Embed from Getty Images
As a fan of US Congressional language, I was pleased to hear Vice-President Pence going through the electoral college certification process this morning.
Each state is taken in turn. Their envelope has been opened. Their certificate has been checked by the clerks to check that it is all in order – right date, right signature, right text – that sort of thing, I suppose.
Over and over again, for each state, VP Pence repeats the same officialese:
This certificate from State X, the Parliamentarians advise me, is the only certificated vote from the state, it purports to be a return from the state and is annexed to a certificate of authority from the state according to a point of ascertained electors.
Then a Senator acting as teller says:
Mr President, the certificate of the electoral vote of State X seems to be regular in form and authentic and it appears therefrom that Joseph R Biden Junior of Deleware received x votes for President and Kamala D Harris of California received x votes for Vice President.
Then VP Pence says:
Are there any objections to counting the certificate of the vote of State X that the teller has verified as it appears to be regular and authentic?
It all sounded all extremely dry, boring, administrative and old-fashioned.
A sort of grand paperwork exercise, making sure the right seals and paper clips had been used.
But that is the point.
The job of Congress is to purely verify that the certificates received are genuinely the legal electoral votes from the fifty states.
Therein lies the beauty and simplicity of the process. It is the very embodiment of “E Pluribus Unum” – “One from many” – where the Capitol brings together the fifty disparate states under one roof.
Therein lies the essence of the United States of America. It is fifty states. Not fifty states plus Ted Cruz, Josh Hawley and Donald Trump adding in their two penneth worth.
* Paul Walter is a Liberal Democrat activist and member of the Liberal Democrat Voice team. He blogs at Liberal Burblings.
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Should Labour reconsider the Brexit red lines?
Raising a flap about letterboxes
Arriving at one of East Finchley's ghost platforms
Restrained
Chase Park fair photos
Meg Thomas
Kira Collins
expats
Peter Davies
Nigel Jones
23 Comments
I agree. Mesmerising stuff. I was already watching CNN well before the rioters dominated the airwaves. Process was so delayed that I could finish watching it with my breakfast.
It is interesting how much Trump has governed as a radical conservative anti-devolutionist leading a party that has (of recent) been occupied very much by radical conservative devolutionists.
The only bit of the USA electoral system I would import would be the breakdown of votes by “precinct”, equivalent to polling districts here I guess.
Scottish local STV elections here are counted electronically and give totals by ballot box.
The change I would like to see is the Commons enabling electronic voting, like the US House of Representatives. MPs trooping through the Lobbies to vote is an anachronism that should be ended now.
I’ve been banging on about this on LDV for a long time. US democracy, like our own, needs urgent reform. So, here goes, again:
1 Get rid of the Electoral College and elect the President and Vice President by popular vote.
2 Reform the Senate by removing the ‘two Senators per state’ rule and allocating the number of Senators per state by population size.
3 Stop the gerrymandering of Congressional Districts.
4 Presidential Elections should take place every five years as should elections to Congress.
As for the U.K. ……….
Mr Cox may have forgotten that Holyrood has electronic voting……. and is elected on a PR basis.
I know I would disagree with Mike Pence about many issues, but by carrying out his duties in a dignified, correct and constitutional way during this crisis, he was a shining contrast to Donald Trump and went up a lot in my estimation.
@Alan Jelfs ‘breakdown of votes by “precinct”, equivalent to polling districts here I guess.’
Already available, at least afterwards, for Greater London Authority elections.
@Laurence Cox ‘The change I would like to see is the Commons enabling electronic voting, like the US House of Representatives.’
And many UK council chambers. It would be relatively easy to make such a closed system secure, as opposed to a larger system, or internet voting.
Paul there is nothing beatiful or simple about the system.
1. The contest should be decided by the national vote not each state
2. Trump got in although polling two million less votes than his oppenent!
3. There should be a Civil Service that is permanent and ready to manage a change of government, not appointees of the winning candidate
4. Which should be within a week maximum of the election, unless there are extra ordinary circumstances such as the “Chad” election.
5. It seems to go on for ever, what 88 days to the inaugaration!
6. Apparently it was designed in 1776 because of the then length of time it took for travel across the country, hardly applies now!
6. I agree with John Marriott, it is outdated and indefensible.
Talking about ‘electronic voting’, does anyone remember that classic photo a few years ago from, I think, Spain’s Cortes, showing an MP seated with empty positions on either side voting THREE TIMES by using both hands and one of his feet to press the buttons on three consoles?
theakes
“two million”
2.8 million actually.
I was talking about the electoral vote process within its own context (alongside “The Great Compromise” that founded the USA’s constitution), in comparison to the mob rule that interrupted it.
I have made clear many many times that I favour the popular vote option but any change would have to incorporate reassurance for the “fly over” states.
I am obliged to Mr Raw for confirming that Holyrood has reached the 20th century by introducing electronic voting, unlike the House of Commons which is still stuck in the 19th Century in which Pugin’s architecture straight-jacketed it. He is wrong to imply that Scotland is somehow a leader in this regard. I remember an ALDC conference at the fag end of the Major government, notable because Paddy came to try to reassure us over his dealings with Blair. I am fairly sure it was in Birmingham where they had what looked like a decades-old electronic voting system with coloured lights on a panel on the wall above the Mayoral Chair. So it is more a case of where Birmingham leads, others follow; quite appropriate for the ‘city of a thousand trades’.
Counting by precinct may have its advantages in speed, but I like the drama of UK elections where everyone is gathered in a large counting hall, ending in the theatrical climax of the declaration and the winning/concession speeches.
Laurence Cox The implication came from you, Mr Cox. I was simply gave information and reassurance.
@John Marriott
I agree about the democratic deficit that the Electoral College and Senate voting systems have. Not unlike the situation in the UK with boundaries giving Labour an advantage over the Conservatives. Intriguingly the margin between the tipping state (Wisconsin) and national margin was 4% – up from 3% in 2016 and the highest since 1948. So in 2016 Hilary need to win by 3% (but only got 2%) whereas Biden needed 4% (and thankfully got 4.5%). Imagine if Biden only won by 3.9%, doubled the popular vote margin but still lost in the EC. Then we’d be talking about the Electoral College! Given this margin is increasing it is highly likely that 2000 and 2016 (where the popular vote winner loses) will be repeated in the coming years.
Andrew Toye: That maybe OK for General Election in seats that count quickly, but the way many areas count elections has got worse. When I was first elected as a Councillor it was in a ward with three Polling Districts, votes were brought to one of those stations and counted, the results were then ‘phoned through to the Council office, and the official paperwork followed shortly after. Counts were completed in just over an hour, 90 minutes if there was a recount.
In 2011 this was changed to a central count, a large conference hall was hired and votes from every ward were brought there and counted, anf of course they had to be done in groups as there was not enough room to count simulataneously. The whole process was protracted and it was not finished until 6:00 AM the following morning!
@Steve Comer
Over the years I’ve attended more counts, usually as a candidate but occasionally as an Agent, than I care to remember. Most of them ‘started’ as soon as the polls closed so we often ended up going home in the early hours of the morning. From my experience it was normal in local elections to count all District wards and their County Council Divisions together, usually in a local Sports Hall.
What really improved matters in my last few years of campaigning was when counts began the following morning, which meant we could have a night’s sleep before gathering to find out our fate. It’s a pity that they won’t do that in General Elections; but I gather they think we need our late night excitement! Mind you, if we had STV, for example, where results can take much longer to emerge, they might have to think again.
At a guess, the ritual of reading out the paperwork state by state then having the VP formally certifying it dates from the era when they were brought to Washington by Pony Express. That would have created ample opportunity for tampering in the several days it would have taken in the late 1700s/early 1800s.
But now? I really think any tampering at this stage would be noticed!!!
What should be a concern to Americans is the universal (or near universal?) use of electronic voting machines. There is abundant evidence they are easy to hack to get any desired outcome.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w8eujrTyRRE&feature=emb_logo
In the clip he points out how easy it would be for the North Koreans or Russians to do this. What he doesn’t say is it would be even easier for either Democrats or Republicans to do it – at least where they have supporters in the right positions. Given the blatant gerrymandering that goes on there must be a fair few ‘rotten borough’ type situations.
I would be astonished if both parties aren’t doing this on quite a large scale so, alarmingly, Trump may have a point. Most of his supporters think so as do many Democrats.
Hand marked paper ballots counted in public is the only safe way to run an election. And AFAIK are often cheaper and quicker. IIRC California was still counting more than a week after the polls closed in 2016.
Gordon: I expect that election departments are sold these electronic voting machines by smooth talking salesmen who get a substantial commission because of the huge profits. I assume that even in the USA they do not have elections every day. Maybe the traditional counting staff should be allowed to put in a competitive bid ?
The problem with old revolutionary constitutions is that they become out of date but their supporters benefit to such an extent that they refuse to modernise them. Of course the Republicans benefit from the Electoral College system as even the smallest state gets 2 electors to represent the 2 Senators plus at least one for their Representative. Small rural states tend to support the Republicans and some may have strong racist tendencies although Texas has quite a lot of them, including leaders who indicate their support for that outlook. I guess most people who admire the US are either not aware of this or happy with it. The sins of the fathers shall be punished even unto the third and fourth generation ??
The Electoral College & The Senate are two very different issues.
The whole point of having two Senators for each State was precisely to stop States with low populations being ignored – that seems like a Liberal idea to me. There is a case for us doing something like that with our Upper House, once we get round to actually Electing it.
@Paul Barker
How can you compare the Senate, which actually makes laws, with a revisory Upper House, whose powers were severely reduced by the 1911 Parliament Act? How can it be right that both Wyoming, with a population of 582,328 and California with a population of 38.78 MILLION elect two Senators?
@ nvelope2003 – I am sure you are right that there are lots of smooth-talking salesmen on substantial commissions involved. I wonder if some buyers also get, ahem, ‘commission’ on occasion even when (especially when!) the equipment is substandard even compared with the low benchmark that prevails.
Be that as it may, this is a situation that politicians need to get to grips with. Democracy is only quasi stable at best; there are always forces trying to degrade it in one way or another to further their own interests. Honest elections are the best defence we have.
A great advantage of the UK approach of hiring in lots of people to do the count by hand is that it makes any attempt to suborn the system far too complicated and too risky – so I imagine attempts to do so are rare to non-existent. The system is simple and resistant to attack and that makes it a good system.
That said, international studies show that postal votes are always more prone to being fiddled everywhere they are used so I would prefer we go back to the old way of reserving them for exceptional circumstances – the disabled for example. My own polling station always gets a fair number brought in by hand but there is no chain-of-custody security; they are simply piled up on the windowsill. Were it a marginal seat (it isn’t at any level) and if the other polling stations are similar, there would be quite enough involved to enable the result to be taken out of the voters hands by a couple of well-placed bad actors.
On the Electoral College system, I’m with Paul Barker. It was a necessary compromise (and a sensible one IMO) struck between larger and smaller states back in the 1700s and baked into the US Constitution. Without it there would have been no US in the first place; today, without it, smaller states would be totally ignored. In a country as vast and diverse as the US that matters a lot.
The UK may not be as big in area as the US but it is equally diverse in human terms and we have suffered badly from the ability of a very narrow majority in the most populous part of the UK to totally ignore the concerns of parts far from London – especially Scotland & NI. That’s Brexit obviously, but that vote was rooted in a long-standing habit of neglect.