While objections to electoral votes are infrequent, they are not unprecedented — and in the past, it was Democrats who lodged them.
The Senate and House will meet in a joint session on Jan. 6, a day the late Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg labeled the date of “ultimate significance” in our electoral process, to count the recently cast electoral votes. What happens that day will determine the outcome of the presidential election.
The Procedure
The Electoral Count Act provides that after the electors in each state and the District of Columbia vote on Dec. 14, they must sign a certificate of their votes that is then sealed and sent to the president of the Senate.
At 1:00 p.m. on Jan. 6, a joint session of Congress convenes, at which the presiding officer opens the states’ certificates in alphabetical order. Each certificate is then presented to “tellers” who read the votes aloud, after which the presiding officer invites objections.
Under the law, objections must be presented in writing and signed by at least one senator and one representative. When a properly made objection is received, the separate houses retreat to their respective chambers for two hours of debate and a vote on whether to count the votes in question.
The chambers must vote separately on each objection. If a majority in each supports the objection, the votes in question are excluded. If the objection garners the support of less than a majority in either chamber, it fails, and the challenged votes are counted.
Legal Basis for Objections --->READ MORE HERE
If the state senator was in the field working, she certainly was not ‘indefinitely confined’ under the meaning and intent of state statute. So, did she break the law? How many others did?
Outgoing Wisconsin state Sen. Patty Schachtner, a full-time county medical examiner, earlier this year claimed to be “indefinitely confined,” receiving the special status accorded under state election law. The Democrat and her husband signed a statement claiming they were confined to their home “because of age, physical illness or infirmity” in seeking an absentee ballot to be automatically sent to their Somerset home.
It begs the question: If the lawmaker is “indefinitely confined,” how has she performed her duties as St. Croix County’s Medical Examiner these past six months?
Medical examiner doesn’t seem to be a remote gig. The St. Croix Medical Examiner’s Office’s mission is “to serve the public with trained medicolegal death investigators to ensure accurate and scientific investigations when determining cause and manner of death,” according to its website.
An official from the St. Croix Register of Deeds office told Empower Wisconsin that Schachtner has signed the county’s death certificates over the past several months — since she applied for indefinitely confined status in June. If the state senator was in the field performing death investigations, she certainly was not “indefinitely confined” under the meaning and intent of state statute. So, did the lawmaker break the law?
That question came up earlier this week. --->READ MORE HEREFollow links below to related stories and opinions:
Trump Campaign Files Challenges To Pennsylvania Voting Rules In Supreme Court
Mark Meadows makes surprise appearance at Georgia ballot signature audit
Peter Navarro updates election report to show 379,000 'possible illegal votes' for Biden in Michigan
Rudy Giuliani: 'Big revelations' coming about Georgia voting machines
Sen. Hawley Perfectly Explains Why You Should Never Feel Bad About Questioning the Election
Hemingway: Voters Have Legitimate Concerns About ‘Very Sloppy’ Election
Florida Democrat files petition to disbar Rep. Matt Gaetz for election-challenge 'sedition'
If you like what you see, please "Like" us on Facebook either here or here. Please follow us on Twitter here.
No comments:
Post a Comment