This is model text, not legal advice. It shows what the laws could say, using the rules described on the main page and borrowing language from interstate compacts already on the books. Every state has its own drafting conventions, election code, and officials, so any real bill should be adapted and reviewed by the state’s legislative drafters. Bracketed text, like [State], marks what each state fills in. The model language itself is dedicated to the public domain under CC0: copy it into a bill freely, with no credit needed.
How this differs from the NPVIC
The National Popular Vote compact is a single agreement. Every member enacts the same text, and it takes effect only when states with 270 electors have enacted it “in substantially the same form.”
Fair Slate compacts aren’t like that. Each one is its own agreement among a few partner states, and its terms can vary from one partnership to the next: who the partners are, when it starts, how long a withdrawal takes, which method resolves fractional shares. The partners in any one compact need matching text with each other, but a compact between Missouri and Colorado doesn’t need to match one between Montana and New Hampshire.
That flexibility has a cost if Congress’s consent turns out to be required. Separate compacts with different terms might each need their own approval. Keeping the core terms standard (the allocation method, the trigger, and the rules for leaving) would make it easier for Congress to approve them all at once, by consenting in advance to any compact that meets those terms, as it has done before for other kinds of compacts (more on consent). The model below is written with that in mind: the parts most likely to vary are bracketed.
Part 1: A state acting alone
For a swing state close enough to even that switching costs neither party anything. It replaces winner-take-all with proportional allocation, effective at the next presidential election.
An Act relating to the appointment of presidential electors; providing for the proportional allocation of electors.
Be it enacted by the Legislature of the State of [State]:
Section 1. Short title.
This Act may be cited as the [State] Fair Slate Act.
Section 2. Definitions.
As used in this Act:
- “Presidential slate” means a candidate for President and a candidate for Vice President who appear together on the general election ballot in this state, or who qualify as declared write-in candidates under [write-in statute], together with the candidates for presidential elector nominated to support them.
- “Counted votes” means the votes cast in this state for each presidential slate, as determined in the official canvass. Counted votes do not include votes for persons who are not part of a presidential slate, or votes for “none of these candidates” or any similar option.
- “Elector count” means the number of presidential electors to which this state is entitled.
- “Chief election official” means [the Secretary of State].
Section 3. Ranked lists of elector candidates.
Each political party or other body that nominates a presidential slate shall nominate a number of candidates for presidential elector equal to the elector count, and shall rank them in order of priority. Nomination shall otherwise proceed as provided in [elector nomination statute].
Section 4. Allocation of electors.
The method is left as a blank. A state could choose largest remainder (what the main page uses), a threshold, or a divisor method; see the methods, worked through.
- After the official canvass of the general election, the chief election official shall allocate the elector count among the presidential slates in proportion to their counted votes, resolving fractional shares by [method of resolving fractional remainders].
- From each presidential slate, the candidates for elector ranked highest on its list under Section 3, up to the number of electors allocated to that slate, are appointed as presidential electors of this state.
Section 5. Certification.
The [Governor] shall include in the certificate of ascertainment required by federal law the names of all electors appointed under Section 4, the presidential slate from which each was appointed, and the counted votes for each presidential slate.
Section 6. Pledge and vacancies.
- Each person appointed as a presidential elector shall pledge to vote for the candidates for President and Vice President of the presidential slate from which the person was appointed.
- A vote cast by an elector in violation of the pledge is void, and the elector’s office is vacated.
- A vacancy in the office of an elector shall be filled by the highest-ranked candidate on the same presidential slate’s list who has not already been appointed.
Section 7. Conforming amendment.
[Section ___], providing for the appointment of all presidential electors from the presidential slate receiving the most votes, is repealed.
Section 8. Severability.
If any provision of this Act or its application is held invalid, the invalidity does not affect other provisions or applications that can be given effect without the invalid provision or application.
Section 9. Effective date.
This Act takes effect [date] and applies to presidential elections held on or after [date].
Part 2: A compact between partner states
For a state that leans one way. Each partner enacts the same agreement, and it takes effect only when every partner has. Until then, and if it ever ends, each state’s existing law stays in force, so no state gives up electors alone.
An Act to enter into the Fair Slate Compact with [Partner State or States].
Be it enacted by the Legislature of the State of [State]:
Section 1. Enactment.
The Fair Slate Compact is enacted into law and entered into with all other states legally joining in it, in the form substantially as follows:
Article I. Parties and purpose.
- The parties to this compact are [State A] and [State B] (the “party states”).
- The purpose of this compact is for each party state to appoint its presidential electors in proportion to the votes cast in that state, together and on equal terms, so that no party state does so at a disadvantage to another.
Article II. Proportional appointment.
For each presidential election while this compact is in effect, each party state shall appoint its presidential electors by the method set out in Article III, notwithstanding any other provision of its law.
Article III. Method.
- Each political party or other body that nominates candidates for President and Vice President in a party state shall nominate a ranked list of candidates for presidential elector equal in number to that state’s electors.
- Each party state shall allocate its electors among the presidential slates in proportion to the votes cast for them in that state, resolving fractional shares by [method of resolving fractional remainders]. Every party state shall use the same method.
- From each presidential slate, the highest-ranked candidates for elector, up to the number allocated to that slate, are appointed.
- Each party state shall require its electors to vote for the candidates of the slate from which they were appointed.
Article IV. Effective date.
- This compact takes effect when every party state has enacted it in substantially the same form and the enactments have taken effect.
- This compact first applies to the first presidential election held at least [six months] after it takes effect.
- [If the consent of Congress is required, this compact shall not take effect until that consent is given.]
Article V. Withdrawal.
- A party state may withdraw from this compact by enacting a law repealing its enactment of this compact, and shall promptly give written notice of the withdrawal to the chief executive of each other party state.
- A withdrawal enacted [on or after January 1 of a year in which a presidential election is held] shall not take effect until [the day after the President elected in that election is inaugurated].
Article VI. Reversion.
When a withdrawal takes effect, this compact terminates as to every party state, and each party state shall appoint its presidential electors as provided by its law in effect when this compact is not in effect.
Article VII. Amendment and new parties.
This compact may be amended, and other states may become parties to it, only by laws enacted in substantially the same form by every party state.
Article VIII. Binding effect.
This compact is a binding agreement among the party states. A party state may seek its enforcement in any court of competent jurisdiction.
Article IX. Severability.
If any provision of this compact or its application is held invalid, the invalidity does not affect other provisions or applications that can be given effect without the invalid provision or application.
Section 2. Implementation.
While the compact is in effect, the chief election official of this state shall allocate and certify electors as provided in Article III, using the procedures in[the state’s Fair Slate allocation provisions, such as Sections 2 through 6 of Part 1].
Section 3. Existing law preserved.
[Section ___], providing for the appointment of all presidential electors from the presidential slate receiving the most votes, remains in force and governs the appointment of electors whenever the compact is not in effect.
Notes on the choices
- The method. How to resolve fractional shares is left as a blank, because there are several defensible answers: largest remainder, a threshold, or a divisor method. The methods page works through each on one example. Partners in a compact should use the same method.
- The trigger. “In substantially the same form” is the NPVIC’s own standard for counting a state’s enactment, so it has a track record.
- The withdrawal window. The NPVIC only delays a withdrawal made in the last six months of a president’s term. This model locks in earlier, from January 1 of an election year, so no partner can back out once a campaign is underway. Partners can choose a different window.
- Reversion. Because each state keeps its existing law on the books (Part 2, Section 3), ending the compact restores winner-take-all automatically, with no new legislation needed. That’s what makes it safe to go first together.
- Pledges. The Supreme Court upheld states’ power to bind electors to their pledge in Chiafalo v. Washington (2020).
Back to Fair Slate