Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Helping states comply with the Electoral Count Reform Act

Election Reformers Network details simple steps for states to comply with new federal law before the 2024 election.

News

Helping states comply with the Electoral Count Reform Act
Getty Images

Confusing and ambiguous laws for critical phases of the presidential election played a big role in the near failure of America’s peaceful transfer of power after the 2020 elections. Republicans and Democrats in Congress took on the problem, passing critically important bipartisan legislation in December 2022. Now, it’s up to the states to complete this important work. Before the 2024 election, all states and Washington D.C. should assure their own laws and procedures comply with the Electoral Count Reform Act (ECRA).

To date only a handful of states have enacted ECRA compliance changes.


This week, Election Reformers Network (ERN) released a new report, “ Helping States Comply with the Electoral Count Reform Act,designed for state legislators and their staff, election officials, and other administrators. The report summarizes the impact of the ECRA on state law and provides six recommendations on what states need to look for—and potentially change.

“The Electoral Count Reform Act reflects a broad bipartisan consensus that clarity counts when the stakes are high and time is short,” said G. Michael Parsons, ERN Senior Counsel and lead author of the report. “The report aims to make implementation as simple as possible so states can carry on this important and timely work ahead of the 2024 presidential election.”

The ECRA updated the Electoral Count Act of 1887, which contained the ambiguous and outdated language that provided a pretext for attempts to subvert the 2020 election. Recognizing the importance of clarity for the processes governing a peaceful transfer of power, Congress affirmed the purely ministerial role of the vice president, tightly narrowed the grounds for objection to electoral votes in Congress, and underlined the primacy of courts in resolving election disputes. In addition, the ECRA added new procedures to avoid any ambiguity around the validity of electoral votes received from the states.

Because of these changes, there are now discrepancies between state and federal laws. “We shouldn’t be relying on eleventh-hour litigation in 2024 to fix foreseeable issues that can be addressed today,” said ERN Executive Director Kevin Johnson. “We don’t need to take that chance.”

The report’s recommendations need not always be adopted through legislation—some could be incorporated through rule-making and guidance, or even referenced by courts when determining appropriate requirements, remedies, and deadlines in particular cases.

The report will go to election officials and legislators in all 50 states. In some locations ERN will be working directly with state leaders to advance the needed changes.

The report and executive summary can be read on the ERN website, along with other election resources.


Read More

Fueling the Future: The Debate Over California’s Gas Tax and Transportation Funding
person in red shirt wearing silver bracelet holding red and black metal tool
Photo by Wassim Chouak on Unsplash

Fueling the Future: The Debate Over California’s Gas Tax and Transportation Funding

This nonpartisan policy brief, written by an ACE fellow, is republished by The Fulcrum as part of our partnership with the Alliance for Civic Engagement and our NextGen initiative — elevating student voices, strengthening civic education, and helping readers better understand democracy and public policy.

Key Takeaways

Keep ReadingShow less
A person looking at social media app icons on a phone

Gen Z is quietly leaving social media as algorithmic feeds, infinite scroll, and addictive platform design fuel anxiety, isolation, and mental health struggles.

Matt Cardy/Getty Images

Gen Z Begs Legislators: Make Social Media Social Again

Lately, it seems like each time I reach out to an old acquaintance through social media, I’m met with a page that reads, “This account doesn’t exist anymore.”

Many Gen-Z’ers are quietly quitting the platforms we grew up on.

Keep ReadingShow less
Open Letter to Justice Roberts: Partisan Gerrymandering Is Unconstitutional
beige concrete building under blue sky during daytime

Open Letter to Justice Roberts: Partisan Gerrymandering Is Unconstitutional

The Supreme Court, in holding that partisan gerrymandering is permissible—unless it "goes too far"—stated that the argument made against this practice based on the Court's "one person, one vote" doctrine didn't work because the cases that developed that doctrine were about ensuring that each vote had an equal weight. The Court reasoned that after redistricting, each vote still has equal weight.

I would respectfully disagree. After admittedly partisan redistricting, each vote does not have an equal weight. The purpose of partisan gerrymandering is typically to create a "safe" seat—to group citizens so that the dominant political party has a clear majority of the voters. It's the transformation of a contested seat or even a seat safe for the other party into a safe seat for the party doing the redistricting.

Keep ReadingShow less