Minnesota Governor Tim Walz advocated for the elimination of the Electoral College on Tuesday while speaking at a fundraiser held at California Governor Gavin Newsom’s private residence in Sacramento.

Trump Surges To Victory – Get the Ultimate Trumpinator Bobblehead To Celebrate 2024!

Walz’s comments echo a long-standing position of some Democrats, especially following key election losses in recent years.

“I think all of us know the Electoral College needs to go,” Walz stated, according to a pool report from the event, as reported by Bloomberg. “We need a national popular vote, but that’s not the world we live in.”

In 2023, Walz signed the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact on behalf of Minnesota, aligning the state with an initiative aimed at electing U.S. presidents by the national popular vote.

The compact would require states to allocate all of their electoral votes to the candidate who wins the national popular vote, regardless of how individual states vote.

Do you think the economy will come back roaring quickly when Trump takes office?

By completing the poll, you agree to receive emails from LifeZette, occasional offers from our partners and that you've read and agree to our privacy policy and legal statement.

However, this agreement would only take effect if enough states—those representing at least 270 electoral votes—join the compact.

A spokesperson for the Harris-Walz campaign explained that the governor was discussing the importance of the Electoral College in the current system while working to earn electoral votes in battleground states. “Governor Walz believes that every vote matters in the Electoral College and he is honored to be traveling the country and battleground states working to earn support for the Harris-Walz ticket,” the spokesperson told Fox News. “He was commenting to a crowd of strong supporters about how the campaign is built to win 270 electoral votes. And, he was thanking them for their support that is helping fund those efforts.”

The Electoral College, established by the Founding Fathers, requires a candidate to secure 270 electoral votes to win the presidency.

Each state is allocated a certain number of electors based on population, and most states award all their electoral votes to the candidate who wins the popular vote in that state.

The system was designed to balance influence between large and small states, ensuring that no single region would dominate national elections.

However, the system has come under increased criticism from some Democrats, particularly after elections where the popular vote and electoral vote results have diverged.

Notable examples include the 2016 election, where Hillary Clinton won the popular vote but lost the presidency to Donald Trump, and the 2000 election, where George W. Bush won the electoral vote despite losing the popular vote to Al Gore.

Critics argue that the Electoral College undermines the principle of one person, one vote, and leads to disproportionate influence for certain states.

Republicans, on the other hand, generally support maintaining the Electoral College, arguing that abolishing it would concentrate political power in states with large populations.

They argue that a national popular vote would lead presidential candidates to focus only on major urban centers, ignoring smaller states and rural areas.

X Screenshot – Charlie Kirk

The current system, they argue, ensures a more balanced representation of all states in the election process.

The debate over the future of the Electoral College continues to divide public opinion.

A Pew Research Center poll released last month found that 63% of Americans support eliminating the Electoral College in favor of a popular vote system, showing significant public interest in reforming the way U.S. presidents are elected.

As the 2024 election approaches, the topic of Electoral College reform remains a contentious issue, with prominent figures like Walz pushing for change and others defending the status quo.

However, any attempt to abolish the system would require a constitutional amendment, a significant challenge given the political and procedural hurdles involved.

The opinions expressed by contributors and/or content partners are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of LifeZette. Contact us for guidelines on submitting your own commentary.