Help me understand ther House process. (with the 140 rethugs threats)

[bluestarone]

I DO understand that there is NO WAY they change a fucking thing, BUT How much time does each one get on the floor? Could this go into the night? TY in advance!

[bullimiami]

1. i think they can get an hour or 2 for each state they challenge. then they vote.

[Jerry2144]

2. Two hours per state

If at least one house and one senator submit in writing their challenge and sign it, then both houses adjourn to their respective chambers and debate for two hours and vote whether to accept the electors. Both houses have to agree to reject in order to reject that state’s electors. Then they go back. Repeat the process for each challenged state. Six states times 2 hours each is 12 hours wasted. Plus any time spent to adjourn and reconvene. If the objections are not in writing and not signed by at least one person from each house, then the objections are ignored. I am not sure any Repugnant senator will actually sign that.

[StarfishSaver]

7. They have up to 2 hours for debate

I wouldn't be surprised if McConnell limits debate to something much less than 2 hours and for Pelosi to do the same in the House. Neither one of them wants this dragged out.

Also, Sen. Josh Hawley has announced that he'll sign on to an objection.

I also think it's possible that Pence could rule an objection out of order if it's based on the voting process or counts. The statute limits objections to instances in which the electors vote was not “regularly given” and/or that the elector was not “lawfully certified.” The Parliamentarian could advise that the electors were lawfully certified under their state law based upon the vote counts certified by the chief elections officer of the state. If Republicans are objecting to vote counts and procedures, that's a different issue and doesn't fall within the strict requirements of the statute, so therefore, it would be appropriate to dismiss the objections as out of order. I doubt that will happen, but it is a possibility.

[UTUSN]

3. Me, too - what am I missing?! Why is objection now different from previous times?

I distinctly remember Al GORE presiding in 2000 and Rep. WATERS pleading with him at his (bench?) and him sending her on her way without even looking at her.

Does it have to do with a *SENATOR* doing the objecting? Why does today's Repuke senator throw everything into votes in separate houses? Why wouldn't PENCE overruling the objections be applicable today?

*********QUOTE*****

https://www.mediaite.com/election-2020/vp-joe-biden-overruled-objections-to-electoral-college-certification-for-president-elect-trump-in-2017-it-is-over/

WATCH: Joe Biden Overruled Democratic Objections to Electoral College Certification for President-Elect Trump in 2017

... it is instructive to look back at the same Congressional procedure from four years ago. Turns out that many House Democrats also objected to the certification of then-President-elect Donald Trump, but were quickly overruled and sometimes mocked by none other than then-Vice President Biden, who was presiding over the process. ....

... The 2017 certification vote was a raucous occasion as it was interrupted multiple times, not just by Congressional objections but also by protesters. CNN reported that Biden was interrupted 11 times by objections, all of whom were presented by House Democrats who cited what they saw to be an unfair election due to either Russian interference or voter suppression. ....

“It is over,” Biden told the congresswoman.

Rep. Barbara Lee of California, Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee of Texas, and Arizona’s Rep. Raul Grijalva objected, to which a visibly agitated Biden replied “There is no debate. There is no debate. There is no debate.” ....

******UNQUOTE*******

[bluestarone]

5. After your response i'm confused again (like you)

If that's the way it was then, then why the fuck are we going on and giving 2 hrs per state? I still do not get it! TY for this By the way!!

[StarfishSaver]

6. In 2001, House Members weren't able to get a Senator to sign on with them

The objection has to be made by both a House Member and a Senator in order for it to be taken up. That's why people are making such a big deal of Josh Hawley announcing he'll sign on to an objection. That means the objection will likely have to be debated and voted on by each chamber.

FYI, in 2005, Rep. Stephanie Tubbs Jones objected and Sen. Barbara Boxer signed on to it. Cheney sent the two chambers out to debate and vote. Both houses rejected the objection. Rep. Jones said she wasn't trying to overturn the results of the election but to highlight the need for comprehensive election reform.

[UTUSN]

8. that clears it up

[MichMan]

9. I have seen a few posts stating that these actions are unprecedented

and that any members of congress that participate by definition are unamerican traitors trying to perform a coup and need to be held accountable.

I tried to explain that while silly and a waste of time, it is not unprecedented, as there have been objections by members of congress in multiple recent elections.

Politicians will always grandstand when given the opportunity, but everyone needs to just take a deep breath as it will ultimately accomplish nothing.

[UTUSN]

10. The key is the procedural rule of a senator plus a Rep, as Starfish/post#6 spelled it out.

Our judgments of unamerican and grandstanding are irrelevant if the procedural requirement of one senator plus one Rep is met or not met.

[arlyellowdog]

4. Who speaks during these 2 hours

I know the limit per person is 5 minutes during the 2 hour debate per state. But, I assume Democrats also speak since it’s a debate. I think it would actually be great to see Adam Schiff and Katie Porter go after these jerks.