On the peculiar way that we choose our president , not through a direct election by the people, but in an indirect by 51 separate elections to elect 538 electors who then go through a process to select our president. Louder i can you hear me now if speak like this . The election of donald trump marked the fifth time in our history that the Electoral College awarded the presidency to the candidate that did not win the most votes. The experience of the last election was also disheartening in other ways that our panelists will get into, but essentially, it was not an election aimed at the entire country. It was an election aimed at about a dozen battleground states, and if you do not live in one of those battleground states, you were essentially a bystander in the election. The experience of the last election has led many people to asked why we continue to have this system and what are the somethingfor doing about it. I will speak for a couple of minutes about what the Electoral College is. Article two of the constitution sets the rules of the Electoral College. Essentially, to become president , you have to win a majority of the total Electoral College votes, and if nobody gets a majority, and an extremely undemocratic feature of the constitution, the election would go to the house of representatives in an election, a runoff, where every state gets one vote, so california and vermont get one vote. You may be surprised to learn that the constitution does not require that people vote for president , and it does not limit the way states can choose their elect or is. State legislatures have complete authority and power to choose electors in a way that they see fit. For the last century and a half, that has meant separate elections in each state, and the states basically award their electors to the candidate who wins the election in that state, mostly on a winner take all basis. States expect these electors to vote for the candidate that won the election in that state a month later when the election happens, but the constitution does not require this. Electors do sometimes cast ballots for people who were not selected by the people in that state, and there really is nothing to stop them, although some states do impose a fine for electors that do not vote for the candidate elected by the people. You may ask of the framers of our constitution invented such a system. The answer to that, you need to go back to the world of 1780 seven. Our constitution was drafted by in secret that were hammering out a lot of differences between different factions and different kinds of states. The Electoral College itself was a product of many compromises. To understand why we havent, you have to understand the special interests that were placated by the creation of the Electoral College to understand why we have it. Becausestates a role they chose electors. It protected smaller states from bigger states, the same way the senate gives a little extra support. It protected the slave south against the north because the system of choosing electoral votes depends in part on the number of representatives a state has, and the original constitution insulated the representation of a slave south by counting slaves as 3 5 of a person. Finally, the people who were worried about having to make direct democracy on a nationwide scale. It was something that had never been tried. They liked the idea that electors would get together and deliberate and they liked the idea that elections would go to the house of representatives, but the system that we have was something they never would have envisioned. With that, i guess, what i want to say is many people dislike the Electoral College, but the question is are we stuck with it . There have been requests in the past to amend the constitution to get rid of it, but that has proven difficult to do. Today, we will hear many other ideas including a strategy to move the country to a National Popular vote system without the challenge and burden of trying to amend the constitution. With that, we will turn to an amazing panel who will explain some of this to us. To my left, we have a Senior Consultant with the group National Popular vote. Then we have maggie brennan, a lawyer who also works with the group make every vote count. For those of you at the plenary, i dont think i need to introduce larry lessig, who tore the roof off this place, but if you were not there, he is a harvard law professor, a former president ial candidate, and he recently founded a group called equal citizens. With that, i will ask a question of all of you and ask that maybe in turn, you address it. Apart from awarding victory to the candidate who does not win the most votes, why is electing our president through the Electoral College such a big problem, and what is your organization doing about it . Thanks or the introduction, and i am grateful for the opportunity to be here. Im not sure i think the Electoral College is the problem. Think the statebased undertake all laws, which is how 48 states and the district of columbia are using that power that is the problem, right . Five out of 58 average and president ial elections is clearly a problem. If i were to leave here and were flying to minneapolisst. Paul, and five out of 58 times, my plane landed in chicago, you could see how that would be a little inconvenient. Certainly, when it comes to electing a leader of the free world, five out of 58 average elections under a system that allows us to happen leads to significant crises in legitimacy for the american president no matter what party you are in. My disclosure to you is i am a conservative republican trapped behind the blue wall in the state of minnesota, and while im not concerned about the results of the last president ial election, my primary concern with the system is that in every president ial election, 3 4 of the voters in the country feel like they are politically irrelevant when they are electing a leader of their country and that is problematic, and it is a problem worth addressing. Exhibit a would be the 2012 president ial election. Everybody knows what a battleground state is, right . Ohio is a saying stayed in every president ial contest in my lifetime. There were 73 general Election Campaign events in the battleground state of ohio in the 2012 president ial election, so the voters of ohio were very, very important to the public in an democratic candidates. 23 reliably republican states and 15 reliably democratic states were wholly ignored, so the political interests of the voters of those states were irrelevant to the american president , and that has traumatic consequences as it relates to people feeling like they had a real stake in american president ial elections. A significant influence on Public Policy, which i think Everybody Knows intuitively, but there is also in. Evidence of that as well. The 2016 election was a little different in that more states got one visit, but 94 of that campaign occurred in just 12 states, right . Three quarters of that campaign states, in six including rust belt states of pennsylvania, michigan, and wisconsin that donald trump needed to win in order to be elected president under the current, legitimate system that candidates run under because of the statebased winner take all law, ok . The constitution allows you to change the system through state legislative action. It says each state shall appoint , so if you are interested in reforming the Current System, statebased action is the approach to take, not because it is expedient, but because this system was adopted over time, so simple state laws get replaced. Ith state laws the real shortcoming of the Current System, in my mind, and as a republican in minnesota, i cannot think of a single redeeming quality of the Current System the real problem is that in every president ial election, if you are a battleground state voter, you get what you want from the american president , and the rest of us are forced to deal with that because we happen to be in reliably republican or democratic states, ok . The real shortcoming is that too , a voters feel valued legitimate value in terms of their participation in president ial campaigns, if you are a democrat in louisiana or republican in minnesota. You feel undervalued in president ial campaigns. The second real shortcoming is that that impacts Public Policy, and if you think that is a little thing, my conservative friends, think about the republican president that passed a trillion dollar Prescription Drug benefit to appease the ,oters of the ifour corridor in florida, and essential swing state. These are not little decisions that get made. They are big decisions. Interstate compact ask steve in my last 30 minutes 30 seconds. What did i say . 30 minutes . I want to thank the rest of the panel for being here. The power under article two section one of the constitution and asks the legislature if they want to award their electors on the basis of the National Popular with 270 orates more electoral votes have this law in place. It triggers, guarantees the presidency to the national and it iste winner, the constitutionally appropriate way to make every voter in every state politically relevant and every president ial election, and i dont care what jersey you where wear. That is an important thing to do. [applause] maggie, your group, make every vote count, recently joined this effort. Why dont you tell us about that . Theie it explains that system is broken. I work with a group that was founded by reed hunt, a former chairman of the fcc from the Clinton Administration and jake fuentes, a Silicon Valley entrepreneur, and they got together to try to figure out what they could do to help contribute to the solution, which as a group we decide is the National Popular vote interstate compact. It is the best and most achievable solution at this time. The problem is that people are , anded during campaigns that extends to policy outcomes after the election. We think one of the best ways to demonstrate the problem is to think about how things would be different under a National Popular vote. I want everyone in the room to think about a policy or issue that is of interest to you and that a majority of the country supports and thinks need to be acted on and is not going anywhere now and how that would be resolved more productively with president ial leadership on that issue. We have come up with three general examples. First, with president ial leadership, you would see a nationwide focus on infrastructure. The government would fix roads and bridges and dams everywhere and repair the damage of hurricanes and floods and fires all over the country, and it would not just focus on battleground states, which is what tends to happen now. Second, you would see a National Focus on health care. The government would expand medicaid in every state on an equal basis. Third, you might see affordable broadband nationwide. The government would be more incentivized to provide affordable broadband too high low income voters in rural and urban areas. This is evidenced by the recent controversial plan released by the Trump Administration recently, and they are focusing on rural areas, which are trumps base. I would say its very likely you will see a focus on rural areas whereasr purple states, in a place like schenectady, new york, which is rural, economically disadvantaged, but in a blue state, theres no incentive for the fcc in the Current Administration to focus on them. Were launching an Education Campaign to spread the word about his problems and the need for reforms, and we are using the internet, social media, and the soontobe launched online video campaign, which i will talk more about later, and i had two colleagues here. Ideas aboutear your what you think is effective in your states. And the need for reforms. Larry, you are working to advance the contact as well, but you are bringing some innovative litigation strategies in addition to other advocacy strategies. Yourou tell us what organization is doing . First, i just want to remark on something you should notice about this extraordinary conference. We could weave together a conversation that would include fund people are fundamentally different views who come to a common agreement about fundamental issues, basically constitutional issues about how our republic should work, and you are going to see that right here. There is not a single thing he said that i disagree with. Everything he said about trying to produce a representative system where everybody has a shot at electing their president is something we all should be able to agree on, and if we can agree on it, the question is what would the solution be . Agree that what theyre content bring about the is the best. Despite the enlightened view of some, there are many people who are entrenched in their view that this system needs to stay, and the compact so far has 11 jurisdictions with 165 electors, got 105 means it has more to go before it gets to the place that it can actually be triggered. What we are concerned about is that if the status quo is allowed to remain as the status quo, nothing is going to make that happen, so what we felt we would do is to try to complement this movement by shaking up the foundations a bit. But i thinkrantee, we are 90 certain that next friday, we will be filing a states of oner person, one vote. Again, i agree with that. The problem is winner take all. That is a statecreated problem. The Supreme Court has said again and again and again that the president ial selection system is subject to the principle one person, one vote, and we believe we have a clear and obvious application of existing law most recently, bush versus gore that opens the door for us. Proportional allocation is still not perfectly one person, one vote. Their idea is perfect one person, one vote, but what we think is shake it up and rally people to this principle that we ought to be running this system, respecting all those equally. We ran a Crowdfunding Campaign to get this off the ground. We decided we had to raise 250. We raised ive hundred thousand dollars in shorter time that we said we would want to and tens of thousands of people rallied to this principle, and this is what we have to do find a way to talk about this so we do not get trapped in our partisan see that as americans, we have a commitment that we have to deliver on and that is to make a systemntial election that possibly elect a person that could possibly represent all of us. [applause] i would like to talk now a little bit about how we get from 165 to 270. Maryland was the first state to embrace the compact and moved steadily up to the current jurisdiction, including d. C. , but interestingly, since the , theren of donald trump has not been an additional state added, and if you look at the states, they are essentially blue states. There has been interesting activity in red states, but the question i would like to join down on is what is the state of play in trying to get to 270 . What is the plan to get enough states on board to make the compact a reality . From our perspective, its three yards and a cloud of dust. This happens one state at a time, one legislator at a time, and its right to point out there are 165 electoral votes in the compact already, but it happened in every one of those states in a bipartisan, nonpartisan fashion. It is also important to point out that in the lead up to the 2016 election, we have also passed one chamber or another in 12 additional states with 96 electoral votes, and if anybody thinks that is easy, you know, welcome to my shoes after this session. In 2016 in the lead up to the election, we had 100 54 republican sponsors on this bill and 163 democrat sponsors on this bill in the states that it was introduced. This is a form that enjoys the support of Newt Gingrich and howard dean, and if anything if anyone knows anything about those guys, they do not get together on politics very much, but they do believe the National Popular vote interstate compact is the way to go. We continue to make pressure over time work. I think it is important to understand that the National Popular vote interstate compact was introduced in its First Legislature the idea germinated in 2000 five. It passed its First Legislature in 2007 and we are 105 electoral votes away from it actually 10 years later. It took the Civil Rights Act 30, 40 years to finally get done. At the end of the day, a lot of progress is being made. I would look to the 12 chambers. You can find them at nationalpopularvote. Com, but the way to weigh in on this is in favor of the compact. It on legislative action, write your legislator, tell them you support the compact, ask them to sponsor the bill. That is how you get this thing done. Anybody else want to weigh in on that . Kind oftion i have is drying out a little bit more on that. What we have is so far, blue states are the ones that have taken it across the finish line, but if you do the math, you cannot do this just with blue states. You definitely need purple and some red states. Are the different arguments are strategies needed . In a related question, has the election of donald trump 60 years after the election of george w. Bush done something to make it what difficult for republicans to get support for this issue . The great lost opportunity is its in 2004, 50,000 votes in , johnad switched to kerry kerry would have been elected president , even though he lost the popular vote, and if that had happened, no doubt by 2008, we would have solved the problem. It is not a partisan issue, even in the numbers, but you made the correct observation that we have had five times over the past 200 years, but the data which make pulledote count has together, the calculations say that in close elections, the probability is at least 33 that we will elect a minority president. Number one. That is a motivation that i think we have to do more to make people aware of. How can we run a democracy where 1 3 of the time we do not elect the majority president . 2016, 99 ofn Campaign Spending is in 14 states. They are older. They are whiter. Be represented like any of us, but only as much as any of us. The first part i think we should recognize is you could not design a system better set up for russian hacking then winner take all in an Electoral College because the technique of figuring out exactly what you have got to flip is pretty trivial and much harder when you talk about the many votes. If we focus on these factual reasons why the Current System is bad, we should be able to bring more grassroots republicans along. I imagine you have felt this more than i would ever know. Love. Oots republicans, i i was one once myself. I am not anymore. I grew up, but, you know, i used to be. Is a group of committed, principled people pushing on both sides, but i imagine from the top down, theres not much enthusiasm for this type of reform, so we have to build this outside of a politic movement that just does not allow them to play politics with this critical part of our democracy. Up, making every vote counting sticky to this is education. We think that we do not want to just get 270 electoral votes. We want to build a strong, national, bipartisan majority that supports a National Popular vote for president , and we think we need to aim for 15 more states, and i am going to read them because we want your ideas. Talk to us afterwards. Florida, virginia, delaware, connecticut, pennsylvania, michigan, wisconsin, oklahoma, georgia, nevada, utah, new mexico, arizona, oregon, and colorado. Where making a major commitment in connecticut in 2018 because their andor both hopeful for success. Our communication strategy now is focused on education, and the strategy has a few different components. First, we will start an email campaign, focused for the time in connecticut, but it will expand. Tina, we are announcing the launch of a video campaign. One of us will explain the goals and mechanics. Another will show interviews with elected officials, thought leaders, media figures, voters, on why theys support the compact and why they support a National Popular vote, and we are exploring other topics. Were also Holding Events to provide attendees with an educational experience anderning a National Vote its urgency right now. The idea is to enhance visibility and Public Awareness around the issue. Nbc has already hosted two of these events, one at stanford law school. The other at the National Press club in the fall. They were very successful and we theplanning two events in coming months. The idea is that key legislators and influencers who attend learn more and spread the message, and we think by spreading this message, that is the way to get this done. The only thing i would layer on top of that, if you want to do something specifically today, email a guy named dieter court in oregon and tell him to schedule a vote. He happens to be a partisan democrat standing in the way of the enactment. We have majority support in both chambers, but if he would just schedule the house bill for a vote, they would be more electoral votes, so if you are interested in doing something really productive today, you can do that. What we do is the legislative work. We recruited all the sponsors. We put them on the bill. We have enacted the bill and all in 11 states and passed them through those 12 chambers with bipartisan, nonpartisan legislative advocates from both sides of the aisle. Our republican support continues to be our republican support. I have been in front of grownup conservative activists around the country who believe that grownup conservatives ought to have a voice in president ial elections and are not afraid of a National Popular vote. My view is i would love a system where i could campaign in all 50 states and the district of columbia and line up and beat them. Thats my personal opinion. Im sure theres a lot of people who think this is a centerleft country, but thats why you have nonpartisan support. Its why you have a little bit of nonpartisan opposition, because they like to concentrate their political activity in 12. Tates at the end of the day, i am not concerned about being able to compactstates in the because the problems are the same problems. That is why i am here today. [applause] for the last question for the group before we open it up to questions from you, i want to focus on the next year to two years. When there is a prospect, we can all hope, of an election that will be pivotal and transformative and might bring in new legislators. In the last wave election in 2010, the republican majority very quickly moved to bring about their own kind of warped idea of democracy and reform, which is essentially making it harder for many people to vote, particularly people who support the other party, but the question i have for the group is if we have an election that is going to be an important election, and where, as larry said, democracy ought to be a primary question, what would it take to get the compact inserted into the debate . More importantly, what would it take to really convince a new electors with different configurations and state legislatures to make joining the compact a priority . Go first. If you have a bodyguard, but the National Vote interstate compact on your voter guide and support candidates that support it and oppose candidates that oppose it. That is pretty simple. The other thing is i know how every state legislator in america gets elected, having after talking to 1000 of these people. When a knock on your door, ask him or her if they will support the popular vote interstate compact, and if they after say , hold it to them, and if they dont, fire them. That is how these things work. At the end of the day, if you are wondering how you can help, go to nationalpopularvote. Com and on the top righthand side of the website, type in your what is it called . Zip code, right . We still use those . It will pull up your current legislators. Write them in email. That is what they respond to. That is how you move them. When they come to your door asking to get elected, asking where they are on the bill. Those are the best things you do in my opinion to support the National Popular vote movement. Making every vote count, were focusing on Education Campaigns. The idea for us is put the do it the National Popular vote issue in front of both legislators and constituents because it is easy to not take a position on an issue when no one knows about it and no one is talking about it. Once it goes on the radar, people will have to take his visions. For everyone here, if you go to mevcfoundation. Org, we will send you information about what is going on in your state and what you can do specifically to help. Be on the lookout for events. Another important tool to get this in front of legislators and get this spoken about is utilizing polling. Weve already conducted one nationwide poll, which says over 70 of americans support a National Popular vote, meaning the present with the most votes becomes president and over 50 of republicans supported that idea. We are also doing a poll in connecticut. We do not have results yet, but we are confident it will have similar strengths. If you put those poll results in front of legislators and show them their constituents care about this issue, you need to make them take a position and make them say it aloud if their position is going against the will of the people. I absolutely hope that their issue in bringing this front of ordinary people and making it the central political issue. My fear is that so much anxiety and attention has been drawn towards one issue we disagree about, this issue of, like, who is controlling our country and resistance to that control, that it is hard to get oxygen for the issues that i, frankly, think are much more important. Fundamentally fundamental issues of democratic reform. Whatever you think of the president , the president is not going to be there in four or eight years, at least, but these problems will still be there because we are not paying enough attention to them. I hope they are successful, but i am anxious they will not be. What were trying to do is to up the anxiety level among the vested interests. I told you we are bringing this lawsuit to red states and blue states. It turns out that in addition to the constitutional claims, there is a Voting Rights act claim because there is good evidence in Southern States that they mucked about with the winner take all system in order to exclude blacks and minorities from influence over the president the present electoral system. You talk to lawyers who say they dont know how that will work. I think they are wrong. The Voting Rights act claim is really solid. What i think will happen once this is out on the table is that the Republican Party in particular will get this and what if wecrap, lose winner take all in the south and democrats get to keep it in the north . Then they cannot possibly win. Then the sensible position is lets try to win more votes. Let me just mention one other really anxietyinducing thing were doing. Many of you remember in the last election these electors who voted against their pledge. Three of them were in the state of washington and one of them in kickedte of colorado was off in three were threatened by the attorney general. We are defending these electors and the freedom of them to vote their conscience. If you agree with that are not, we thought it was a good idea to get that result before it creates a constitutional crisis. Its the number of people who voted their conscience and 2016 had done that in 2000, would have had a civil war. We want a result one way or the other. Most people think it will be resolved by the Supreme Court to say you have to obey your pledge. As a constitutional scholar who has spent a year talking to everyone i can and reading everything i possibly can about this, i think it is almost impossible to imagine the court writing that opinion. Ofimplicates so many areas federal law, and it would be an extraordinary thing for them to do, which means its possible that in a year, this submarine surfaces, and the Supreme Court says these electors cannot be legally constrained, and then people sit back and say, are you kidding me . We have this system thats not only jerryrigged of winner take all, but it could be that candidates spend their time now figuring out how to recruit electors to get them to switch in the Electoral College, which i think would be a revolution on our side because people would say, enough of this stupid system, and lets get to something, and again, the simplest system would be National Popular vote. About 20 we have minutes left in this session, and i would love to turn it now over to you. We have a young woman with a microphone in the back. I have a hard time seeing people. So just move around the room and give people a chance geographically. This is to the whole panel, but in terms of raising the anxiety levels of the vested interests, lets say, for example, that you are successful , and anxiety levels do rise. Doesnt that perhaps trigger the possibility of an Article Five Constitutional Convention being called . And with dark many interests attempting to roll the dice and expecting they can carry the day, even though the numbers, as i understand them, are not quite in their favor at this moment . Inthis is another area i get trouble with with my liberal friends because i am someone who believes that the Article Five Convention i do not call it a Constitutional Convention because it is not that. Is Article Five Convention path we ought to think about to amend the constitution, but even though i think that it is a viable path and might be an essential path to deal with the money and politics problem, i think the compact is a much better path to deal with this problem because we are very, very close, and even an Article Five Convention still requires three quarters of the states to support any reform we will have. The microphone is coming. Reform groups present here want to see our choose one plurality Voting System replaced with a better system like star voting, approval voting, or instant runoff voting, but these systems destroy any notion of a National Popular vote. How do you suggest we ever this mpending train wreck . National popular vote does not require majority vote. Neither does any vote for president. There is not a state that requires a majority vote for president , even under the Current System, so the National Popular vote interstate compact says the candidate who gets the most popular votes in all 50 states in the district of columbia will be elected president , and that is what the compact stipulates. [indiscernible] the only thing i would add is that the beauty of the National Popular vote system is that it uses existing provisions in the constitution to move toward a National Popular vote system. It is not the same thing as going to the constitution. You can imagine redoing the president ial election system in the constitution, and you actually might be innovative and creative and have a Runoff Election and all kinds of things, but that is not the purpose of this i would say all 50 states and the district of columbia use the simple president ial ballot to date. That is true. We have these two gentleman here. I guess i need some education. I thought that we were supporting a constitutional amendment, but neither of these , sotions represents that can you make some comment on my misapprehension . One can support the amendment in principle, although not everybody who is supporting the compact supports an amendment. I think that is an important point to emphasize, but i think we need to be practical about it and recognize that if it takes 3 4 of the states to cash to pass an amendment, there will be states who think they do well enough under the Current System to block that, so lets take an alternative path. The league of women voters, their mission is to support both. I personally believe a constitutional amendment would be a very uphill challenge now, but with the compact in place, there would be the status quo would change, and you might bring more people to the table. To me, the one potential ticking time bomb would be a multiparty the National Compact would over the victory to someone with 33 of the vote. Where is the entrenched ideological and bigmoney resistance to the compact . Who is really fighting . I have yet to experience any entrenched bigmoney or entrenched ideological opposition to the compact. Is it enjoys nonpartisan, bipartisan support and bipartisan opposition. I think the primary opponent to the National Popular vote interstate compact is to those who are resistant to change, right . Change is a scary thing. I have the same golf shoes i had eight years ago. As soon as they realize the nature and understand the real nature of the problem every four years, it does not matter what your ideology is. You find the solution just as attractive or just as offensive. [inaudible] defer that question to the senate president. I do is speak to him, but i would encourage him to move the house bill. A lot of the resistance is not ideological. A lot of it is based on myths about the Current System that it is not true, the idea that the Current System benefits small states or rural areas. Book deals with all of these myths, explains why they are not true. The real benefit of the Current System are battleground states. Everyone else loses. Livee who hear that they you hear, i live in a small state. I would be ignored under a National Vote. No, candidates would have to campaign anywhere. The small state thing came up. Its a fallacy. The 10 smallest states are ignored under the Current System. Nobody loses more. Woman inyou, i see a the front. I am a candidate for state legislature in west virginia. We are not on your list. [applause] we are not on that many good lists. What i would like to know is with our legislature, it is so changeresistant. Perhaps a good strategy would be useto convince them but to us as your champions of change, the people trying to run now. Are there Resources Available to help us . I would say this definitely resources to get yourself educated, and we always look for selfstarters. I have been in the Virginia Legislature for two legislative sessions and we have built a partisan support in that body. Not enough to sufficiently get through either chamber at this point, but we have had our shoulder to the wheel before, and we would be happy to get our shoulder to the wheel again. It requires selfstarters willing to reach out to their colleagues on both sides of the aisle. A great place to go to get yourself educated is nationalpopularvote. Com. Theres great videos that explore a lot of these myths that become impediments to change, but i would be happy to point you in the right direction and give you my card after this session. Be very careful because if actual support, they are c3 status. I am for any champion of the bill. The was actually at Washington State democrat electors it was a convention in 2016. I was one of the people that helped elect an elector who said that they would adamantly they adamantly opposed clinton and they would fight against that if that was if the electoral vote was going to push it that way in the state, and i was very proud and supported them, but the main thing that i wanted to get through is that it seems like the one thing that seems to be stopping people up on the idea of one vote mattering, i guess, is that people do not seem to see that we are all in one nation. Is not about city states, or that is not what we are made of. It seems like the education route seems to be the best way forward in that. You already mentioned the league of women voters, and i really feel like that is one of those places that we can reinstill the idea that we are all asizens, so i would say that far as leverage goes, this seems to be one of our best places, through education, but right now, that is not really well supported, and we need to change that. I am asking how we are going to getting to because the people that are actually going to vote and make that happen and actually call their peopleand petition the who i legislators, which, right now, they do not seem to care. They do not even seem to notice how many phone calls. In Washington State, i am in the third legislative district, and i have a republican representative there, and it is really frustrating when that woman will not even writing to amend does not seem to be the leverage. It does not feel like our voices can be heard that well, even with phone calls. Are we supposed to reach these people who adamantly you do not even have to worry about being elected out. Fort money over and over every five dollars they spend, another million goes in. [applause] i would just say a couple things. My experience with state legislators has been very different than that. This is where the rubber meets the road on this issue. They legislators do not keep track of whether you are a republican or a democrat. They love to hear from their constituents. My experience is that the citizens that moved legislative members on this bill that is how it happened for us. Im sure it depends on the issue. I do not think this is one. There is aink constituency that is dead set against it that will fight to the death against it. Inertia. Benefiting by strategies that force people to make a statement about it you can write a letter and they will ignore it. If you have an oped, go to your local paper. It is easier said than done, but takeeed to make people position. You have to put it in front of them and them make that decision. I will say this. They are all in. If you think the league of women voters is the solution, one place they are taking a real in florida. Ole is you are seeing results. I talked to a lot of legislators who count those who are for and against this. That is my experience. My truth. That does not necessarily make it yours. Maybe a couple more questions. I have a question about the win or take all. Proposed. Istrict plan i testified against it. We had this come up in the senate and the house. We believed they had decided there was is that number of states that would sling swing democrat. Was to balkanized blue states that were going democratic. The way we challenged that was to stay in 1824, where every state does win or take all by had, everything, the state one role. What we said is the Electoral College cannot be defended if red states have winner take all and Democratic House proportional. The blue states would have to 60 or 70 percent of or 70 of the vote. I think it is very dangerous. I would hope to get a really good question answer to that question. The republicans to pass it immediately try to repeal it. It has never made a difference in the outcome. In michigan, they established this bad law in the u. S. Supreme court. State legislators can disrupt a sizable. Decide a rule. What theove to hear professor thinks of that. I completely agree that we need to have one role. Allocation and the others have winner take all. To Voting Rights act was not imagine that the Supreme Court would allow different standard to exist in different parts of the country. I do think that it raises the pressure, especially the republican to think about what it alternative is to this. Clear two, i want to make one point that is another value. Most people think that the states are free, Lake Michigan in the late eight 18 1800s. Courtnk that if the decides that the principle of one person one vote control how electors get allocated culloden between proportional allocation and district allocation, district allocation is less could assisted with one person that proportional allocation. The principle we are advancing about what standards should be thatd drive as a way from district allocation and towards a proportional allocation. Even that is a second death to the wind or take all. I think gerrymandering pennsylvania has gerrymandered this entire cycle. We think it is important to bring this up. Virginia, there was an election of governor northup who would have be towed this proposal. Vetoed this proposal. Putting that into the conversation is really important. Is with the district message, it allows the party doing it to weaponize gerrymandering even more than they have already done it. Bythe 1996 case was led delaware sued new york over the win or take all law. States get to determine how they award electors. Mcpherson for mcpherson versus becker. The lawsuit is going to be very difficult. I could talk about why that is, but it is primarily because it says what it says. As theate shall appoint Legislature May direct a number of electors, which means however if the juices toward award their letter is up to the state. If you want your vote in south dakota to matter as much as for ottavio fort lauderdale, florida. In that case, the court said there is no constitutional issue that has been raised about the implication about the allocation. The court has repeatedly said even though there is complete power, it iser subject to restrictions. I think we have one more questions. I may have my information incorrect, but it is my understanding that the Electoral College is set up to safeguard an elected president from not working in the best interest of the country, someone who is either inept or corrupt, they certainly failed this time around. However, it seems to me it is not the function that is the problem but the execution of the Electoral College. ,omewhere along the line because of state corruption or selfinterest, the function became it is not doing what it should be doing. Is there some value in trying to hold onto it . Has not always made the people know what is best for the country. The second part of that is, what do you think of right Choice Voting . Are two completely separate topic. I am here on a single subject. I do not have anything to say about right Choice Voting. They came up with in a afterral college that was of ecclesiastical process electing a pope. Thinking that the state legislature would act in the best interest of the citizens they represent. Or take allwin system was never debated at the Constitutional Convention. It was never in the federalist papers. It was not adopted until the 11th president ial election and it was set off as an arms race when regina moved to a win or take all law. ,he lead up to the civil war the states adopted those laws. Yourself, if the reason they have this power is to advance the interest of their state, why are three out of four states using that power to make one out of four state voters more important. Adopt the should National Popular vote. Three fourths of the state are not providing an accurate check. Theyre making three out of four of us not matter. That is a great way to in thisconversation end conversation. [applause] announcer cspans washington journal live every day with news and policy issues that impact to you. Wednesday morning, we will discuss foreign administered administrations. We will talk about rebuilding withations infrastructure the ceo of associated builders and contractors. We are live in oklahoma city, oklahoma for the next stop on the cspan bus tour where governor mary fallin will join us. Be sure to watch cspans washington journal live at 7 00 a. M. Eastern. Coming up wednesday, a look at the Economic Impact and cost of Global Cybercrime in 2018. Ofwill be live on the Center Strategic and International Studies on cspan two. Florida senator bob graham is part of a discussion wednesday am looking at how to improve Civics Education and prepare students to become more politically engaged citizens, hosted for the center for American Progress and generation citizen. It is live at 10 00 eastern on cspan. Unfoldswhere history daily. In 1979, cspan was created as a Public Service by americas Cable Television companies. Today, we continue to bring you unfiltered coverage of congress, the white house, the supreme and Public Policy events in washington dc and around the country. Cspan is brought to you by your cable or satellite provider. Palestinian president spoke to the Un Security Council in new york on tuesday. He called for an International Peace conference to be convened later in 2018 to address the israelipalestinian conflict. He also criticized the Trump Administration decision to move the American Embassy in israel to jerusalem. The u. S. Ambassador to the u. N. Nikki haley responded directly to the speech. This portion of the event is about an hour. I now give the floor to his excellency, president of the state of palestine. You. Ank