The Electoral Count: Robust or Weak?

While the situation on January 6th, 2021 in which Mike Pence re-asserted the pastoral role of the Vice President in certifying electoral votes was unique, both the Vice President and many others looked to the precedent of 1876 on how to proceed. With this in mind, how did the election of 1876 inform the electoral count in 2021, and what might this tell us about the upcoming election?
The election of 1876, between Republican Rutherford B. Hayes and Democrat Samuel Tilden, had a massive impact on the legacy and continuation of federal reconstruction efforts. More importantly for this discussion, it was a highly contentious election that ended with the election of Hayes being contingent on 20 disputed electoral votes. The dispute came from Florida, Louisiana, South Carolina, and Oregon, who all submitted multiple slates of electors to the Senate in hopes of preventing the election of Hayes. The solution that was chosen by Congress was a bipartisan commission of 15 Senators, Representatives, and Supreme Court justices. Eventually, with inauguration looming, the commission came to a decision, known as another “corrupt bargain” that elected Hayes in exchange for (essentially) the end of federal reconstruction efforts.
The facts of the election of 1876 invite many comparisons to 2021, although the comparison is not perfect. The concept of the electoral count being the place to challenge the results of the election is a major similarity, and the creation of alternate slates of electors unconnected to the vote returns is a major point of comparison.
These comparisons are not new or unique to years after the 2020 election. Instead, they were happening in the moment, and the election of 1876 was a guide for many people on both sides of the 2020 certification. For example, on the morning of Jan. 6th, Vice President Mike Pence, whose job was to oversee the certification, released a letter in which he commits to following the lessons learned from 1876, and to carry out the “largely ceremonial” role that he is assigned. As a lesson from 1876, Pence reasserted his role of not challenging the election, adding new language to the historical script of the electoral certification that helped to shut down challenges to the validity of slates of electors. At the same time, others used 1876 as a template for challenging the election. Minutes before the Senate was placed into an emergency recess and locked down, Republican senator James Lankford of Oklahoma called for the formation of a 15 member electoral commission, the same as the one created in 1876. By attempting to create this commission, it is possible that Lankford and other Republicans hoped to either re-elect Trump, or to create something with which to bargain.
What do these comparisons mean for today? Well, first of all, it can provide some comfort in recognizing that the American electoral system, while imperfect, is resilient, and has endured (potentially larger political) challenges before. Similarly, it is a reminder that electoral challenges are not uncharted territory, and that there exist (somewhat) robust systems to address challenges that worked in 2021, and could work moving into the upcoming election.