Electoral College tie still looms as a possibility

[libertybele]

I would welcome it!

Electoral College tie still looms as a possibility

It may seem like a long shot, but the highly anticipated presidential contest between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump could go to overtime after Tuesday, November 8 if the candidates each have 269 votes in the Electoral College.
electoral-tie456

We wrote about this topic last month and offered at least four scenarios where the Electoral College vote could be a tie, which would trigger the 12th Amendment of the Constitution into action. And as of Friday morning, at least one scenario is still out there, based on polling data that show New Hampshire as a possible addition to the Republicans’ column.

The popular election-tracking site Real Clear Politics compiles polling data into averages by state and projects possible Electoral College outcomes. As of early Friday morning, the Real Clear Politics No Toss-Up Map showed the projected outcome as 298 votes for Clinton and 240 votes for Trump. That scenario assumes Florida and its 29 electoral votes go to Clinton. If not, and Trump takes Florida, the count is 269-269....

...In a tie scenario, the election would eventually head to the House of Representatives and the Senate, under the 12th Amendment, assuming that the final Electoral College vote is similar on December 19, 2016.

This has happened twice before. After the 1824 election, when no presidential candidate won a majority of the electoral votes, the House picked John Quincy Adams over Andrew Jackson (who had the most popular votes) as President. And after the 1836 election, there was a contingent election in the Senate for Vice President won by Richard Mentor Johnson.

Before the contingent elections get to the House and Senate for a vote, however, several things need to happen. First, at a state level, the election results need to be confirmed; in particular, the winning slate of electors for a state is confirmed. This is where the disputes in 1876 and 2000 over electors had to be resolved.

There are also the possibilities of recounts and contested elections within states where a recount is automatically triggered (like the 2000 contest in Florida) or of a legal action leading state courts to decide lawsuits related to contested elections....

...In 2017, the new federal Congress convenes on January 6 for the official Electoral College vote count. The Vice President will open the vote certificates and pass them to four members of Congress, who count the votes. If there is a majority winner with at least 270 electoral votes and there are no objections filed by members of Congress, the Presidential election is certified and over. If there isn’t a majority winner, the House decides who is President; the Senate decides who is Vice President.

In the House, each state delegation gets one vote in the presidential contingent election. Currently, the Republicans have the clear majority in 33 state delegations out of 50 in the House, before Election Day. Each member of the Senate gets one vote in a contingent election. That could allow for the unlikely pairing of a President and Vice President from different political parties – which hasn’t happened since 1796....

https://www.yahoo.com/news/electoral-college-tie-still-looms-possibility-160206146.html

[jmyrlefuller]

The question then becomes:

If it's 269-269, and the House is limited to the top 3, are they stuck with just the two who got electoral votes, or can they choose anyone who technically tied for third with zero?

Any faithless elector might end up having a huge role if this scenario played out.

[Suppressed]

The question then becomes:

If it's 269-269, and the House is limited to the top 3, are they stuck with just the two who got electoral votes, or can they choose anyone who technically tied for third with zero?

Any faithless elector might end up having a huge role if this scenario played out.

The wording is

... and if no person have such majority, then from the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those voted for as President...

[libertybele]

The question then becomes:

If it's 269-269, and the House is limited to the top 3, are they stuck with just the two who got electoral votes, or can they choose anyone who technically tied for third with zero?

Any faithless elector might end up having a huge role if this scenario played out.

...hmm...good question... the Constitution states ..."if no person have such a majority, then from the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those voted for as President ..."

It doesn't state electoral votes, it simply says the highest numbers ... I am interpreting that as majority votes/popular vote, not electoral votes.  I can see if this were to happen, it would get tossed to the SCOTUS for interpretation and decision.  Since there is an even number of justices on the SCOTUS right now, if their decision is tied, then what? 

[jmyrlefuller]

...hmm...good question... the Constitution states ..."if no person have such a majority, then from the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those voted for as President ..."

It doesn't state electoral votes, it simply says the highest numbers ... I am interpreting that as majority votes/popular vote, not electoral votes.  I can see if this were to happen, it would get tossed to the SCOTUS for interpretation and decision.  Since there is an even number of justices on the SCOTUS right now, if their decision is tied, then what?

Numbers does mean electoral votes, the only ones that actually count in terms of the constitution (the popular votes are in fact state elections, not directly tied to the U.S. constitution; if a state wanted to nominate electors by legislative action or gubernatorial appointment, they could, even though none do).

But that still doesn't quite answer my question: if it is highest numbers not exceeding three, well, if there are two, the third-highest is technically zero, and there will be a tie among many bona fide candidates. I would assume that if any House member cast a vote for one of them, as long as any succeeding House voter did not vote for someone else (which would spoil and invalidate the vote), it could technically be valid.

Not that I think it would happen; as I said, I would think that given the weeks' lead time between the popular vote and the electoral vote, even if it came out 269-269, at least one of the electors would probably be persuaded to go faithless (which is legal in 21 states) and nominate that third candidate for the House to choose. I just hope it doesn't turn out to be Sanders if that's the case.

[libertybele]

Numbers does mean electoral votes, the only ones that actually count in terms of the constitution (the popular votes are in fact state elections, not directly tied to the U.S. constitution; if a state wanted to nominate electors by legislative action or gubernatorial appointment, they could, even though none do).

But that still doesn't quite answer my question: if it is highest numbers not exceeding three, well, if there are two, the third-highest is technically zero, and there will be a tie among many bona fide candidates. I would assume that if any House member cast a vote for one of them, as long as any succeeding House voter did not vote for someone else (which would spoil and invalidate the vote), it could technically be valid.

Not that I think it would happen; as I said, I would think that given the weeks' lead time between the popular vote and the electoral vote, even if it came out 269-269, at least one of the electors would probably be persuaded to go faithless (which is legal in 21 states) and nominate that third candidate for the House to choose. I just hope it doesn't turn out to be Sanders if that's the case.

I don't think Sanders as he wasn't selected as the party nominee. The nominees are now of course Trump, Clinton, McMullin, Jonson and Stein. If neither of the 3rd party candidates were to get electoral votes then it would be between Trump and Hillary.  If McMullin were to win UT, or Johnson NM, they could select one of them.

[libertybele]

Best explanation I've read of what happens in the event of an electoral college tie:

http://time.com/4482377/electoral-college-tie/