According to the IRS report, „the question of whether the NPV initiative requires congressional approval in accordance with the compact clause first requires deciding whether the NPV is an intergovernmental pact.“  Yale Law School professor Akhil Amar, one of the members of the pact, argued that the NPVIC would probably not create an intergovernmental state apparatus and that „cooperative states acting together would not exercise more power than they can exercise individually“ that NPVIC is probably not an intergovernmental pact and cannot violate the Compact clause.  Conversely, the DE CRS report cites the Court of Justice`s opinion in Northeast Bancorp v. Federal Reserve Board of Governors (1985), that a requirement for a new intergovernmental entity is a sufficient, but not necessary, condition to qualify an intergovernmental agreement as an agreement in accordance with the compact clause.  Instead, the IRS report cites the comments of the Virginia Court v. Tennessee and Northeast Bancorp, that any agreement between two or more states covering „all provisions regarding the conduct or claims of the parties“ prohibits members from „unilaterally amending or cancelling the agreement“ and requires a „reciprocal response“ constitutes an intergovernmental pact. The IRS report notes that the NPVIC meets all of these requirements and concludes that „the initiative can be characterized as an intergovernmental pact.“  Pete du Pont states that „Mr. Gores had a 540,000-vote lead [in the 2000 elections] 3.1 votes in each of the country`s 175,000 districts. Finding three votes per district in urban areas is not difficult… ».  However, the national referendum asserts that it would be more difficult to change the result of fraud in a national referendum than under the current system, since the total number of votes that would probably need to be changed would be greater: at present, the result of a close election can be determined by the result in a single „tip-point state“ and the margin in that state should be well below the national margin. , because of the smaller number of voters at the national level and the fact that several states can have close results.  Only 2 of the 13 smallest states (with 3 or 4 votes) received any of the 399 election campaigns.
New Hampshire received 21 because it was a very divided battle state. Maine (which gives the congressional district vote) received 3 campaign rallies because its 2nd Congressional District was tightly divided (and in fact, Trump wore it). All the other states in this group have been ignored. If 270 votes are thus promised, the winner of the referendum will be elected president. The pact would not enter into force until enough states had signed to accommodate the 270 voters needed. The project has been supported by editorials in newspapers such as the New York Times, of the Chicago Sun-Times, the Los Angeles Times, The Boston Globe and the Minneapolis Star Tribune arguing that the current system discourages turnout and only stops at a few states and on a few issues, while a popular election would compensate for the voting power. Others argued against this, including the Honolulu Star Bulletin.  Pete du Pont, a former Governor of Delaware, called the project an „urban power grab“ in a statement published in the Wall Street Journal, which would completely shift politics to urban issues in populated states and bring in small candidates.  The League of Women Voters has assembled a collection of readings for and con.  Some of the most common talking points are listed below: some opponents of the measure have expressed concerns about the constitutionality of the agreement because of its opposition to the constitutional obligation to the electoral college.