Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Spirit of 1776 – Rejected by Project 2025, Embraced by NPVIC

Opinion

Full frame shot of pins that say “vote” with red, white, and blue American flag theme.

An analysis of Project 2025, the Electoral College, and the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, examining democracy, representation, and presidential elections.

Adrienne Bresnahan / Getty Images

Project 2025 is a structural undoing of the "Spirit of 1776." It fundamentally undermines the foundational principles of the Declaration of Independence in the following areas: democratic representation, equality, liberty, and checks/balances. The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (NPVIC) restores the founding ideals of civic equality.

Spirit of 1776 – Rejected by Project 2025, Embraced by NPVIC


Project 2025 is a manifesto that fundamentally rejects the "Spirit of 1776," it replaces the founding ideals of decentralized liberty, civic equality, and resistance to authoritarian rule with a blueprint for a highly centralized, imperial presidency. The 900-page “Mandate for Leadership” operates not as a preservation of 1776, but as its structural undoing.

The primary arguments positioning Project 2025 as a rejection of the original American revolutionary principles, follow:

Swapping Rebellion Against Monarchy for the "Imperial Presidency": The American Revolution was to overthrow the overreaching, centralized authority of a single ruler (King George III) and to establish a system of strict checks and balances. Project 2025 seeks to drastically expand executive power. It advocates for the Unitary Executive Theory, which places the entirety of the executive branch, including independent regulatory bodies—under direct presidential control.

Dismantling the Separation of Powers: The Framers deliberately fragmented government authority across three branches to prevent any single entity from usurping total control. The Project 2025 blueprint encourages the executive branch to bypass congressional intent. For example, it outlines strategies to unilaterally reallocate federal funds and deploy the military domestically via the Insurrection Act, effectively eroding legislative and judicial counterweights.

Replacing a Merit-Based Civil Service with a Loyalty-Based Bureaucracy: Early American governance sought to transition away from the European "spoils system," where governance depended on royal patronage and absolute fealty to the Crown. A central pillar of Project 2025 is the revival of "Schedule F," a classification mechanism allowing the president to strip civil service protections from tens of thousands of federal employees. Critics argue that converting apolitical experts into political appointees establishes a modern-day system of political patronage that demands absolute loyalty to the executive, running counter to Enlightenment-era principles of public accountability.

Narrowing the Scope of Liberty and Universal Rights: The Declaration of Independence asserted that all individuals possess unalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Though flawed in execution, it established a trajectory toward expanding individual self-determination. Human rights advocacy groups emphasize that Project 2025 outlines a highly prescriptive, state-sanctioned vision for American society. By utilizing federal machinery to restrict reproductive freedoms, rollback LGBTQ+ protections, and legally enforce a specific traditionalist religious framework, critics argue the project replaces individual liberty with state-enforced moral conformity.

While proponents claim the Project 2025 as a necessary reclamation of national sovereignty, opponents see it as a structural counter-revolution that swaps the foundational principles of American democracy for centralized authoritarianism.

The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (NPVIC) and Project 2025 represent opposite approaches to American democracy, differing fundamentally in their views on voter enfranchisement, states' rights, and the balance of political power.

The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (NPVIC) aligns with the democratic ideals of the "spirit of 1776" by ensuring the president is chosen directly by all citizens. This restores foundational principles of the American Revolution—popular sovereignty and political equality—by guaranteeing every voter's ballot carries the exact same weight, regardless of where they live.

Reclaiming "Consent of the Governed" :The Declaration of Independence asserts that governments derive "their just powers from the consent of the governed". In modern presidential elections, the winner-take-all Electoral College system means millions of votes are effectively nullified if a candidate loses a specific state. By transitioning to a national popular vote, the NPVIC ensures every single citizen’s voice directly contributes to the national outcome, honoring the revolutionary promise that true authority comes from the people.

Ensuring "All Men Are Created Equal": The 1776 spirit is rooted in the ideal of fundamental equality. Currently, the Electoral College creates a system of unequal representation where a voter in a swing state holds disproportionate sway over the presidency, while voters in safe partisan states are ignored. The NPVIC restores this ideal by making one person's vote equal to any other person's vote nationwide.

Fulfilling the Promise of "No Taxation Without Representation": The core grievance of the Revolutionary era was being subjected to laws and taxes without having a voice in the legislature. Today, an American living in a deeply red or blue state is effectively disenfranchised when it comes to the nation's highest office. By pooling the voting power across states, the NPVIC ensures that every American participates in electing the commander-in-chief, eliminating modern-day electoral disenfranchisement.

The NPVIC: Leverages federalism to achieve a national goal. Using Article II, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution, which gives state legislatures the authority to direct the appointment of their electors, states collaboratively enter into a binding compact to reflect the will of the entire American electorate.

NPVIC is an agreement among U.S. states and the District of Columbia to award all their electoral votes to the presidential ticket that wins the overall popular vote in all fifty states and the District of Columbia. It is considered a pragmatic, voluntary state-based initiative because it aims to ensure the winner of the national popular vote wins the presidency without requiring a constitutional amendment, operating instead within the existing Electoral College framework by utilizing states' constitutional authority to appoint electors. If enough states join the NPVIC to reach 270 electoral votes, the United States will effectively shift from a winner-take-all (WTA) regime to a national popular vote system for electing the President.

With Virginia’s adoption, the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact has been adopted by eighteen states and the District of Columbia, which collectively hold 222 electoral votes. The compact requires 270 electoral votes (a majority of the 538 total) to take effect. It currently needs forty-eight more electoral votes to become active.

In 2026, NPVIC will be a relevant issue in several state elections, particularly in Arizona, Michigan, Nevada, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. As the compact needs forty-eight more electoral votes to reach the 270-vote threshold, these purple or contested states are key battlegrounds where legislative control could determine whether they join the nineteen jurisdictions already signed on.”


Hugh J. Campbell, Jr., CPA, is a Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) professional and a student of W. Edwards Deming, the American statistician often credited as the catalyst for the Japanese economic miracle after WWII.


Read More

Diverse People At Voting Booth. Vote Here Elections Sign

A political scientist examines how automatic voter registration is quietly turning non-affiliation into America's largest voting bloc.

AndreyPopov/Getty Images

When Neither Party Is the Default: Rethinking Representation As America’s Electorate Changes

For most of my career as a political scientist, representation was the central theme of my teaching and research. Early on, I studied how legislators understood their responsibilities to constituents — whether they saw themselves as delegates carrying out constituent mandates, trustees exercising independent judgment, or politicos combining both. That work asked a question that still matters: What does it mean to represent the public in a changing democracy?

Today I find myself asking a related question: What happens when the electorate changes but the institutions built to represent it do not?

Keep ReadingShow less
A person looks out at the North Tower pool at the 9/11 Memorial and Museum ahead of the 25th anniversary of the attack on the World Trade Center on September 7, 2026, in New York City.

A person looks out at the North Tower pool at the 9/11 Memorial and Museum ahead of the 25th anniversary of the attack on the World Trade Center on September 7, 2026, in New York City.

Gary Hershorn/Getty Images

How 9/11’s Memory Continues to Shape American Citizenship

Twenty‑five years after September 11th, the burden of that day continues to affect us in ways that are difficult to express. It was a moment of profound loss, but also one that revealed both the vulnerability and resilience of our national fabric. The memories remain vivid for many of us: where we were, what we felt, and how the world appeared to change in an instant. Even now, a quarter century later, the impact of that morning continues to shape how we understand our country, our responsibilities, and our relationships with one another.

To help us all reflect on that day, I invited four contributors to the Fulcrum to share reflections not to revisit the tragedy, but to commemorate the ways it has persisted in our consciousness twenty-five years later.

Keep ReadingShow less
Close-up shot of a Black woman's hands receiving a mail-in ballot to vote in a USA Presidential, Senatorial, Congressional, or local election

An immigrant's perspective on why America's election debate over security vs. access is a false choice — and how USPS mail ballot rules fit in.

Jeremy Poland/Getty Images

Ballot Security and Voter Access Are Not Opposites: What the USPS Ballot Rule Gets Right

I came to the United States from India in 1982. In Indian elections, I watched officials check voter identity and mark a voter’s finger with indelible ink. Party representatives observed the process. The system was imperfect, as every large democracy is, but it sent a simple message: casting one vote is a serious civic act, and the process should make that clear.

When I later became an American citizen and cast my first ballot, the experience felt very different. A poll worker found my name on a list and handed me a ballot. In my precinct, there was no photo identification check. I was surprised—not because I expected voting to be difficult, but because I expected a system as consequential as an election to have clear, visible safeguards.

Keep ReadingShow less
A group of people wait in line to get their ballots to vote in the election.

Uncontested elections are more common than you'd think. From open primaries to multi-member districts, here's what states like California and Alaska are doing to bring real competition back to the ballot — and what it'll take to change political culture, too.

Getty Images, SDI Productions

What America Can Do About Its Uncontested Elections

Politics nerds have many ideas about how to strengthen American democracy; however, few directly address silent elections. For example, ranked-choice voting does nothing to encourage more candidates to run if there are not enough. Term limits increase turnover, but even newcomers can frequently run uncontested in general elections if they have won competitive primaries.

Fortunately, the cause isn’t hopeless. For one, tightening campaign finance laws would put potential challengers on more even footing with corporate-backed politicians, encouraging more candidates to run. Independent redistricting would also help. The Cook Political Report, a poll aggregator, considers only 69 of America’s 435 House districts competitive. Fair redistricting means more competitive districts and therefore more contested elections.

Keep ReadingShow less