Latest NPV Reports

• Fuzzy Math: Wrong Way Reforms for Allocating Electoral College Votes

  September 16, 2011

  This updated analysis (first published in 2007) analyzes two of the three major options available to state leaders interested in reforming how a state allocates its Electoral College votes: the whole number proportional system and congressional district system. It evaluates them on the basis of whether they promote majority rule, make elections more nationally competitive, reduce incentives for partisan machinations and make all votes count equally. Our analysis reveals that both of these methods fail to meet our criteria and fall far short of the National Popular Vote plan, which is the third major option available to reformers.

• Presidential Elections State-by-State: Hardening Partisanship

  August 1, 2011

  In recent decades presidential election outcomes have become more predictable in most states to the point that only a small minority of states are expected to be swing states in 2012. Due to the winner-take-all rule used by nearly all states (meaning a state awards all its electoral votes to the popular vote winner of that state), swing states receive much more campaign attention than their non-competitive counterparts.

• Not Your Parents' Presidential Elections: The Decline of Swing States, 1960-2008

  June 13, 2011

  The number of swing states (generously defined as ones projected to be won by 9% or less in a year in which the major parties candidates split the national popular vote) has dropped sharply since 1988, especially among our nation's largest and smallest states. In 2008, only one of the 13 smallest states and only 4 of the 27 smallest states were swing states. This trend shows no indication of changing, with all trends pointing to wider division.

   

• Following the Money: Campaign Donations and Spending in the 2008 Presidential Race

  May 14, 2010

  As we’ve shown at FairVote in study after study, the great majority of people and states are ignored during the election for our country’s highest office. But in the 2008 election, every state was invested at least in one way – they all had residents who donated to and financed the two major party candidates’ campaigns. However, when it came down to the stretch run, the candidates did not reciprocate this national effort.  Instead, candidates concentrated their efforts in a small number of states and left the others as net exporters campaign contributions relative to campaign spending. This report takes a state-by-state look at the data.

Read More