19. Myths about Administrative or Fiscal Impact
19.1 MYTH: The National Popular Vote compact would be costly.
The National Popular Vote bill would not impose any fiscal burden on any state because voting in the presidential election inside each state would be conducted in the same manner as it is today. The only difference is that each state's chief elections officer would use the popular vote total from all 50 states and the District of Columbia (instead of the statewide popular vote total from his or her own state) to ascertain which slate of presidential elector candidates will cast the state's electoral votes.
19.2 MYTH: The National Popular Vote compact would complicate the work of local elections officials.
The mechanics for counting and tallying votes at the local, county, and state levels would be the same as they are now in presidential elections.
19.3 MYTH: The National Popular Vote compact would complicate the work of the state's chief election official.
The National Popular Vote bill would not impose administrative burden on any state because the voting by the people in the presidential election inside the state would be conducted in the same manner as it is now. The only difference is that the statewide official responsible for certifying the election of presidential electors would refer to the popular vote total from all 50 states and the District of Columbia (instead of the statewide popular vote total from his own state) to ascertain which slate of presidential elector candidates will cast the state's electoral votes.
It is important to note that neither the current system nor the National Popular Vote compact permits any state to become involved in judging the election returns of other states. Existing federal law (the "safe harbor" provision in section 5 of title 3 of the United States Code) specifies that a state's "final determination" of its presidential election returns is "conclusive" (if done in a timely manner and in accordance with laws that existed prior to Election Day).
The National Popular Vote compact is patterned directly after the existing federal "safe harbor" provision and would require each state to treat as "conclusive" each other state's "final determination" of its vote for President. No state has any power to examine or judge the presidential election returns of any other state under the National Popular Vote compact.
