Washington Post editorial supporting the bipartisan Senate ECA reform bill. Here’s an excerpt (which links to the earlier joint post):

‘Perhaps most important are changes that would impede state-level mischief. By identifying governors as responsible for submitting a slate of electors, appointed according to rules in place before election day, the legislation would exclude competing lists from other officials. Better yet is a process to counter a rogue governor who lodges an illegitimate submission for approval by a friendly House or Senate. Under the reformed act, any such attempt could be challenged by a vice-presidential or presidential candidate in federal courts, to whose judgment Congress would be bound. Finally, the bill would ensure that state legislatures can’t simply override the popular vote by calling it a “failed election.”‘

Another excerpt links to ECA-related scholarship by Matthew Seligman: “According to one scholarly study, the losing party in nine of the past 34 presidential elections could have exploited gaping holes in the law to overrule the people’s decision.”

The editorial closes by recognizing that “[t]he Electoral Count Reform Act will not fix everything, because it can’t fix everything.” Speaking directly to Democrats, its last point is: “Democrats are right to dream of even more than is on offer today, and they’re right to push hard as they investigate the events surrounding the Jan. 6 insurrection. But they would also be wrong to say no to what they might be able to get from this legislation.”