Last week, bi-partisan majority in the Oregon House of Representatives passed a bill that will guarantee that the person who receives the most votes in all 50-states wins the Presidency. If the bill passes in the Senate, Oregon will become the 5th state to sign into an agreement. The bill will not take effect until states constituting a majority of electoral votes pass similar legislation.

Predictably, the proposal drew the ire of those who are invested in the current system. The main criticisms being that the proposal goes against our Federalist system, or that it could lead to a plurality candidate winning the election. By-in-large, these critics have not been on-point.

Bill Clinton was elected by a plurality in 1992 and 1996. And the key instruments of our federal system -- both branches of the US Congress, our state legislatures and county and municipal governments would remain entirely unchanged under this proposal.

For the past decade and more, Presidential campaigns have focused heavily on just a few states (Florida, states in the upper Midwest, and just lately some Rocky Mountains states), where the major party candidates run close races. The candidates have all but completely ignored Pacific Coast, New England, Mid-Atlantic, Southern (except Florida) and Great Plains states.

Yes, voter preferences can shift over time. But that never makes the current electoral college system better. The candidates are always compelled to focus on states where the Presidential vote is expected to be close and to disregard voters in other states (except as a source of campaign money, as is the case for California and New York in particular). Perhaps in 2012 North Carolina and Virginia will be considered "battleground" states, and maybe Pennsylvania and Michigan will drop out of that category. But, in any event, the Presidential campaigns will focus on the states where the vote is expected to be closest, to the detriment of all other states. This is an inevitable result of the Electoral College, combined with the "winner take all" system.

And let us not forget that the Electoral College is an undemocratic system, having four times elected a President who received fewer votes than his opponent. Who were the fortunate four? John Quincy Adams, Rutherford Hayes, Benjamin Harrison, and George W. Bush.

The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, embodied in HB 2588, has already been adopted in Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, and New Jersey. It creates an agreement among states that guarantees the Presidency to the candidate who receives the most votes nationwide. The bill would only take effect only after it is enacted by states that collectively exercise a majority of the electoral votes (270 or more).

A survey of 800 Oregon voters conducted by Public Policy Polling on December 16-17, 2008, found 76% overall support for a national popular vote for President. Support was 82% among Democrats, 70% among Republicans, and 72% among others. Sorce: National Popular Vote Poll.

For more information, see www.nationalpopularvote.com