Why do we have the 12th amendment

Objectors might hold out hope that the Supreme Court can be persuaded to intervene. As an alternative scenario to avoid this outcome, the Governors of Pennsylvania and Michigan, anticipating the move by their Republican Legislatures, could themselves certify Biden electors to the Congress on or before December 14 even though the count is incomplete. This also assumes the Biden electors had met and voted on December 8.

After all, if as a matter of political authority the Republican Legislatures can certify electors on the basis of an incomplete vote, so should the Governors be able to do so — the critical difference being that the Governors would be acting in good faith to allow all the votes to be counted.

If the Governors do so, they would then have until the congressional session on the afternoon of January 6th to recertify electors under state seal backed up with a full count.

And the recertified electors based on a fully counted vote should prevail in both House and Senate. This scenario could play out in each of the states with Republican Legislatures and Democratic Governors — Michigan, North Carolina, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania, and perhaps in other states as a way to buy time to complete their vote count.

A clear win for democracy and for the republic. Say Trump sees his votes slipping away in Michigan and Pennsylvania as the count moves into December. Armed with a confirming legal opinion from the Attorney General, he explicitly states that, in addition to the Insurrection Act, he is acting under the implied authority given to him by Article II of the Constitution and other unspecified US laws.

He declares a National Emergency in the first week of December before electors meet and orders the U. The objective and foreseeable consequence of such extreme actions is that no electors from either state can be certified and without them neither candidate can claim a majority of electors. Two possibilities present themselves. Under this interpretation, neither Trump nor Biden could marshal electoral votes to win.

This is the more logical of the interpretations, although we are in a forum where politics not logic will prevail though litigation might well shift the forum to the judiciary, where legal reasoning rather than political power at least should carry the day.

Potentially this could throw the election to Trump — even though he may have lost the popular nationwide count by many millions and failed to get even close to electoral votes. Unlike the Electoral Count Act, the 12th Amendment does not include a method of for resolving objections. Majority rule in each chamber will prevail on any interpretive question. They must agree, and they may not if Republicans remain in control of the Senate. At this stage of events, the 12th Amendment appears to provide a solution.

States with Republican majorities would be expected to vote for the Republican candidate on the list. If the next House looks like the current House, Trump likely wins. But not necessarily — Trump is playing hardball to stay in power— so might Speaker Pelosi in order to protect the will of the American people.

On January 3rd, Pelosi might convene an early caucus of the elected Democrats to discuss her plans once elected Speaker. A portion of the 12th Amendment was changed by the 20th Amendment. But in choosing the President, the votes shall be taken by states, the representation from each state having one vote; a quorum for this purpose shall consist of a member or members from two-thirds of the states, and a majority of all the states shall be necessary to a choice.

And if the House of Representatives shall not choose a President whenever the right of choice shall devolve upon them, before the fourth day of March next following, then the Vice-President shall act as President, as in case of the death or other constitutional disability of the President. But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States. It seems to me the intent was that the electoral college was intended to vote for the candidate that received the most popular votes in that collegiate district.

What am I not understanding. Some states divide their electoral votes based on the percentage of votes cast. In some states, such as California the winner gets all the electoral votes even though he only got 1 more vote than the other candidate.

It is winner gets the whole pie. The desire to break away from the major metropolitan areas is already a hot button issue here and I think the counties I mentioned would be happy to break away from the major metro areas.

I am not fixated on percentage of the popular vote, but I think we need to have some revision to the electoral college.

They will of course, lead the charge if they fall out of power. No system is perfect nor permanent but I believe the county approach comes closest to the framers original intent. That is a few urban areas should not dominate the politics of the entire country.

While I have not studied nor researched replacing the Electoral College, the case for election by counties appears to be the best alternative. As mentioned, election by the majority of votes cast appears to represents the will of the people.

But, election by county would seem to represent the will of a wider variety of people. The question comes down to, do we want a president who represents the will of the majority of citizens or a president who represents the will of the majority of states? What happens if no one can get to votes??? Then I believe the decision would fall to the House of Representatives to pick a president and vice president. I must admit though, I am not a constitutional scholar. I was correct.

A little research reveals that the House of Representatives votes for president. Each representative gets one vote. The Senate votes for vice-president with each senator getting one vote. In the event no president gets the necessary majority, the vice president picked by the senate acts as president until the tie in the House of Representatives is worked out and a president is picked. Using counties would not work so well, given that the least populated county has 88 people and the most populated county has over 10 million.

By county would mean the 88 people are equal to the 10 million. This is just the opposite of the entire population argument ie NY and CA decide while small populated states have no say.

More fair the way it is now, but not ideal. Your email address will not be published.