2008 Election

This is where the action is regarding President-elect Barack Hussein Obama’s eligibility

2010 Election

Will the Dems lose their majorities by November 2, 2010?

Initiatives

American reform has always started from the bottom, up. Track various State-based reformation initiatives here

Money

It makes the world go around, especially DC and Wall Street

Qualifications

Who’s checking up on officeholder eligibility? Find out here

Home » Electors, National Archives

States Miss Deadline for Electoral Votes — What’s Up? Update: The Votes are In

Submitted by Phil on Sat, Jan 3, 200913 Comments
States Miss Deadline for Electoral Votes — What’s Up? Update: The Votes are In

According to the National Archives web site, they have received Electoral College vote certifications from only 24 States (FreeRepublic.com is reporting as well). Here are the facts of how the process is supposed to go at this point:

The statutory deadline for the designated Federal and State officials to receive the electoral votes is December 24, 2008. Because of the very short time between the meetings of the electors in the States on December 15 and the December 24 statutory deadline, followed closely by the counting of electoral votes in Congress on January 6, 2009, it is imperative that the Certificates be mailed as soon as possible. 

We strongly recommend that the sealed pairs of Certificates be taken to the Post Office on December 15, or no later than the morning of December 16, to minimize delays that could occur during the holiday mail season. Some States may find it useful to alert their local Postmaster to the extraordinarily important nature of the mailing. When the paired Certificates of Vote and Certificates of Ascertainment have been delivered to the designated Federal and State officials, the States’ Electoral College duties are complete.

Prior to the election this year, the Legal Staff of the Office of the Federal Register will telephone Secretaries of State and other election officials to establish contact with the States and assure the smooth operation of the Electoral College process.

Now, let’s realize that we’re obviously not dealing with the nation’s first presidential election and that we’ve clearly been through this process enough times that everyone should have every reason to know what’s going on and what’s to be expected (i.e.: the Electors are voting for the freakin’ POTUS; it’s a slightly big deal around here!).

So, what’s up with this?…

First, we have House Joint Resolution 100:

Requires the first regular session of the 111th Congress to begin at noon on Tuesday, January 6, 2009.

Requires the meeting of the Senate and House of Representatives to count the electoral votes for the President and Vice President to be held on January 8, 2009.

I’m not sure that this inherently means anything, other than Congress changed the dates for the Legislative process for the Electoral College vote counting. Interesting tid-bit, anyway.

And according to the LarryMWalkerJr blog, all of this could be going on for a number of reasons:

I am told this is the first time in history that many Delegates did NOT report in or submit their votes by the deadline. I have been told that Indiana ALL voted “Present” and cast zero votes. Can SCOTUS over-ride the delegates and just make Obama POTUS?

This is an excellent question, of which I’d love to know the answer. However, if a candidate doesn’t receive 270 Electoral Votes (per the 12th Amendment):

The Electors shall meet in their respective states, and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President, one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves; they shall name in their ballots the person voted for as President, and in distinct ballots the person voted for as Vice-President, and they shall make distinct lists of all persons voted for as President, and of all persons voted for as Vice-President, and of the number of votes for each, which lists they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the seat of the government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate; — The President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted; — The person having the greatest number of votes for President, shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed; 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, the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, the President. 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 the case of the death or other constitutional disability of the President. — The person having the greatest number of votes as Vice-President, shall be the Vice-President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed, and if no person have a majority, then from the two highest numbers on the list, the Senate shall choose the Vice-President; a quorum for the purpose shall consist of two-thirds of the whole number of Senators, and a majority of the whole number shall be necessary to a choice. But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.

As we’ve just seen, the National Archives, per protocol, coordinates among the 50 States to make sure that the process for Electoral vote ascertainment runs as smoothly as possible. Could it be that the remaining 26 States simply haven’t filed yet? If that were the case, that would seem rather extradordinary, wouldn’t it, considering this clearly isn’t the first presidential election for which they must show votes? Also, we are talking about this being a presidential election; they all have every reason to know that as soon as the Electors sign off on the votes, that ascertainment must be immediately mailed to the appropriate destinations (notice the remark that is recommended to the Postmaster!).

Frankly, I’m not sure if any of the above means anything, except that maybe Congress wants the process to end up in the House, where the Democrats will have even more control over the process (it would be the 111th Congress at that point). There’s nothing at all illegal about that, but the fact that Electoral College votes for more than 50% of the States haven’t been reported yet is very, very strange, in my opinion.

Either way, we’ll know by next week!

Update: The votes are officially in; perhaps the National Archives simply hasn’t been updating all of their pages to date.

Update: Dr. Orly Taitz reports on a trip she and a friend made to the National Archives on January 1.

-Phil

13 Comments »

  • richCares says:

    Jan 8, 2008 Congress named Obama to be next president, was presided and announce by VP Cheney. Sorry “Birthers”.

  • [...] of many potentially odd twists to monitor in this electoral process is that as of Friday, 1/2, the National Archives had received Electoral College votes from only twenty-four …, not nearly enough votes for Congress to count, tomorrow for an [...]

  • JeffM says:

    I just recounted them physically on the National Archives site. 365 votes for Obama.

  • JeffM says:

    286 votes? What happened to the 365 “landslide” votes we were all shoveled by the Mainstream Media? Did I miss something here?

    If this is the correct count, then the 15 votes in New Jersey and 7 votes in Connecticuit would cause Obama to fail to obtain the 270 votes recessary to win.

    Interesting indeed.

  • Patrick McKinnion says:

    Not a problem. Was curious to see if there was any effect to be seen, but traditionally electors are pretty serious about the person they’re to vote for.

  • Phil says:

    ken,

    I think you’ll see from my bottom-of-post update that I have a link to where all 50 States + DC have been accounted.

    Thanks for the comment,

    -Phil

  • ken says:

    NOT TRUE!!! check out the federal archives – all 50 states are in and Obama has 286 electoral votes. NOT one elector stood up to protest.

  • Phil says:

    Patrick McKinnion,

    In my opinion, things would have to go pretty extraordinarily for their to be a “faithless” elector (notwithstanding allegations of ineligibility).

    Thanks for the comment,

    -Phil

  • Patrick McKinnion says:

    Just looked at the certificate of vote for each state + DC on that link (thanks)

    Doesn’t look like there’s any evidence of “faithless electors”.

  • Wayne says:

    I have posted a link to this article on Obama timeline

  • Pearl Schmunk says:

    I only hope and pray it’s because Obama is NOT Illegible to be President. I only hope that America will wake up and abide by the Constitution!

  • JeffM says:

    Good to hear they’re all in. That makes all the electors who voted for Obama or McCain accountable for Obama’s and McCain’s eligibility.

  • JeffM says:

    This is yet another example that the Election process is clearly broken. If you look at the 2000 and 2004 results on the National Archives site, all of the votes have been tallied.

    Let us hope that all of these will be processed before January 8, 2009. Otherwise it will allow Congress to do whatever they want instead of being forced to deal with ineligibility issues of the current election.

Leave a comment!

You must be logged in to post a comment.