A few days ago, I got an invitation from my friend Laura Brod to discuss the National Popular Vote initiative. Laura served several terms in the Minnesota legislature, rising to assistant GOP leader in her last two sessions (majority, then minority), and she has organized and served conservatives for her entire public career. Given that, I was a little surprised to hear that Laura backed the NPV. The proposal gets a lot of mischaracterizations; it doesn’t bypass the Electoral College, for instance, and since it relies on states voluntarily deciding to change how they allocate their Electoral College votes, it doesn’t violate the Constitution, either. My skepticism rests mainly on my perception that an NPV arrangement would mainly serve the interests of high-population, mainly coastal states — and solve a problem that has only arisen twice in the preceding 134 years.

After meeting with Laura and Pat Rosenstiel from Red Cap Strategy, I was still skeptical, but at least intrigued by their argument that NPV would benefit smaller-population states and limit the kind of pandering that helped create Medicare Part D, for instance, and other big-ticket federal programs. Laura wrote a brief essay for Hot Air introducing their case that conservatives should support NPV, and I’m curious to see how Hot Air readers respond. I’ll have more to say at the end of the essay.