With their new trifectas in Pennsylvania, Michigan, Arizona, Wisconsin and Nevada, Democrats could sign onto the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, in which states give their electoral votes to whoever wins the nationwide popular vote. All five of those states haven’t yet signed; the 19 that have possess 222 of the 270 votes needed to win the presidency. The additional states would activate the Compact. Some states might decline, bellyaching over losing their place of prominence in picking the president, but that would be irritatingly myopic: of the five presidents who won while losing the popular vote, four were Republicans.
Talk about historic.
Yes, but the disproportionality between electoral votes per voter comes more from the existence of the Senate than it does with the slightly different population sizes of the House districts. Wyoming has almost 4 times the electoral votes per voter than Ohio, whereas right now the widest ratio in House district populations is Delaware’s 980k having 80% higher population compared to Montana’s 542k.
And the genuine unfairness of the electoral college is the winner take all nature of it. Even if the electoral college itself were divided exactly proportionally to the population of the states, there would still be divergence between the national popular vote and the electoral college winner when one candidate wins a disproportionate number of very close states. Apportionment is a separate problem from the electoral college, and both independently need to be fixed.