“One of those laws says that in carrying out the 12th Amendment (which you cited) the VP has to ask if there are any objections to the electoral vote count. Dick Cheney never did that. “
The objections must be made in writing. Having received no written objection, Cheney didn’t NEED to call for verbal ones...but are you suggesting someone HAD an objection, and couldn’t make it? Or that Congress doesn’t know what they meant in their law, or have the authority to change their own procedures?
“Since the mid-20th century, on January 6 at 1:00 pm before a Joint Session of Congress, the Vice President opens the votes from each state in alphabetical order.5 He passes the votes to four tellers—two from the House and two from the Senate—who announce the results. House tellers include one Representative from each party and are appointed by the Speaker. At the end of the count, the Vice President then declares the name of the next President.6
During the Joint Session, Members of Congress may object to individual electoral votes or to state returns as a whole. An objection must be declared in writing and signed by one Representative and one Senator. In the case of an objection, the Joint Session recesses and each chamber considers the objection separately in a session which cannot last more than two hours with each Member speaking for no more than five minutes. After each house votes on whether or not to accept the objection, the Joint Session reconvenes and both chambers disclose their decisions. If they agree to the objection, the votes in question are not counted. If either chamber does not agree with the objection, the votes are counted.7”
http://clerk.house.gov/art_history/house_history/electoral.html
Also see
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,143510,00.html
There you go again, bringing facts to the discussion. Inconvenient ones, too.
How would they know if there were any objections if they never asked for them?
Somebody posted a transcript from a documentary about the electoral vote count in 2000. Al Gore asked for objections. There were no objections that met the qualifications (written and signed by a member of the House and a member of the Senate). Gore never did receive a valid written objection, but he still asked the question; he had to. It’s the law.
I know it’s in vogue for the Congress under Obama’s coup to just change the way they do things on a whim, ignoring laws and rules (kind of like the Hawaii DOH...) but that is not lawful.
If you’re saying that Congress changed the law to say that the question asking for objections doesn’t have to be asked then please cite for me the law where they changed that. Absent that, they clearly violated the law you posted here, which means that the process was never legally completed.