Law Election Reform Debate: ECA Reform signed into Law 12/30/22

[Lead]

Is anyone going on record in opposition to this? Seems like that would be signaling a clear intent to try to prevent elections from deciding results. Or is there a defensible argument?

In the forum or in DC? I could put a poll up. The thread originally was about other reform bills earlier in Biden’s term though but I think I’ll bring it to a close if and when ECAR goes through.

In terms of the senate, there’s recently was 60 confirmed votes but there are two bills. The second bill isn’t likely to pass so there’s probably some deal making that is key about what gets in the more basic ECAR one. I don’t know if the senate released their version completely yet but I’d want to see far more than 60 votes on something that just clarified rules and also raises contesting so a fringe house and senate member can’t cause delays.

 

[Jack V Savage]

In the forum or in DC? I could put a poll up. The thread originally was about other reform bills earlier in Biden’s term though but I think I’ll bring it to a close if and when ECAR goes through.

More interested in like a serious argument. Pundit maybe or, yeah, any senator who has gone on record with a reason for a no vote.

 

[Lead]

More interested in like a serious argument. Pundit maybe or, yeah, any senator who has gone on record with a reason for a no vote.

I haven’t found anything credible. In terms of pundits/ journalists, you can find articles across the board form National Review, Cato to Vox, WaPo calling for it.

It’s hard to know what the opposing talking point will be because it usually doesn’t show up until the vote is close. Like I don’t know if it will happen with this thread but often the thread will have low traffic/ little interest then the vote gets near and there’s suddenly interest along with a very specific talking point about it. I think a good barometer people could get on their own political leanings is to find different issues like this early on and form an opinion before it gets enough spotlight to get politicized. Sometimes there truly are new developments and it could sway one’s opinion but I think you can eventually see if there’s a pattern that might question why one truly gets to their decisions with politics. Maybe this won’t be one of the cases however.

I can’t see it being unanimous but should be 70-80. There isn’t a reason to not clarify the ceremonial act the VP and lift the contesting threshold. Like it seems to me Cruz, Hawley and those who intended to contest state results likely won’t be fans. On that note, I decided to search his view and of course, he was the single senator on the rules committee who was in opposition to it:

Aside from fleshing out these details, the only pushback against the big‐picture premise of ECA reform came from Sen. Ted Cruz (R‑TX), the only senator participating in the hearing who had voted against counting electoral votes in the 2020 election. As he did then, Cruz revived the idea of using the 1876 Hayes‐Tilden election dispute as a model. In particular, Cruz has advocated that Congress should revive the ad hoc “Electoral Commission” used to decide that year’s election. This is an unusual outlier position, to put it mildly.

The 1876 fiasco is generally regarded as the most infamous example of what notto do. It nearly reignited the Civil War, almost failed to resolve the dispute in time for Inauguration Day, and paved the way for Jim Crow under a corrupt bargain to end Reconstruction. More than any other incident, it was this crisis that prompted Congress to realize better procedures must be codified ahead of time in an Electoral Count Act.

As one of the expert witnesses, Derek T. Muller of the University of Iowa, pointed out to Cruz, even the notorious Electoral Commission rejected what Cruz wants from his revived version: a broad power to sit in judgment of how each state conducted its popular election. Far from a conservative or an originalist argument, this position amounts to flagrantly usurping the proper role of the states and the courts, wrecking the Framers’ design for a president independently elected by the Electoral College rather than chosen by Congress. The widespread rejection of Cruz’s position can best be summed up by Klobuchar’s deadpan response: “I’m not a fan of the 1876 election.” Indeed.

https://www.cato.org/blog/senate-hearing-shows-consensus-electoral-count-act-reform
So looks like an out of “I want to fix things but in a way no one else wants to and since they aren’t, I will oppose the minor and reasonable fixes that were brought to light because of my awful behavior in the 2020 election.”

 

[Lead]

Another House bill was released which does conflict with the current Senate version in a few ways. Reps. Liz Cheney (R-WY) and Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) released a bill which sets the contesting threshold to a third of the house and senate (rather than a fifth) and also had different additional provisions like allowing candidates to sue states if they believe there was election fraud, with the caveat the candidate would receive high fines for frivolous lawsuits. It also clarified when a state can extend their voting in the event of something like a power outage, natural disaster or terrorist attack. Lastly, the bill puts some of the finding from the Jan 6 hearings in as this is something both Cheney and Lofgren want highlighted. It seems unlikely to me Pelosi would put this version through the House vote as the Senates requires more consensus to get through. I don’t think it risks the chances either way but another piece to this.

House and Senate split over how to prevent the next Jan. 6
Politico

 

[Lead]

Looks like Pelosi did move forward with Cheney/ Lofgrens bill. The senate likely will still pass theirs and we will have to see it hashed out between the two houses for a final version.

House Passes Overhaul of Electoral Count, Moving to Avert Another Jan. 6 Crisis
New York Times

The House on Wednesday took the first major step to respond to the Jan. 6, 2021, assault on the Capitol, voting mostly along party lines to overhaul the 135-year-old Electoral Count Act, the law that former President Donald J. Trump tried to exploit that day to overturn his defeat.

The bill was the most significant legislative answer yet to the riot and the monthslong campaign by Mr. Trump and his allies to invalidate the 2020 presidential election, but it also underscored the lingering partisan divide over Jan. 6 and the former president’s continuing grip on his party.

It cleared a divided House, passing on a 229 to 203 vote. All but nine Republicans opposed the measure, wary of angering Mr. Trump and unwilling to back legislation co-written by Representative Liz Cheney, Republican of Wyoming and a leader of the House select committee investigating the events of Jan. 6 and what led to them.

 

[Lead]

So the Senate version of ECA reform pass the Senate Rules Committee 14-1 with Cruz being the lone no vote. It was mentioned earlier but he’s trying to play an angle that he’d like the reform to be done a different way. I tend to think he is just part of the problem this even was necessary so he doesn’t want to be apart of the solution now.

Additionally, now that it’s been finalized, McConnell has come out in support for the bill as well. This likely signals this will be well north of the 60 votes that were originally on board here. Obviously there will be some no votes, likely from those who were considering contesting state electoral votes on Jan 6. So Cruz, and guys like Hawley who said he didn’t see a need to update such an old law (again, you are literally the reason for the update, Hawley). We did see on of those senators who wanted to decertify PA and AZ vote yes for this bill in the committee vote though so that seems even more comforting. I’m thinking around 80-20 on the Senate vote. Hopefully more.

Vote is now expected after midterms, like many other high profile bills at this point.


Senate's Electoral Count Act reform heads for broad bipartisan vote
Axios

 

[Lead]

So here we are. About less than two months in the Senate to get an ECA reform bill passed and make sure it either aligns with the House passed version or get revised and another vote. Though I think this could linger into 2023, I think there is some danger in McCarthy turning against it, especially the House version that had passed and nothing going through. Though there are some key disagreements with the house and senate, they both seem to agree something should be passed before the end of the term.

Now That Trump Is Running, Get Electoral Count Act Reform Done
National Review

Yesterday, for the third time, Donald Trump announced he is running for president. His reascension to the highest office in the land is certainly within the realm of possibility. Given his past attempt to overturn election results and its disastrous fallout, it’s high time for Congress to pass the bipartisan Electoral Count Reform Act (ECRA).

The incoming Republican majority will serve as an indispensable check on President Biden’s left-wing agenda. Unfortunately, because of the apparent prevalence of the view among the GOP base that the 2020 election was stolen, the House Republican Conference is unlikely to take up the cause of reforming the Electoral Count Act, which was the rickety product of the disputed 1876 presidential election. It’s urgent for the lame-duck 117th Congress to amend it now, because the 118th Congress, which will certify the results of the 2024 presidential election, likely won’t have the inclination to do so.

 

[Lead]

Term coming to a close and it looks like the way the electoral count act reform bill will go through the omnibus bill to save floor time. Makes sense if it really is popular enough in the senate and won’t be a cause for protest outside of the other items in the omnibus. I’m thinking this move might possibly be a way to strong arm the house into using the senates version of the bill. House already voted for theirs and it was somewhat different from the senate version so if there’s a spending cliff, put it in that bill which forces the house to also upvote it.

Manchin and Klobuchar: Omnibus likely place for electoral count overhaul
Roll Call

Legislation to overhaul how Congress counts presidential electoral votes should hop on the must-pass spending omnibus on its way out of the Senate, Sens. Joe Manchin III and Amy Klobuchar said Wednesday.

Speaking at a National Council on Election Integrity event, Manchin said the Electoral Count Reform Act was “ready.”

“I would think the omnibus bill is the appropriate place to put it,” the West Virginia Democrat said.

Speaking later, Klobuchar, who chairs the Senate Rules Committee, said the National Defense Authorization Act was another option, but “the omnibus is looking more and more promising.”

 

[Lead]

Schumer also confirmed the senate version of this bill will likely go into the Omnibus bill.

Lofgren and Cheney in the House mentioned two technical pieces the Senate version didn’t keep which was in the House bill which they are urging to still be included. The thought it if it were added, it would be as an amendment but if this is attached to the omnibus, I’m not sure if that makes it less likely as a lot of other items are on the line. The two items are covered by Cato here, dealing with the language “regularly given” and federal jurisdiction rules under USC 1344.

 

[Lead]

Biden signed the omnibus which included the ECA reform provisions into law 12/30. There now can be no concern with the new term whether this would be swept under the rug. With the bill, we are unlikely to see many successful attempts to hold up the electoral count process. The VP's role is further clarified and the threshold between the House and Senate is far higher.

Biden signs $1.7 trillion spending bill, avoiding a partial government shutdown

One thing I am left wondering about is will the higher threshold make more Senators routinely feel comfortable protesting the process knowing they don't have the votes to have it go any further. As Ben Sasse would say, allowing performance "jackassery" by Senator's looking to get TV spots or further their name with the base. Time will tell on that but the hope at least would be there be less hold ups on electoral votes being counted when there isn't any clear evidence of material fraud.

This thread began with Biden's term and Democrat's proposed election reform changes. It ultimately turned into the ECA reform provisions that are now law. I'm ending this thread on that note and if any other election reform debate begins in the DC that seem significant, I'll consider a new chapter/ thread.