Earlier this year, both of us had the privilege of leading the orientation for first-term House members at the State Capitol. We covered topics ranging from adapting to life as a public official to the nuances of House rules. One thing we could all agree on: Legislators should reach across the partisan divide and work together when legislation is in the best interest of Minnesotans.

An example of that kind of agreement is the National Popular Vote bill, which we introduced earlier this session. The legislation, which has been enacted in eight states and has passed in more than 30 legislative chambers, would award the state's Electoral College votes to the presidential candidate who wins the overall popular vote across all 50 states. Under this plan, Minnesota would enter into an interstate compact with other enacting states. It would go into effect only once the number of participating states represented a majority of the Electoral College votes, which is needed to elect a president.

The dominant system for awarding states' electoral votes for president is not in our Constitution and was never endorsed by our founders. It is deeply flawed. Under it, the candidate receiving the most popular votes in a state receives all of that state's electoral votes. (States may award their electoral votes on any basis they choose, but for some reason, however, few have taken advantage of that flexibility.)

Our current system relegates two-thirds of American voters to irrelevancy when electing the president. Presidential candidates pay less attention to the concerns of voters in states where they are comfortably ahead or hopelessly behind. Instead, the focus is on "battleground states."

The facts don't lie. In the 2008 presidential race, between Sept. 5 and Nov. 8, 57 percent of all campaign events were held in just four swing states: Ohio, Florida, Pennsylvania and Virginia. A total of 171 campaign events were held in these four states, while Minnesota merited only two.

Worse, the winner-take-all rule allows a candidate who does not receive the most votes nationwide to win the presidency. We are all familiar with the 2000 presidential race; meanwhile, a shift of just 60,000 votes in Ohio would have changed the outcome of the 2004 election, despite President George W. Bush's nationwide lead of 3.5 million votes.

Our intent is not to dwell on past elections. Yet, we do ask ourselves: Isn't it only fair that we have a system in place that ensures the presidential candidate with the most votes wins, just like in any other election? And shouldn't a vote cast in Minnesota count as much as one cast in Pennsylvania?

If your response to these questions is yes, then the National Popular Vote bill should receive your full support. The bill preserves our Electoral College by allowing states to exercise their power, as the Constitution explicitly grants, to award electoral votes as they see fit.

Amid all the political disagreement at the State Capitol, the National Popular Vote bill is an opportunity for consensus. Simply put, legislators should reach across party lines and agree, as we have pledged to do, that Minnesotans deserve to have their votes count in presidential elections — and that the winner of the election should be the candidate with the most votes.

Pat Garofalo, R–Farmington, and Steve Simon, DFL–St. Louis Park, are members of the Minnesota House