That's not part of the bill in the one state that I reviewed (MA), nor in the text describing the compact generally.
[Voters in] States participating may in fact believe that multiple types of fair elections exist, but that they merely prefer this particular one.
I shown this article because it is interesting from a "technical" perspective to see how the States are discussing together to figure out a backdoor, instead of doing what is the "right" thing: sitting on a table and amend the Constitution to abolish the Electoral College.
It reminds me of technical debt. Instead of rewriting the original buggy code, we add one more feature and we certainly don't change anything to the original code.
So instead we have:
"This is the logic, we do this A and this B, but oh well, anyway it's C"
Simpler is better, especially on crucial things such as elections.
Changing the presidental vote to a popular vote would be the first step to doing that.
Then I learned more about how the US works, and realized that the electoral college is actually its strength! Without it cities would completely dominate rural areas, like completely.
Those rural areas would essentially have zero voice. Think about it: do you want a US where only a couple states control the entire thing?
And I don't mean like today where some states are predictably red or blue (i.e. where only the swing states "count") - in the current state red vs blue alternate positions on capital hill, so all those states eventually get their voice heard.
In a world without the Electoral College the rural states get zero voice. None.
I don't think the US would survive this.
Also, all the rural red counties in CA effectively have no voice in the presidential election. It's a dumb, outdated, arbitrary system.
Obviously rural states would not cease to have a voice in government if the President were elected by popular vote - which is in essence what the Electoral College is designed to prevent - because most Presidents have been and yet rural states somehow persist, pass legislation and maintain political power.
They're not trading anything, the compact is one where all participating states agree that the only fair election is one where the candidate with the most votes should win, and so all of them have agreed that their electors will vote for the candidate who wins the most votes at the national level, regardless of what the local result is.
As it should be, for a national vote.