Summary#
H.J. Res. 218 proposes an amendment to the U.S. Constitution; it does not amend a statute or become law on its own. Its stated goal is to abolish the Electoral College and elect the President and Vice President by direct vote. The resolution is at the introduced stage: it would need approval by two-thirds of each chamber of Congress and ratification by three-fourths of the states.
- Voters would cast one vote for a pair of candidates who have agreed to run together for President and Vice President.
- The pair with the greatest number of votes would win; the text does not require a majority of votes.
- Congress may pass laws to address a candidate’s death or disqualification before the President-elect or Vice President-elect has been chosen, and to address a tie.
- The amendment would take effect one year after the first January 1 following ratification.
What it means for you#
- Voters: If ratified and in effect, you would vote directly for a President–Vice President pair. The text does not set rules for voter eligibility, vote counting, recounts, or other election procedures.
- Candidates: A voter’s single vote would be for two people who have consented to run together. The text does not set other candidate eligibility rules.
- Congress: Congress may, but would not be required by this amendment to, make laws for the specified cases of death, disqualification, or a tie.
- General public: The proposed article sets out direct election, but does not expressly repeal existing constitutional provisions about presidential elections. How those provisions would interact with the new article is unclear from the supplied text.
Money#
No publicly available information.
- The resolution gives no estimate of federal or state costs, staffing, or election-administration expenses.
What is unclear#
- The amendment does not set detailed procedures for running or counting a direct election.
- It does not say whether Congress would pass laws on ties, deaths, or disqualifications; it only gives Congress the power to do so.
- It does not explain how the proposed article would interact with existing constitutional provisions on presidential elections.
- It gives no funding details or estimate of the costs of changing election procedures.
- Passage is uncertain: the resolution has only been introduced and referred to the House Judiciary Committee.
Case for#
- A possible argument for the bill is that the winning pair would be the one with the greatest number of votes cast by voters, rather than being chosen through the Electoral College.
- The proposed rule is direct: voters choose a pair, and the pair with the most votes wins.
- Giving Congress power to address ties or a candidate’s death or disqualification could allow laws to cover those situations.
Case against#
- The text requires only the greatest number of votes, not a majority. A pair could therefore win without receiving more than half of the votes.
- The amendment leaves key election procedures unstated, including how votes would be counted and how disputes would be handled.
- Congress may address ties and certain candidate disruptions, but the amendment does not require Congress to pass those laws.
- The text does not explain how the new article would fit with existing constitutional election provisions.