Explainer: Another possible risk in U.S. election - 'faithless electors'
Send a link to a friend
[October 20, 2020]
By Tom Hals
(Reuters) - U.S. presidents are chosen by
electors, party loyalists who pledge to vote for their candidate once
their state's voters have made their selection clear. The polarized
climate in the United States has heightened the risk that "faithless"
electors may break that promise to voters, however, increasing the
possibility of confusion around this year's result.
Below is an explanation of "faithless" electors and how they could
disrupt the outcome of the Nov. 3 presidential election.
What role might "faithless" or rogue electors play?
Under the U.S. Constitution, 538 electors – known as the Electoral
College – determine the winner of the presidential election.
In all but two of the 50 U.S. states, the popular vote determines which
candidate will receive all of that state's electors, who are apportioned
by the number of representatives in Congress.
![](http://archives.lincolndailynews.com/2020/Oct/20/images/ads/current/humanesociety_sda022411.png)
On rare occasions, "faithless electors" have cast their vote for someone
other than the candidate that won the popular vote in their state,
however.
If the race is tight, a few rogue electors could break from their
pledged candidate and throw the outcome of the election into doubt.
When have electors been faithless before?
Out of 23,507 elector votes cast in 58 presidential elections, just 90
have gone rogue, according to FairVote, which advocates for electoral
changes.
Sixty-three electors changed their votes in 1872 after the losing
candidate on Election Day, Horace Greeley, died before the Electoral
College met.
In 2016, 10 electors from six states went rogue, eight defecting from
former Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton and two from Republican
Donald Trump. These faithless electors cast their vote for Democratic
Senator Bernie Sanders, activist Faith Spotted Eagle and three
Republicans - John Kasich, Colin Powell and Ron Paul. Their actions had
no effect on the outcome: Trump ended up with 304 electoral votes versus
227 for Clinton.
Only once, in 1796, has an elector cast their vote for the opponent of
their pledged candidate.
[to top of second column]
|
![](../images/102020pics/news_c9.jpg)
Explainer: Another possible risk in U.S. election - 'faithless
electors'
![](../images/ads/current/fitzpatrick_lda_SPONSOR_2017.png)
Is it legal?
Most states have laws that bind electors to their pledged candidate
and 15 impose a penalty for faithless votes, including cancelling
the vote and fines of up to $1,000. In New Mexico, a faithless
elector faces up to 18 months in prison.
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in July that it was legal to require
electors to pledge to support a particular candidate.
Sixteen states with a combined 191 elector votes do not bind
electors, including Illinois, New York, Texas and the battleground
state of Pennsylvania.
Are faithless electors a risk?
Given that electors are generally party enthusiasts, it's highly
unlikely that they would balk at casting a vote for their party's
candidate, experts said.
The greatest risk arises in a razor-thin electoral vote, where one
rogue vote could determine the presidency.
If no candidate has the requisite 270 electoral votes, the winner
would be decided by the newly elected House of Representatives when
the U.S. Congress meets to count the electoral votes on Jan. 6.
![](http://archives.lincolndailynews.com/2020/Oct/20/images/ads/current/collision_lda_PPP_2018.png)
"It’s never happened before, but this is 2020," said Dave Daley,
senior fellow at FairVote. "Constitutional chaos would be something
wise to avoid in such polarized times."
(Reporting by Tom Hals in Wilmington, Delaware; Editing by Noeleen
Walder and Sonya Hepinstall)
[© 2020 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.] Copyright 2020 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Thompson Reuters is solely responsible for this content. |