Senators Propose Changes To Electors Law After Capitol Riot

A bipartisan group of senators has proposed reforms to the Electoral Count Act of 1887 to clarify that the Vice President cannot unilaterally reject electors. This comes after former President Trump pressured Vice President Mike Pence to do so in the 2020 election, which Pence resisted, citing constitutional limitations. The proposed bill also raises the threshold for objections to electoral votes, requiring at least one-fifth of both the House and Senate to object, as opposed to the current rule where a single member from each chamber can object. The effort aims to prevent future vice presidents from overturning legitimate election results.

What was the main goal of the bipartisan group of senators regarding the Electoral Count Act of 1887?

• To clarify that the Vice President cannot reject electors unilaterally

• To give the Vice President more power in elections

• To abolish the Electoral College

• To allow states to choose their own electors

What change is proposed regarding the threshold for objections in the Electoral Count Act reform?

• Allowing only the Senate to object

• Eliminating the objection process entirely

• Raising the threshold to at least one-fifth of both the House and the Senate

• Lowering the threshold to one member from each chamber

What is the role of the Vice President in a presidential election according to the proposed reform?

• To oversee and potentially alter the election results

• To have the final say in the election outcome

• To act as a ceremonial figure with no decision-making power

• To appoint electors from each state

What did former President Trump attempt to do after the 2020 election?

• He tried to pressure Mike Pence to reject Electoral College ballots

• He resigned from office

• He accepted the election results without objection

• He proposed a new election law

Who did Mike Pence consult to confirm his lack of authority to reject electoral votes?

• His family members

• The President

• Legal experts

• The Supreme Court