• marine_mustang
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    6 hours ago

    In a contingent election, control of the House doesn’t matter, as each state gets one vote regardless of House delegation size. Interestingly, a majority of the state’s House delegation has to vote for the same candidate in order for that candidate to be awarded the state’s vote, so if a state with 2 House reps had each voting for a different candidate, that state doesn’t get counted.

    • SolidGrue@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      6 hours ago

      That’s why we’re concerned about a gambit to disqualify or at least delay seating Representatives from contested districts past the 6th. There isn’t clear guidance on this, and House Rules are House Business. It’ll come down to the US House Parliamentarian, perhaps.

      /maybe. Almost nobody knows this stuff
      //Not OP. I’m the other one.
      /// {edit) 'sup, grue?? We meet again.

    • grue@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      6 hours ago

      Control matters insofar as the House can’t deal with the matter at all until a Speaker is chosen, and the Republicans may very well be incapable (or unwilling) to choose one by Jan 6. (See second link in my previous comment.) Edit: and to be clear, this aspect of the issue would be a problem whether the Presidential election certification is contingent or not.

      Also, if some Representatives for a given state are not yet seated because their election is still disputed, it could affect the partisan balance and therefore the decision of the state delegation (edit: if it’s a contingent election).