There's going to be a lot of pissed off and disappointed people who think and are counting on Pence can walk in and just throw votes out because he thinks there was fraud on 1/6. We ALL know there was fraud. The only thing that is going to flip this is for the state legislatures that are in question to take back their power and decertify their vote.
How do you figure that pence does not have the constitutional power count the electors in the manner that he sees fit?
Despite the conflict in the electoral counts act
And the 12th amendment, BOTH acknowledge pence’s power to count electoral votes.
The 12th amendment has explicit instructions indicating the manner in which votes should be counted and the manner in which competing or disputed electors should be addressed.
Unless I am missing something, I don’t see why pence could not disregard the conflicting (and prima facia unconstitutional) provisions in the electoral count act and follow the 12th amendment. This would eliminate the need for senators to object and send it straight to the house ( by state delegation, not individual state representative ) if pence felt the need to punt.
It says he shall count the votes. The alternative electors sent are are not a “this or that”. They are there only to allow the Trump campaign to continue legal challenges. There’s absolutely nothing in the constitution that say the VP can pick what he wants. Pence will open the envelopes and count for each state. When the battleground states come up there will be objections. Those objections will trigger a two hour debate where evidence can be presented. Then there will be a vote from the house and the senate to either sustain the objections or override them. BOTH houses must agree in the objections or the original count will stand.
Where is that procedure located in the constitution?
The 12th amendment gives exactly zero power of the members of the senate to object to anything. The written objection from rep and senators AND the two hour debate language is found in the electoral count act.
The 12th amendment gives the dispute resolution power to house of reps by state delegation where the president of senate cannot count a majority for any party.
Those are two conflicting procedures. Why would the simple majority-passed piece of legislation (electoral count act ) dictate the procedure rather than the constitution?
There's going to be a lot of pissed off and disappointed people who think and are counting on Pence can walk in and just throw votes out because he thinks there was fraud on 1/6. We ALL know there was fraud. The only thing that is going to flip this is for the state legislatures that are in question to take back their power and decertify their vote.
How do you figure that pence does not have the constitutional power count the electors in the manner that he sees fit? Despite the conflict in the electoral counts act And the 12th amendment, BOTH acknowledge pence’s power to count electoral votes.
The 12th amendment has explicit instructions indicating the manner in which votes should be counted and the manner in which competing or disputed electors should be addressed.
Unless I am missing something, I don’t see why pence could not disregard the conflicting (and prima facia unconstitutional) provisions in the electoral count act and follow the 12th amendment. This would eliminate the need for senators to object and send it straight to the house ( by state delegation, not individual state representative ) if pence felt the need to punt.
It says he shall count the votes. The alternative electors sent are are not a “this or that”. They are there only to allow the Trump campaign to continue legal challenges. There’s absolutely nothing in the constitution that say the VP can pick what he wants. Pence will open the envelopes and count for each state. When the battleground states come up there will be objections. Those objections will trigger a two hour debate where evidence can be presented. Then there will be a vote from the house and the senate to either sustain the objections or override them. BOTH houses must agree in the objections or the original count will stand.
Where is that procedure located in the constitution?
The 12th amendment gives exactly zero power of the members of the senate to object to anything. The written objection from rep and senators AND the two hour debate language is found in the electoral count act. The 12th amendment gives the dispute resolution power to house of reps by state delegation where the president of senate cannot count a majority for any party.
Those are two conflicting procedures. Why would the simple majority-passed piece of legislation (electoral count act ) dictate the procedure rather than the constitution?