It's January of 2001. Al Gore is the sitting Vice President, and he's just "lost" the 2000 election to George W. Bush.
What stops VP Al Gore from rejecting the electoral votes from a handful of states that voted for Bush?
And no, the 12th Amendment did NOT change the veep’s counting authority ...
OK. Let's pretend the 12th Amendment was never adopted. The original Constitution lays out the same role of the VP:
The President of the Senate shall, in the Presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the Certificates, and the Votes shall then be counted.
Where does it say the VP, as President of the Senate, has any role in this process other than to "open the Certificates?"
1) Nothing. Gore could have (as Nixon did) counted the votes for his opponent (Bush), or, he could have, as Jefferson did, counted the contested vote for himself, or, he could have (as Adams did) have allowed time for an objection from the floor.
There is NOTHING anywhere, any place that says that the veep/pres of the senate cannot entertain an objection from the floor during the counting. Indeed, quite the contrary, his very authority as “presiding officer of the senate” means he is REQUIRED to.
I answered your second question. He acts DUALLY in a role of veep/counter and as “presider” and is fully empowered to count what he wants, entertain objections. whatever. It does not say, “and in that role he must count only those electoral votes given to him and may not count, reject, or entertain any other electoral votes.”
And 1876 proves fully that this entire situation is fluid.