- Apr 14, 2003
- 7,452
- 1,301
- 72
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Protestant
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Democrat
You may feel intuitively that the Republicans who objected to Congress counting Electoral College votes were wrong. It certainly looks like partisan gridlock has grown beyond tolerable bounds. Congress counting the votes of the EC is normally a ceremonial matter. There is virtually no parallel to the fracas on the floor of Congress on January 6-7, even if you ignore the rioters.
Richard Nixon was Vice-President and presided when a joint session of Congress counted the Electoral votes that made John F. Kennedy President. Nixon certainly didn’t like the result but neither he nor any other Republican challenged it. Actually, there were significant allegations of election regularities in 1960. It is widely believed that ballot boxes were stuffed in Chicago. Nevertheless, Republicans realized that they had no documentary evidence, no “smoking gun” to present that Congress could reasonably consider.
I did watch the counting of votes and Congressional debate over certifying the Electoral vote from Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania was the only state where a challenge was signed by members of both Houses and so the only one where the Senate and House had to vote separately to accept or reject the challenge.
Over and over the challengers pointed to the provision in the Constitution that gives the state legislature the authority to set rules for the election in their state. Claims were made that the Governor and other persons in Pennsylvania state government exceeded their power by issuing new rules within a month of the election. If the Governor and other officials did exceed their authority under state law, it seems to me that this would have to be settled in Pennsylvania. A conflict between the Pennsylvania legislature and the Governor, if it even exists in this case, can’t settled by the US Congress.
Where does this allegation leave us? After the Pennsylvania Electors met and voted, the Pennsylvania legislature certified the vote and sent it to Washington, to be counted in a joint session of Congress. According to the challengers, to show respect for the authority of the legislature to set election rules, Congress should throw out the Electoral votes which have been certified by the state legislature. To show respect for the legislature, Congress should throw out the vote tally sent by the legislature. This reduces to absurdity. Rejecting the Pennsylvania Electoral vote would leave Pennsylvanians without a say in who becomes President.
Those challenging the Electoral vote from Pennsylvania fail to notice some crucial points. The Governor and other officials did issue new regulations with an election looming. They did so because of the unprecedented challenge of holding national and state elections while under partial lockdown because of the corona virus epidemic.
Another point raised by the challengers is that the courts changed the deadline for accepting mail-in ballots. To the challengers this is an infuriating last-minute change in election procedures. What they fail to note is that this occurred against a backdrop of the Trump Administration undermining the Post Office in the past year. With more people being allowed to use mail-in ballots than ever before, and more people choosing to use them, the Post Office is moving slower than usual. Again, rules were sensibly changed with the goal of getting every legitimate ballot counted.
Is election fraud an issue? A good point was made by defenders of the 2020 vote count. Republican operatives filed about fifty lawsuits around the country challenging the election results. All these lawsuits have been thrown out for lack of evidence. What did these lawsuits say about fraud? NOTHING. The evidence for fraud is so slight that no lawyer could sign a suit alleging fraud without serious risk of being disbarred. No, fraud isn’t really an issue, it’s just another word that gets tossed around.
Richard Nixon was Vice-President and presided when a joint session of Congress counted the Electoral votes that made John F. Kennedy President. Nixon certainly didn’t like the result but neither he nor any other Republican challenged it. Actually, there were significant allegations of election regularities in 1960. It is widely believed that ballot boxes were stuffed in Chicago. Nevertheless, Republicans realized that they had no documentary evidence, no “smoking gun” to present that Congress could reasonably consider.
I did watch the counting of votes and Congressional debate over certifying the Electoral vote from Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania was the only state where a challenge was signed by members of both Houses and so the only one where the Senate and House had to vote separately to accept or reject the challenge.
Over and over the challengers pointed to the provision in the Constitution that gives the state legislature the authority to set rules for the election in their state. Claims were made that the Governor and other persons in Pennsylvania state government exceeded their power by issuing new rules within a month of the election. If the Governor and other officials did exceed their authority under state law, it seems to me that this would have to be settled in Pennsylvania. A conflict between the Pennsylvania legislature and the Governor, if it even exists in this case, can’t settled by the US Congress.
Where does this allegation leave us? After the Pennsylvania Electors met and voted, the Pennsylvania legislature certified the vote and sent it to Washington, to be counted in a joint session of Congress. According to the challengers, to show respect for the authority of the legislature to set election rules, Congress should throw out the Electoral votes which have been certified by the state legislature. To show respect for the legislature, Congress should throw out the vote tally sent by the legislature. This reduces to absurdity. Rejecting the Pennsylvania Electoral vote would leave Pennsylvanians without a say in who becomes President.
Those challenging the Electoral vote from Pennsylvania fail to notice some crucial points. The Governor and other officials did issue new regulations with an election looming. They did so because of the unprecedented challenge of holding national and state elections while under partial lockdown because of the corona virus epidemic.
Another point raised by the challengers is that the courts changed the deadline for accepting mail-in ballots. To the challengers this is an infuriating last-minute change in election procedures. What they fail to note is that this occurred against a backdrop of the Trump Administration undermining the Post Office in the past year. With more people being allowed to use mail-in ballots than ever before, and more people choosing to use them, the Post Office is moving slower than usual. Again, rules were sensibly changed with the goal of getting every legitimate ballot counted.
Is election fraud an issue? A good point was made by defenders of the 2020 vote count. Republican operatives filed about fifty lawsuits around the country challenging the election results. All these lawsuits have been thrown out for lack of evidence. What did these lawsuits say about fraud? NOTHING. The evidence for fraud is so slight that no lawyer could sign a suit alleging fraud without serious risk of being disbarred. No, fraud isn’t really an issue, it’s just another word that gets tossed around.
