There are just 20 people whose decision would change everything...

[FULL_METAL_HAT]

From my own post that I admit would be better broken up.
This is Part 4 of Section 3 "Procedure".
The arguments as well as more background can be read in the rest of Part 1:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x242355#243233

---

...

The fate of America could rest on just 20 Republicans

In the House of Representatives, there are 206 Democrats, 233 Republicans, and one Independent. Assuming the Democrats and Independent vote unanimously, a majority vote for an objection would need only 14 Republicans to be convinced to achieve 221 votes. That’s just 6%. Looking at that, it does make the possibility of rejection real.

The Senate is now composed of 44 Democrats, 55 Republicans, and one Independent. Again assuming a unanimous vote of the Democrats and Independent, a majority vote for an objection would need only 6 Republicans to be convinced to achieve 51 votes. Again, seeking the vote of only 6 Republicans (10%) gives credence to the possibility of a successful rejection of the state’s electoral votes.

One of the best things from this analysis is the realization that there are just 20 people whose decision would change everything.

When both the Senate and the House of Representatives have had their debate and vote, they return to the joint session.

If both bodies are not unanimous in their decisions on the objection, then the electoral votes of the state in question are accepted.

However, if both houses agree, then quite simply those votes are rejected.

In this 2004 election, the tally of electoral votes is 252 for John Kerry, and 286 for George Bush. A successful objection to the state of Ohio would discount 20 electoral votes from the 286 awarded, leaving 266. This would be an incredibly significant accomplishment, but would still leave a 14 vote difference between the two contenders.

As we know each state is individually dealt with, so given the evidence for the objection of two states, the joint session would have reconvened after a successful objection to Florida’s voters, only to patiently accept the next states votes until reaching the letter O and Ohio, where they’d once again separate and debate for another two hours.

A total of eight hours of debate, hearing from up to forty-eight Senators and Representatives, could swiftly and decisively change the course of the 2004 election in a way no adjudication in any court could.

[Ian David]

1. Can certain people be forced to "recuse themselves" from the vote?

If it can be demonstrated that a particular senator or representative has a conflict of interest, can they be forced not to vote?

If this works with judges, why not with congress?

[FULL_METAL_HAT]

2. Interesting point ... It'd make for some seriously scared Senators!

Depending upon the nature of the bombshell, there could be doubt cast on members of the House or of Senators.

I think the plan could be to create a lot of questions and chaos!

To take advantage of the all the prideful attitudes that have emanated from the "winners" of Novemeber 2!

Steeled Against All,
FULL_METAL_HAT

[mod mom]

3. Conflicts of Interest are rewarded by repugs

Look at Kathryn Harris in 2000, can't let it happen to blackwell! Can't wait until he dons his orange prison jumpsuit!

[fasttense]

4. "If both bodies are not unanimous in their decisions on the

objection, then the electoral votes of the state in question are accepted."

Does that mean both bodies have to have unanimous agreement within their respective bodies? Or does that mean the two bodies have to agree with each other?

[FULL_METAL_HAT]

5. They both have to accept the objection(s) or it's rejected.

They announce the states alphabetically, so I'll be sitting on the edge of my seat once they get to "District of Columbia" !!