With the US election nearing and polls reflecting a highly competitive race, the possibility of a 269-269 electoral tie has stirred curiosity and speculation. Such a scenario could thrust the country into a historic process known as a “contingent election,” a rare constitutional procedure last used for the presidency in 1824.
Could a tie happen in 2024?
Though it’s improbable, a tie is possible. The US Electoral College consists of 538 electors, meaning a presidential candidate must secure at least 270 votes to win. Yet, with closely contested battleground states and the unpredictability of voter turnout, various pathways could lead to a 269-269 tie.
A scenario illustrating this outcome would be if Kamala Harris (or another Democratic candidate) were to win critical states such as Wisconsin, Michigan, Arizona, and Nevada—places that President Biden won in 2020—but lose other states like Pennsylvania and Georgia. In this case, both candidates would secure exactly 269 electoral votes. According to 270toWin, a nonpartisan website specializing in Electoral College forecasting, this outcome is certainly within the realm of possibility, though not the most probable.
Moreover, Nebraska and Maine’s unique electoral rules, which split electoral votes by congressional district, could tip the scales. Each of these states awards two statewide electors and grants one elector per congressional district, further complicating potential outcomes.
What is a contingent election?
If no candidate secures 270 votes, the US Constitution mandates a contingent election. Under the 12th Amendment, the decision falls to the House of Representatives to choose the president, while the Senate selects the vice president. Such a scenario only arises if no candidate attains an outright majority in the electoral college, as noted in an analysis by the Congressional Research Service.
In a contingent election, members of the House vote by state delegation, with each state delegation casting a single vote for one of the top three presidential candidates. A majority of states—26 out of 50—are required to elect a president. Simultaneously, the Senate selects a vice president from the top two vice presidential candidates, with each senator casting one vote.
When would a contingent election take place?
A contingent election would likely take place on January 6, 2025, when Congress convenes to officially count the Electoral College votes. If a tie or inconclusive result is confirmed, the House and Senate would immediately proceed to their respective votes.
This timeline is aligned with the traditional schedule for certifying electoral results. As per Ballotpedia and other constitutional sources, this January date serves as a deadline for finalizing electoral outcomes before the inauguration on January 20. If neither chamber decides by this date, the 20th Amendment outlines that the incoming vice president, if one has been chosen, will serve as acting president until a president is confirmed.
If neither a president nor a vice president is chosen by the time of inauguration, the line of succession dictates that the Speaker of the House, currently Mike Johnson, would temporarily assume the role of acting president.
The role of state delegations in the House
A contingent election is particularly advantageous to smaller, less populous states, as each state delegation receives an equal vote regardless of population size. This system could theoretically benefit one party over another depending on the composition of House delegations. Currently, Republicans hold a majority in 26 state delegations, while Democrats lead in 22. Minnesota and North Carolina are tied, though North Carolina is likely to become majority-Republican after recent redistricting changes.
An example of the possible implications can be seen in a hypothetical situation involving Arizona: if Arizona voters were to favor a Democratic candidate, the state’s congressional delegation could still vote Republican, depending on the party alignment of its members. This discrepancy underscores the potential tension between the popular vote within states and the final decision of their respective delegations.
What if a third-party candidate disrupts the vote count?
The introduction of a third-party candidate could also lead to a contingent election by denying both main-party candidates an electoral majority. Recently, speculation around Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has stirred discussions on this possibility. Although Kennedy’s strategy to remove himself from ballots in certain states while endorsing votes in others is unconventional, it is unlikely to sway enough electoral votes to prevent either main candidate from reaching 270.
Kennedy’s presence, however, could influence the popular vote in key states, potentially altering outcomes indirectly. However, without securing electoral votes, he would not be eligible for consideration in a contingent election.
