Senators Introduce Reforms to the Electoral Count Act of 1887

https://www.collins.senate.gov/ ^ | July 20, 2022

[NKP_Vet]

Washington, D.C.— Today, after months of bipartisan negotiations led by U.S. Senators Susan Collins (R-ME) and Joe Manchin (D-WV), two proposals were introduced which include legislation to reform and modernize the outdated Electoral Count Act of 1887 to ensure that the electoral votes tallied by Congress accurately reflect each state’s vote for President.

In addition to Senators Collins and Manchin, the senators involved in the bipartisan negotiations include: Rob Portman (R-OH), Kyrsten Sinema (D-AZ), Mitt Romney (R-UT), Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), Mark Warner (D-VA), Thom Tillis (R-NC), Chris Murphy (D-CT), Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV), Ben Cardin (D-MD), Todd Young (R-IN), Chris Coons (D-DE), Ben Sasse (R-NE), and Lindsey Graham (R-SC).

[NKP_Vet]

Edit title: RINOs join with democrats to guarantee rigged elections can’t be contested.

[Alberta's Child]

Seems like a pointless exercise.

The Electoral Count Act of 1887 was always questionable in terms of its constitutionality anyway. Congress simply cannot override a slate of electoral votes certified by a state under any circumstances.

[skeeter]

Just looking at the bad actors supporting this bill says its no bueno.

[Howie66]

Assistant DemocRATs would be a more fitting descriptor for those assholes.

[Agatsu77]

Get rib of the GOP a$$holes who voted for this. Rinos (assistant democrats) need to be removed from office. We have too many libs already.

[joshua c]

then why are they authorized to contest a state’s electoral votes?

[ArcadeQuarters]

> Rinos (assistant democrats) need to be removed from office. We have too many libs already.

They will always be there until conservatives stop voting for them.

[Alberta's Child]

The original 1887 law was passed after the disputed 1876 election -- when several states submitted MULTIPLE slates of electors.

The intention of the law was legitimate, but the application of it is completely unconstitutional. The way the law is written, a state that submits one slate of electors can have its electoral votes canceled by an act of Congress for no damn good reason at all. There is no constitutional basis for that.

[cuz1961]

Opening salvo on the war on the E.C. , mission goal is the defeat and overthrow of the constitutional representative Republic and replace with a pure mobocracy then fiefdom.

Same old same old..

SSDD.

[cuz1961]

The Electoral Count Act of 1887 was always questionable in terms of its constitutionality anyway
/\

Says you.

Big whoop.

Same with the rest of your arguments.

Commie.

[cuz1961]

Im done debating the progs.

It’s a futile attempt.

Vote
Them
Out.

Ignore and ostracize the rest.

[Lurkinanloomin]

We MUST STOP re-electing Assistant Democrats.

[RideForever]

The way the law is written, a state that submits one slate of electors can have its electoral votes canceled by an act of Congress for no damn good reason at all.

Untrue. Congress separates and meets and debates on the different slates, one state at a time.

There is a progression of acceptance of contending slates of electors, and in some states the election law allows a governor to submit a slate if the state legislature submits 2 slates.

[Alberta's Child]

Here's a scenario I'll play out for you. For the sake of this discussion I'll ignore the fact that the allocation of electoral votes among the states has changed after the 2020 census.

1. Donald Trump wins the 2024 election by 304-227 electoral votes over Joe Biden (the same margin as his 2016 victory over Hillary Clinton).

2. He wins Texas (36 electoral votes) and Florida (29 electoral votes) by 60%-40% margins in both states.

3. Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi drum up a scheme to overturn the election results and keep Biden in the White House. They get the Senate and House to challenge these 65 electoral votes under the Electoral Count Act of 1887.

4. The plot is successful. The House and Senate both recognize the challenge to these electoral votes under the terms of the 1887 law, and in separate votes they give Joe Biden 65 of Trump's 304 electoral votes.

There's absolutely nothing in the U.S. Constitution that permits anything of this sort. In fact, the only role the Constitution gives to Congress is under the 12th Amendment -- when Congress selects the President and Vice President in cases where no candidate gets a majority of the electoral votes.

I'm going to gently suggest that you turn off your TV and educate yourself a bit.

[Alberta's Child]

Untrue. Congress separates and meets and debates on the different slates, one state at a time.

What "different slates" are you talking about? I clearly stated that under the U.S. Constitution, Congress has no authority to change the electoral votes of a state that submitted ONE slate of electors.

But the 1887 law allows Congress to do exactly that.

[cuz1961]

Take your scenarios to your deluded utopia and play with yourself.

Prog.

[butlerweave]

I thought the democrats want to get rid of the electoral votes

[Alberta's Child]

"Commie?" "Prog?" LOL. You haven't been around here very long, have you?

I swear, the average IQ here on this website has dropped by about 20 points since I signed on for the first time in 2000.

[cuz1961]

Commie?” “Prog?”

/*

Do you prefer

Stinking RINO infiltrating p.o.s. ?

[JoJo354]

Thank you for the information. I keep a copy of the Constitution with me and I have read it several times but that doesn’t mean I am an expert in any way. I appreciate when someone who has studied it to be on FR and help educate me more.