Bipartisan Legislation Introduced To Help Safeguard Elections and Prevent Efforts To Overturn Presidential Election Results
[guest post by Dana]
You would think that this would be a no-brainer:
Republican Representative Liz Cheney introduced a bill Monday that would change how Congress counts presidential electors to reduce the chances of another effort to overturn election results like that mounted by former President Donald Trump last year.
Co-sponsored with Democratic Representative Zoe Lofgren, the legislation would direct challenges to state elections to courts and limit the vice president’s role in electoral vote-counting as “ministerial.” That grew out of Trump’s attempt to pressure his vice president, Mike Pence, to take action as the Senate’s presiding officer during the counting of the Electoral College results to obstruct or delay formal certification of Joe Biden’s 2020 victory.
It also would raise the bar to challenge a state’s electors to one-third of both the House and Senate. Currently, if one member of Congress from each chamber objects to a presidential election during the arcane certification process, the chambers have to debate and hold a vote on the objection, as was done in 2021.
“The Electoral Count Act of 1887 should be amended to prevent other future unlawful efforts to overturn Presidential elections and to ensure future peaceful transfers of Presidential power,” the bill reads…“Our proposal is intended to preserve the rule of law for all future presidential elections by ensuring that self-interested politicians cannot steal from the people the guarantee that our government derives its power from the consent of the governed,” Cheney and Lofgren wrote. “We look forward to working with our colleagues in the House and the Senate toward this goal.”
While this legislation makes it clear that the vice-president has absolutely no authority to interfere in the counting of electoral votes, the report also says that the threshold for Congress to object to electors would be raised by this bill and that it would also address the delays a state could make in counting and certifying its votes. Given what happened after the 2020 election, there can be no doubt that legislation to protect future presidential elections is absolutely necessary.
–Dana
Hello.
P.S. Because one may not like the two women responsible for this piece of legislation does not mean that the legislation itself is bad or wrong. Nor does it erase the obvious need for such safeguarding.
Dana (1225fc) — 9/20/2022 @ 9:09 amI don’t much care for Zoe Lofgren.
Kevin M (eeb9e9) — 9/20/2022 @ 9:34 amThis interesting:
My emphasis. See page 32 at the link.
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 9/20/2022 @ 9:40 amWhile there is a need to clarify the VP’s powers, I don’t really see the need for making a challenge to a state’s electors a lot harder.
Consider:
1) It still requires a bicameral majority to invalidate a state total.
2) Motions can be made without even the minimal support required now. That they are slapped down does not unmake them.
3) The grandstanding will continue and perhaps increase, both in reaction to the unusual “seconding” requirements and to whatever election shenanigans are alleged.
It is also unclear what happens with electoral vote reports that DESERVE to be challenged, such as votes cast by the legislature, or otherwise in contradiction to the state’s voter’s choice.
If they added a line to the proposed law declaring that any electoral vote in contradiction to the state’s electoral results was automatically invalid, I’d be a lot happier with this.
Except for the VP’s role, I see this mostly as fixing a problem that does not exist and ignoring one that does.
Kevin M (eeb9e9) — 9/20/2022 @ 9:46 amMAGAWorld not amused:
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 9/20/2022 @ 9:50 am
Sad. Cheney removes all doubt when she works with that PoW.
Colonel Haiku (76a1de) — 9/20/2022 @ 9:53 amMore MAGA reaction to the Senate proposal:
Tell us how you really feel 🙂
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 9/20/2022 @ 9:58 amAnd, in reading the bill, it actually protects electoral slates cast under the so-called National Popular Vote Compact, as that travesty (or other legislative usurpations) are not listed among the valid causes for objection.
Even a bona fide case of mass electoral fraud is not a grounds for objection. ONLY a case of a false slate, an excluded elector or an excluded candidate is acceptable.
The following could not be questioned:
1) The Illinois EV of 1960, widely known to have been fraudulent
2) A state which unlawfully excluded some citizens from voting.
3) A state which unlawfully altered the vote tabulation.
4) A state which directed votes to be cast contrary to the voter’s choice.
While some of these might be argued in a court, no part of this law establishes any additional “standing” to do so, and most 2020 court challenges were dismissed on that basis.
Not good enough.
Kevin M (eeb9e9) — 9/20/2022 @ 10:00 amRip, thank you for reading the Free Republic, so that we don’t have to. Clear your cookies.
Kevin M (eeb9e9) — 9/20/2022 @ 10:04 amAs I recall, I think there are 10 Republicans in the Senate who are on board with fixing the ECA. This could and should happen before year-end.
Paul Montagu (753b42) — 9/20/2022 @ 10:08 amWhy does the number of members objecting need to be raised? It’s one & one now, which is not unusual parliamentary practice (mover and seconder). Nearly every election a bunch of dissatisfied customers makes a scene. If all they can do is force a vote, well, we don’t pay them by the hour so what’s the issue?
Kevin M (eeb9e9) — 9/20/2022 @ 10:23 amAs I recall, I think there are 10 Republicans in the Senate who are on board with fixing the ECA
If you read this, this is a partisan “fix.” It addresses more than the VP thing and those additions are from the Democrat list, not the GOP one.
Kevin M (eeb9e9) — 9/20/2022 @ 10:24 amReading more closely…
Could a attorney here please read 6.a.3.c.1.A and subsequent? Does this section preclude ANY selection of electors contrary to the state’s election totals? Or does the bolded language allow the legislature to use another source for choosing electors?
Kevin M (eeb9e9) — 9/20/2022 @ 10:42 amIt doesn’t stop the Electoral Voter Compact fraud which destroys the Constitution so the bill is just posturing and does nothing to secure elections.
NJRob (a5d807) — 9/20/2022 @ 10:44 am“If you read this, this is a partisan “fix.” It addresses more than the VP thing and those additions are from the Democrat list, not the GOP one.”
Works for them. Go get ‘em, Cheney… show those mad conservative skillz!
Colonel Haiku (76a1de) — 9/20/2022 @ 10:48 am“Electoral Voter Compact fraud”?
Paul Montagu (753b42) — 9/20/2022 @ 10:51 amKevin, I really don’t care whether the House bill is too “democratic”. It still has to be conferenced with the Senate, where 10 Republicans have to sign on for it go forward, and the Senate version is pretty good.
Paul Montagu (753b42) — 9/20/2022 @ 11:48 amCheney and Lofgren wrote. “We look forward to working with our colleagues in the House and the Senate toward this goal.”
Not for long.
DCSCA (23025c) — 9/20/2022 @ 12:00 pmThat should not be a grounds for notcounting the vote. That would make the opponent of someone who ran for president the newly elected president rather than the person who ran as vice president. Otherwise this is a scheme to advantage one party. I am surprised (or maybe not surprised – she’s pretty dumb – but I still should expect more) that Liz Cheney would fall for this..
That someone is disqualified should be a separate vote or a court decision.
The definition of that shouldn’t be fuzzy.
Do the peoplewho drafted this billwant toend controversies,or try to take advantage of possible situations?
Sammy Finkelman (1d215a) — 9/20/2022 @ 1:48 pm14. NJRob (a5d807) — 9/20/2022 @ 10:44 am
It’s not fraud but it can make the question of who won unanswerable. At least there would not be an overwhelming consensus of honest people.
And what happens if different states come to different conclusions as to who won the popular vote? Do we say that each state gets to abide by its own final decision?
Sammy Finkelman (1d215a) — 9/20/2022 @ 1:53 pmThis piece of legislation would be worse than Electoral Count Act. And if certain thins are now unsettled, that puts the bias in favor of reality.
Sammy Finkelman (1d215a) — 9/20/2022 @ 1:56 pmWhy the pre-emptive shot if she can stand on her own two feet as a woman? Cheney is the lamest of lame ducks, she is viewed as myopically vindictive and that is how she burned all of her good will, so she won’t be allowed any wins by the GOP if they can help it. If she asked for a resolution to honor Mother Theresa, they’d try to shelve it and make Democrats carry her water… which they won’t unless it hurts the GOP
steveg (aca30e) — 9/20/2022 @ 10:20 pmThe people that know Cheney best didn’t buy that any of her act was about principle, but god bless her that she was able to sell it to people who believe the Vanity Fair version of who she is and who haven’t spent everyday with her for the last 6 years.
I do agree Cheney belongs in the “Trump hating water carrier Hall of Fame” and clearly edges out Kinzinger in this matter, so she may even be the GOAT in category
You know what’s really funny about this, in a sick, ironic way?
Suppose that Trump runs in 2024 and wins a majority of the electoral vote. Looking a the list of legal objections beginning on page 32 of the linked text, we see that one of the causes of action is
So, in the guise of reform, asserting that it attempting to block the kind of coup that Trump is accused of, it plants a method for denying someone like Donald Trump his electoral victory.
Now, people do disagree on that section of the 14th —
* Does it pertain to the President?
* Does it pertain to activity 150 years after the Civil War or was it only for that narrow purpose?
* Does someone have to be convicted in a fact-based due process proceeding?
This bill simply assumes the answers are Yes, No and No and possibly makes the question non-justiciable. So, in the guise of reform we have a procedure that SPECIFICALLY allows revoking a bone fide Electoral College win.
Do better, because the seeds for Civil War II are hidden in this gem.
Kevin M (eeb9e9) — 9/21/2022 @ 1:03 am* Some of the line numbers snuck through
Kevin M (eeb9e9) — 9/21/2022 @ 1:04 amIt still has to be conferenced with the Senate, where 10 Republicans have to sign on for it go forward, and the Senate version is pretty good.
I am old enough to remember the day when I learned that someone telling me “Don’t worry, it will be fixed before it’s enacted” clearly thought I was a fool for believing them.
Kevin M (eeb9e9) — 9/21/2022 @ 1:07 amBesides, Paul, the Democrats view these issues as features.
Kevin M (eeb9e9) — 9/21/2022 @ 1:10 am#22 So, Cheney has no career left in the GOP. She has no career in the Democratic Party. She’s heir to Daddy’s fortune. So money in place of power really isn’t there as a motive.
So, please, what course other than principle, explains her actions?
Appalled (3a74fb) — 9/21/2022 @ 6:18 am27… who cares, she’s toast.
Colonel Haiku (76a1de) — 9/21/2022 @ 7:25 am#28
I agree with that. So why bother trying to ascribe some secret non-obvious unprincipled motive to her? (Which is what #22 does) Why not take some of us anti-Trump folks at face value?
Appalled (bfc916) — 9/21/2022 @ 7:59 amUnsurprising, since it is Trump’s party……
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 9/21/2022 @ 4:41 pmHer vindictiveness is a secret only to you I guess
steveg (cbab39) — 9/21/2022 @ 9:33 pmKevin, at 13 – i read it as saying that the state has to follow whatever rules are in place on election day. so the legislature could choose to not have an election, but they can’t have an election and then change their mind about having an election.
aphrael (d9db76) — 9/21/2022 @ 9:39 pm@27. Are you kidding????
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M8uU_4XBugA
DCSCA (f339cc) — 9/21/2022 @ 10:39 pmOrder the Cheney Breakfast at all participating Wyoming Denny’s…
Toast.
With a side order of toast.
DCSCA (f339cc) — 9/21/2022 @ 10:43 pmDaughter Darth best remember that Trump only boasted about shooting somebody on Fifth Avenue. While her Daddy Darth actually DID shoot somebody in the face and chest — and got away with it.
DCSCA (4b8b01) — 9/21/2022 @ 10:57 pmReading comments on the mystery of Liz Chaney’s behavior.
For DCSCA, the secret is that Cheney traded power for vanity. She could be the biggest Never-Trump of the world,and losing her seat, her power base in the GOP, didn’t matter because she would be…famous. It’s plausible — in the way a Harold Robbins bestseller is plausible.
For steveg — the secret is simple vindictiveness. She just hates Trump and she’s going to get him, no matter what the cost. It’s plausible — if you watch a steady diet of Film Noirs and read angry post world war II private eye books where a bad woman ruins the lives of good men in an amoral world, just because.
I don’t buy it — it des not reflect the impulse towards power that motivates today’s GOP. It also just assumes evil motive when the face value motive is at least as likely an explanation. As Freud puts it, sometimes revulsion against a coup attempt is just revulsion against a coup attempt.
Appalled (54fa4a) — 9/22/2022 @ 7:22 amIf you love this country, preach unity, not division.
Colonel Haiku (9faf71) — 9/22/2022 @ 7:45 am