Kartographer: I apologize if we have hijacked your thread!
Uncle Sham: Good to hear from you again.
Thank you for your views. However, the state of the law has moved beyond the Electoral Vote Counting Act of 1877 and is more clearly understood through the language of the 20th Amendment (1933) and 3 USC 15 (1949, if I recall correctly).
I disagree that 3 USC 19 applies in this instance since there was not a vacancy in both the office of the President and the Vice President (there being no suggestion Biden was not “qualified”).
I do agree with your interpretation of the 20th Amendment insofar as it can be read to place the burden of qualifying with the President elect; unfortunately, you and I may be the only ones with such a view.
It is clear electoral votes could have been challenged on Jan 8 on the basis of “irregularities”, as did the Democrats so challenge George Bush on Jan 6, 2005. Such irregularities would necessarily include instances where those votes were for a candidate who was not qualified; for instance, where the President elect was a cartoon character named Mickey Mouse.
On Jan 8, 2009 Republicans in the Congress, even just two of them, one from each chamber, had the 20th Amendment, 3 USC 15, Congressional precedence and their oaths of office to defend the Constitution. No legal theories are required, the language is clear. And yet, not one of them had the courage to act.
Notwithstanding your careful reply, I still find that unbelievable.
There is a two letter word right smack in the middle of 3 USC 19 that means everything.
3--THE PRESIDENT, CHAPTER 1- PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS AND VACANCIES
"Sec. 19. Vacancy in offices of both President and Vice President; officers eligible to act
”(a)(1) If, by reason of death, resignation, removal from office, inability,
OR
failure to qualify,
there is neither a President nor Vice President to discharge the powers and duties of the office of President, then the Speaker of the House of Representatives shall, upon his resignation as Speaker and as Representative in Congress, act as President. “
I agree with you that it is unbelievable and almost treasonous that not one of our elected officials who are oath-bound by Article six of the Constitution to "support" the Constitution has not stepped forward to do so in this case. It is up to us to force their hand by finding legal ways to penalize those who are not upholding their primary responsibility according to the very document which defines their powers. It is this document, the Constitution itself that we should ALL be defending with every ounce of our being. This is why I raised the issue and presented the case as I did, so that others can see for themselves where to fight the issue using the Constitution itself. It's up to us, the people.