According to Kevin Johnson, “many state laws confirm that certification is not the venue to address claims of fraud, failed equipment, or other irregularities. But public misunderstanding and ambiguities in the law can still be exploited to great harm.” Here is an excerpt from the article published in Talking Points Memo:
If the stars align, Congress could soon pass a much-needed overhaul of the Electoral Count Act (ECA), the 19th-century law governing presidential electoral-vote counting, whose ambiguities helped spawn chaos on January 6th. In pushing to reform the ECA, a bipartisan group of senators is acknowledging a dangerous new reality: that any ambiguity in election law, any hint of an opening, could be exploited in this perilous era for democracy.
The same reality threatens another arcane election procedure: certification of results at the state and local levels, a previously routine process now emerging as a stage for electoral defiance. As with the ECA, our current system is vulnerable to manipulation by partisans and extremists that could dangerously undermine election results, voter trust, and civic peace.
After votes are tabulated locally, state election laws designate an individual or board to confirm the totals add up and to certify victory for the winning candidate. A new Election Reformers Network (ERN) analysis finds that in most states, political parties play a major role in selecting the people responsible for certification. That role is now creating a significant risk of subversion.
Read the full article here.