Even as the state Supreme Court prepares to hear oral arguments (1:30PM, C-SPAN2) on whether the gubernatorial re-recount should include a recanvassing of ballots previously rejected, the case may have already become moot.
As reported today in The Seattle Times, the rejected ballots included that of King County Council Chair Larry Phillips, whose absentee ballot was tossed because his signature wasn’t on file with county elections officials. Philips voted absentee because he was campaigning for John Kerry in Ohio; had he voted at the polls as is his custom, his vote would have counted.
Ooops… there goes the GOP argument that voters who had their ballots rejected were either stupid or didn’t follow directions.
King County Elections Director Dean Logan said he didn’t know how many ballots might have been rejected for the same reason. Election workers will spend the day looking for other ballots that were rejected for the same reason, and present them to the canvassing board.
As I noted last week, Republican Secretary of State Sam Reed has already stated that canvassing boards have some discretion to re-examine ballots:
Reed said county canvassing boards could re-examine some rejected ballots “if there is a problem brought to their attention,” But, he said, “they really don’t have the authority to on their own decide that not only are we going to do a recount, but we’re also going to systematically go back” and recanvass. That could change if a systematic error was discovered, he said, adding he thought that was unlikely.
If Phillips was registered to vote, but had no signature on file, how could it be anything but a bureaucratic error? So I guess the question is, what exactly does Reed mean by “systematic”? If a number of other ballots were rejected for similar reasons, isn’t that systematic? And if there are systematic errors in one part of the system, doesn’t that call into question the entire process?
GOPolitburo Chair Chris Vance would like you to believe that raising these issues leads us down the road towards disaster:
“The Democrats are asking for far more than counting a few ballots that were missed the first time. They want them to look at every ballot that was rejected the first time. It would destroy our election process.”
But explain to me how double-checking the legitimacy of a ballot before discarding it would “destroy our election process”?
It is time for King County Democrats to pressure the Democratically-controlled canvassing board to agree to re-examine all the rejected ballots, before the Supremes hand down their decision. Thousands of ballots have been tossed out by low-level election workers, and these voters deserve that have their ballots reviewed by the canvassing board before they are summarily disenfranchised.
———-
UPDATE:
Watching the oral arguments before the Supremes, the SOS attorney pointed out the following statute, 29A.60.221:
Whenever the canvassing board finds that there is an apparent discrepancy or an inconsistency in the returns of a primary or election, the board may recanvass the ballots or voting devices in any precincts of the county. The canvassing board shall conduct any necessary recanvass activity on or before the last day to certify the primary or election and correct any error and document the correction of any error that it finds.
So my point remains, if the GOP doesn’t want the rest of the state to recanvass, that’s fine by me. But I think enough errors have been uncovered in King County to warrant that the rejected ballots be brought before the canvassing board… for the first time.
Goldy- as I commented elsewhere, NOT excusing failure at King County- Why did Larry Philips NOT respond to the notice he was sent regarding his absentee? This is NOT a provisional ballot for which no notice was given. Safeguards are put into place to catch errors, but the voters have to also take some responsibility. The Councilman obviously did not take any responsibility.
The system only works if all parties try to make it work!
Jim… well, the news stories don’t say whether Phillips was actually sent a notice. But if he had mailed in his ballot close to election day, would he actually have had time to respond before the first count was certified?
But that’s not really the point. What you’re saying is that it is okay for his vote to be tossed due to bureaucratic snafu, because he did not correct it in time. But there is time… we’re in the middle of a recount, and the error has been uncovered. Who are we protecting by not counting his vote?
Goldy- I am NOT saying that- I think Dean Logan is perfectly correct in going to the canvassing board, saying that there is a problem that is the fault of the county, and we should re-examine these ballots- correctly.
BUT, unless there was another error (and that IS possible), Larry Philips was sent a notice and obviously did not take note if he just now found out by checking a list of votes not counted from his councilmanic district.
What I am saying is 1) at what point does it end, and 2) at what ppoint do voters take some responsibility!!!! It’s always someone else’s fault, whine, whine, whine.
I think you know I’ve been relatively reasonable in my attitude toward all of this, but I have little sympathy for Phillips- he easily had until the secound recount was completed in King County! He is (supposedly) intelligent! I am really wondering about that latter one…
And even more…
I want to see how those 561 ballots screw up Nostrasnarkus…
Or if this burns up his li’l excel program, maybe Madonna could help[ him use the Kabala to divine the outcome…
Another question – when will Logan resign?
Bob- Logan is still cleaning up the messes left him by the two previous elections administrators. He’s a deceny guy, doing a tough job, and getting it 99.99% right. Can we agree to cut him a little slack?
Ouch! Rossi gains! Rossi supporters spewing invective! When will it stop?
Jim… yes, you have been very reasonable in this discussion. Again, my point is that those 561 absentee ballots (as we now know), including Phillips’ ballot, were rejected due to clerical error by sub-canvass election workers. That 561 ballots out of about 3000 total rejected… if that does not suggest a “systematic” problem, what does? How do we know that other errors weren’t made?
Oh… and those 561 certainly screws up Nostrasnarkus’s Excel spreadsheet. Projecting the King County margins, it’s an extra 100 votes for Gregoire.
And yes, I can agree with that. And in most elections, 99.99% right would be more than close enough. Unfortunately, it’s not in this one, so we need to do everything we can to eliminate as many of the errors as possible.
By the way, I watched the arguments on CSPAN, and I couldn’t discern an advantage for one side or the other. I wonder how the 561 new King ballots will work into this decision… does it prove that a court order isn’t necessary (ie, the process is working), or does it help convince that it is?
Goldy- I think two fatal problems for Democrats- 1) system IS working, errors are being corrected, no case to COMPEL, by writ of mandamus, any action; and 2) the Dems potentially have an election contest case, per statute, but that is premature at this point and cannot be pursued under guise of a request for a writ of mandamus.
But the Justices recessed and went to conference…
And Goldy- it is not feasible to set a standard of all these ballots go to the canvassing board. The law specifically allows the canvassing board to delegate. When I hear Burman suggest that these elected officials should ignore all their other duties and spend all their time canvassing the votes, I could hear Democratic officials all over Puget Sound country gagging…
Jim, but what we have here is a case were a handful of mistakes by election workers could determine the outcome of the election (as the 561 votes shows.) In a typical election, bringing all the rejected ballots before the canvassing board would not be necessary. But in the rare election such as this, it is.
Look, the canvassing board reviews disputed ballots. In this case, there is a dispute between the election worker, and the voter.
And one other point… if Larry Phillips hadn’t personally complained to Dean Logan, we might never have discovered those 561 erroneously rejected ballots. What other clerical or procedural errors haven’t we discovered?
I think we may say an interesting ruling from the Court, that doesn’t grant the D’s what they’re asking for, but emphasizes the right of the canvass boards to recanvass if that’s what they so choose. And then it is simply a matter of the Dems applying sufficient pressure to the Dems on the King County canvass board to take a look at these ballots.
Goldy- I know where you are heading, but I don’t think you are going to get there. The canvassing boards aren’t going to let that precedent be set. And the Court will not just opine from the bench, saying in essence “We think you ought to do this.” There will either be a writ of mandamus, or a dismissal. And as the recanvass- the safety valve- is discretionary, I really doubt the Court will opine there.
As for what other errors- who knows? How long should we keep looking? I am aware of problems that are not being addressed, including the postal errors, but I think we have to limit this to correcting errors made by elections staff- and that does NOT include reopening every judgement call. I’ll stand by Dean Logan…
And Goldy- you are starting to hope- you are scenting victory…
Think Eagles, and relax again…
Jim, there is absolutely nothing relaxing about being an Eagles fan. In fact, my personal theme song is the theme song from the little known Mel Brooks classic The Twelve Chairs: “Hope for the Best, Expect the Worst.”
That said, I meant that previous statement as conjecture… a way for the court to make a ruling without making a ruling. And at this point, I don’t think it necessary to all the King County canvass board to recanvass the rejected ballots. The GOP lawyers argued the counties had discretion… it would be hard to argue against using this discretion in light of the large number of absentee ballots already found to be erroneously rejected.
Goldy- the fates don’t double-up- it is time to choose- do you want the Governorship, or the Super Bowl- an Eagle’s fan can’t get both at the same time…. :)
If you do, I understand that is one of thev signs of the Apocalypse…
When I was a kid I used to feel guilty when snow was in the forecast, wishing for a blizzard, because I knew that no matter how much I wanted that snow day off from school, my father would be cursing the prospect of digging out his car and driving through the snow to work.
And then I realized… no matter how hard I wished for it to snow, it would snow or not snow all the same.