#Election Certification

[gwydionmisha]

Democrats sue Georgia over election rules that could 'invite chaos'

[famousbasementwizard]

They 👏 never 👏 cared

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Rebecca Crosby and Noel Sims at Popular Information:

During Tuesday night’s vice presidential debate, Senator JD Vance (R-OH) refused to acknowledge that former President Donald Trump lost the 2020 election. “Did [Trump] lose the 2020 election?” Governor Tim Walz (D-MN) asked Vance. “Tim, I’m focused on the future,” Vance responded.  Vance then echoed Trump’s false claims about election fraud occurring during the 2020 election, despite there being no evidence of any significant fraud. “Obviously, Donald Trump and I think that there were problems in 2020,” Vance said.  When asked by CBS moderator Norah O’Donnell, Vance refused to say if he would accept the results of the 2024 election if it was certified by all 50 states. Vance deflected, stating, “[W]e’re focused on the future.” 

A more likely scenario for the 2024 election, however, is that the results of closely contested states are not officially certified by Republican election officials in an effort to validate spurious claims of fraud. A new report published this week by the Brookings Institution revealed that election officials across the country have histories of election denialism and have refused to certify elections. A report by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) found “[a]t least 35 current county election officials” that have voted against certifying an election in the past. Public Wise, Informing Democracy, and the Center for Media and Democracy identified dozens of additional election officials that have “promot[ed] election denialism or amplif[ied] unsubstantiated claims of voter fraud or irregularities.” The amount of election deniers acting as election officials “presents a challenge for monitoring certification,” specifically in swing states and remote areas. 

This has been a growing problem since Trump began spreading lies about election fraud during the 2020 election. The Brookings Institution found that in 2020, “at least 17 county election officials across six swing states attempted to prevent certification of county vote totals.” In 2022, it grew to “at least 22 county election officials” who voted to delay certification in swing states. This year, there have been “at least eight county officials” that have already voted against certifying election results for primary or special elections. This is part of a larger landscape of election deniers in positions of power across the country. According to a data tracker created by States United Action, there are 26 election deniers that hold statewide office and 172 election deniers in Congress. It is not clear what will happen if state officials refuse to certify the 2024 presidential election. But the point of blocking certification is to inject chaos and uncertainty into the election process.

The basics of certification

Until the last few years, election certification was a process that received very little attention from activists or media. It is a formality that occurs days or weeks after election day, depending on state or local procedures — by which point the winners of nearly every election have already been declared, defeated candidates have conceded, and everyone has moved on. According to the U.S. Election Assistance Commission, election certification follows four general steps, although there are some differences in how each state handles the process. First, when polls close on election day, and all the ballots are counted, election officials release a preliminary count. While these results are technically unofficial, they are the numbers that the media uses to call races on election night. Then, election officials will canvass the results. According to the EAC, “[t]he canvass process aggregates and confirms every valid ballot cast and counted, including mail, uniformed and overseas citizen, early voting, Election Day, and provisional ballots.”  Most states also require an audit of the technology that was used to record and count ballots. 

Once these steps are complete, election officials certify the results. Deadlines for certification vary for state and local races, but usually fall between mid-November and mid-December. The deadline for certifying presidential election results is six days before the meeting of the Electoral College. In 2024, states will need to certify their presidential election results by December 11. At the county level, it is typically a board of three to five officials who certify results, although in some places just one person is responsible for certification. Once counties have certified their results, they send their results for state and federal elections to state authorities who aggregate and certify statewide results. The certification process is separate from the process by which a state might investigate any irregularities in an election, like voter fraud. Instead, other state officials such as a secretary of state or governor are vested with the authority and resources to investigate any issues and address them through a recount or audit. The certification process simply affirms that election officials have double checked that they counted correctly and the technology they used was working properly.

Most importantly, election certification is not a discretionary duty. Instead, it is a ministerial responsibility, meaning it is a task that must be completed by the officials elected or appointed to do so. All states have some kind of mechanism at their disposal to ensure that the certification duty is fulfilled. Some states have statutes specifically mandating that election officials complete certification. Others have more general laws to ensure that elected officials fulfill the non-discretionary requirements of their office. In 2022, these mechanisms ensured that election results were certified even in counties where election officials resisted certification.

Popular Information takes a look at how the Republicans could commit perfidious acts to subvert the 2024 elections, such as refusal to certify election results that show Donald Trump losing.

[cherryblossomshadow]

Robert Reich

If Harris wins, will Congress certify the results? There are now 172 election deniers in Congress. But the new Congress gets sworn in before the presidential election is certified. Your down ballot votes could decide whether your presidential vote is respected or discarded.

[originalleftist]

I think in the US we've reached a point where we basically have to win all branches of government, a clean sweep, or lose it all.

The old checks and balances don't work any more. A Democratic Congress but Republican President doesn't mean checks and compromise, or even gridlock- it means the President overruling Congress by executive fiat with Presidential immunity, rubber-stamped by a partisan Supreme Court.

A Republican Congress with a Democratic President just means Congress refuses to certify the election results, and we get a Republican President anyway.

We win it all, or lose it all.

[michigantopnews]

Michigan Dems Remember January 6, 2021 Insurrection as House Certifies 2024 Election 

Michigan Democrats reaffirmed their commitment to democracy by certifying the 2024 election results, contrasting the violent Capitol insurrection four years ago.

Four years after the Capitol insurrection, Michigan House Democrats reaffirm their commitment to democracy by certifying the 2024 election results. LANSING, Mich. – On the anniversary of one of the darkest days in recent American history, Michigan House Democrats voted to certify the 2024 presidential election results, reinforcing their commitment to upholding democracy and ensuring a peaceful…

[ezrasf]

“The Georgia Constitution provides that only the General Assembly may provide for a law for a procedure whereby returns of all elections by the people are made to the Secretary of State,” Cox wrote in his 11-page order. “The Election Code accomplishes this and the SEB has no authority to legislate otherwise.”

[usavotey]

US Democrats Challenge Georgia Election Rules in Trial

Georgia Judge to Review New Election Rules Amid Controversy A legal battle is brewing in Georgia over newly implemented election rules, as a state judge prepares to review a challenge from the Democratic Party. The dispute centers on changes made by the Republican-controlled Georgia Election Board, which Democrats argue were designed to undermine public trust in the upcoming presidential election…

[tjeromebaker]

Trump Allies Test New Strategy For Blocking Election Results In Battleground States | Election Certification Under Threat | 35 Rogue Election Officials Identified by CREW

Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) released a report Monday night identifying 35 "rogue election officials" who are refusing to certify the November election.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=01_HKARXWOM August 15, 2024 | by Thomas Jerome Baker | CEO @Baker Publishing Company | Past-President TESOL Chile | Doctoral Student in Education | Member of Black Doctoral Network, Inc. | Member of Society for the Psychological Study of Men and Masculinities | https://linktr.ee/profesorbaker ** Disclaimer – The Baker Publishing Company has endorsed the…

[gwydionmisha]

I'm begging you please come out to vote. Early if possible. Bring friends. Bring family. It really really matters.

Georgia reports record turnout as early voting begins in US battleground state

[noneofyrbz]

Get the popcorn!!!

[deadpresidents]

"The Vice Presidency comes with plenty of indignities, but probably none greater than the one that Kamala Harris endured on Monday when she presided over the certification of her own defeat.

Standing in the rostrum of the House of Representatives, a gavel in her hand and a look of imperturbable stoicism on her face, Ms. Harris officiated as the two houses of Congress met in joint session to formally count the Electoral College votes for President.

"The votes for President of the United States are as follows," she declared after each state's totals were read. "Donald J. Trump of the state of Florida has received 312 votes." At that point, Republican lawmakers rose to their feet to applaud. Ms Harris gave a small, polite smile as she let them have their moment.

Then she continued. "Kamala D. Harris of the state of California has received 226 votes," she intoned. Now it was the Democrats' turn to stand and applaud. Ms. Harris glanced over to that side of the chamber with a little smile of thanks, then gently gaveled the body to order. After reading the votes certifying JD Vance as Vice President, she formally ordered the results entered in the record.

And with that, Kamala Harris the Vice President officially put an end to Kamala Harris the candidate's quest for the Presidency -- at least for this election. At that point, members of both parties rose to applaud, seemingly out of respect for the no-doubt-painful task she had just taken on without complaint or objection.

There was also certainly a little bit of relief that everyone had gotten through the moment peacefully, unlike the maelstrom visited upon the Capitol on this day four years earlier when Mr. Trump refused to accept defeat and inspired a mob that stormed the building to try to stop the count certifying it.

Ms. Harris made no comments while wielding the gavel beyond her scripted duties...Unlike Mr. Trump, Ms. Harris has made no effort to cast doubt upon the election but has instead accepted defeat graciously. Neither she nor President Biden has sought to pressure the Justice Department, members of Congress, governors, state legislators, or election officials to reverse the vote she lost, as Mr. Trump did four years ago.

She has not filed dozens of lawsuits that would be tossed out by judges as frivolous or unfounded. She has not repeated false fraud allegations or wild conspiracy theories that her own advisers told her were untrue.

Nor did she use her role as presiding officer to reject votes for Mr. Trump and Mr. Vance the way Mr. Trump tried to get Vice President Mike Pence to do to Mr. Biden and Ms. Harris in 2021. Mr. Pence refused, saying he did not have such power, and Congress subsequently passed a law reaffirming that interpretation.

The contrast between Jan. 6, 2021, and Jan. 6, 2025, could hardly be starker. "

-- Peter Baker, on Vice President Kamala Harris presiding over the certification of her own defeat in the 2024 Presidential election before a joint session of Congress, during the peaceful, traditional formal ceremony denied to her and President Joe Biden exactly four years earlier, New York Times, January 6, 2025.

[contemplatingoutlander]

If he loses the 2024 presidential election, former President Donald Trump will likely lobby House Republicans to refuse to certify the results. This was not as much of a problem in 2020 when Democrats held the majority of seats, but with Republicans now holding a narrow majority, it could become a legitimate issue. However, Politico reports that a bipartisan group of House lawmakers have banded together to jointly pledge to certify the results of the 2024 presidential election, and the group so far includes six House Republicans. This means that, should these six Republicans keep their pledge to certify a win for Vice President Kamala Harris, Trump's allies would be unable to block the certification of the election given the current numbers in the House of Representatives. The bipartisan group, which was organized by centrist Reps. Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ) and Don Bacon (R-NE), also includes Reps. Brian Fitzpatrick (R-PA), Mike Lawler (R-NY), Lori Chavez-DeRemer (R-OR), Nick LaLota (R-NY) and Anthony D’Esposito (R-NY). Bacon said that the group's pledge was a reflection of traditional American values. “In America we respect election results especially once the courts and appeals work through the process,” he said. “We fight hard to win during campaigns and then respect the results when the votes are counted.”

Thank goodness for a handful of Republicans in the House who actually take their oath to support the Constitution seriously.

[originalleftist]

Reminder that you need to vote Democrat not just for President but in every House and Senate race.

For one thing, the Senate approves judges, including Supreme Court Justices. The House mainly controls the budget.

For another, the House and Senate certify the Presidential election results, the new House and Senate are sworn in before the certification, and that means if Republicans win either, yes they can and will do what they wanted to last time and refuse to certify.

Vote Blue.

[ivygorgon]

An open letter to the U.S. House of Representatives

Vote NO on the SAVE Act!

8,228 so far! Help us get to 10,000 signers!

I am writing to express my strong opposition to H.R. 22, the so-called “Safeguard American Voter Eligibility” (SAVE) Act. While this bill is framed as a measure to combat voter fraud, it is, in reality, a voter suppression effort that creates unnecessary barriers to voting and disenfranchises millions of Americans.

The SAVE Act would require voters to present narrow forms of “documentary proof of citizenship,” such as a passport or birth certificate, to participate in federal elections. This would disproportionately harm:

- Up to 150 million Americans who do not have a passport.

- Approximately 69 million women citizens who do not have a birth certificate with their current legal name on it.

- Elderly Americans, who are the least likely to hold passports.

Additionally, in 7 states, less than one-third of citizens have a valid passport – Alabama, Arkansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Oklahoma, and West Virginia.

The SAVE Act is a solution in search of a problem. Worse, it would erode the fundamental right to vote, silencing the voices of vulnerable communities under the guise of election security. Rather than advancing harmful legislation like the SAVE Act, Congress should focus on protecting and expanding voting rights by supporting measures such as the Freedom to Vote Act and the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act.

One of the foundational values of our democracy is the idea that every person is entitled to a vote – a say in the direction of our nation. I urge you and your colleagues to work towards that founding ideal. Thanks.

▶ Created on February 6 by Jess Craven · 8,228 signers in the past 7 days

📱 Text SIGN PKFOYU to 50409 to sign!

🤯 Text FOLLOW JESSCRAVEN101 to 50409