Podcast Sejarah

Kira dalam Pilihan Raya persekutuan - Sejarah

Kira dalam Pilihan Raya persekutuan - Sejarah

oleh Marc Schulman

Konsep penghitungan semula dan pilihan raya yang dipertandingkan diikat bersama. Namun, menuntut pengiraan ulang tidak sama dengan bertandingnya keputusan pilihan raya, dan penghitungan ulang lebih kerap berlaku daripada pilihan raya yang dipertandingkan. Menghitung semula undian dianggap sebagai kaedah terbaik untuk menyelesaikan kebanyakan masalah seputar pilihan raya yang dipertandingkan.

Pilihan raya dan penghitungan semula yang dipertandingkan adalah pengecualian dalam sejarah AS. Selama bertahun-tahun kira-kira 500 pilihan raya yang dipertandingkan untuk Anggota Kongres telah berlaku dan sedikit lebih dari dua lusin pemilihan untuk senator telah dipertandingkan. Tidak ada statistik yang tersedia mengenai pemilihan lokal, tetapi seringkali mereka berada di bawah undang-undang yang berbeza.

Soalan pertama yang harus ditimbulkan adalah di bawah kuasa apa yang boleh dinyatakan oleh negeri-negeri yang menyelesaikan pilihan raya persekutuan. Perlembagaan dalam Artikel I Seksyen 5 menyatakan "Setiap Dewan akan menjadi hakim pemilihan, pengembalian dan kelayakan anggotanya sendiri." Kekuasaan ini merangkumi isu mengenali pemilih yang dihantar oleh negara-seperti yang kita lihat pada pilihan raya tahun 1876. Pemilihan tahun 1876 memberi kesan langsung ketika Akta Pengiraan Pilihan Raya diluluskan pada tahun 1877 dan masih berlaku. Ini meletakkan beban utama untuk menentukan siapa pemilih di negeri-negeri, namun Kongres dapat menolak perwakilan mana-mana perwakilan dengan resolusi bersamaan dari kedua dewan Kongres. Oleh itu, Kongres menjelaskan bahawa ia menyerahkan tanggungjawab utama kepada Amerika dalam memilih pemilih, tetapi berhak untuk menjadi hakim utama.

Lebih masa namun negeri-negeri telah meluluskan undang-undang yang memperluas undang-undang negeri untuk mengkaji pilihan raya persekutuan. Hanya tiga negeri (Alabama, Illinois dan Kentucky) yang menyatakan bahawa mereka tidak mempunyai bidang kuasa sama sekali selebihnya telah memperluas undang-undang di pelbagai peringkat untuk merangkumi pilihan raya persekutuan. Dalam kes Roudebush v Hartke pada tahun 1972 Mahkamah Agung menyimpulkan bahawa sebuah negeri dapat melakukan penyiasatan terhadap keputusan pemilihan Kongres di negeri itu tanpa melanggar kekuasaan Kongres. Di mana hak-hak negara dan hak Kongres berpotongan tetap menjadi kawasan kelabu, dan kawasan kelabu itu tidak hanya mempengaruhi pemilihan Kongres tetapi pemilihan Senator dan Presiden juga. Kami melihat pada tahun 2000 seberapa cepat penerapan prosedur penghitungan kembali negara di Florida sampai ke Mahkamah Agung. Ketika Mahkamah Agung memutuskan kes itu, khususnya tanpa menyerang presiden, sehingga tidak memberikan panduan untuk maju.

36 Negeri mempunyai peruntukan untuk perhitungan semula dan pertandingan pilihan raya sementara 12 lagi mempunyai peruntukan untuk satu atau yang lain dalam pilihan raya Persekutuan. Negeri berbeza mengikut siapa yang boleh meminta penghitungan semula. Semua membenarkan calon yang kalah memintanya, sementara banyak yang membenarkan pemilih atau bahkan pembayar cukai memintanya.

Negara juga berbeza dengan alasan untuk meminta penghitungan ulang atau menentang hasilnya. Sebilangan alasan yang disenaraikan merangkumi salah laku, penipuan, rasuah rasuah atau sabitan kejam terhadap penyandangnya. Sebilangan besar negeri juga mempunyai frasa "alasan lain yang menyebabkan keputusan pilihan raya persekutuan tidak sah". Beberapa negeri mempunyai syarat khusus pada margin calon 1% atau .5% misalnya. Negara-negara juga berbeza-beza pada tarikh akhir setelah pilihan raya selesai sehingga permintaan harus diajukan. Sebilangan besar negeri memerlukan bon atau deposit untuk menampung kos penghitungan semula, jika keputusan pilihan raya diubah sebagai hasil pengiraan semula bahawa bon atau deposit dikembalikan kepada orang yang meminta pembayaran tersebut.

Negeri berbeza-beza sama ada ada orang tertentu yang bertanggung jawab atas penghitungan semula atau tidak. Apabila penghitungan semula disebut sebilangan perkara disiasat. Akan ada penghitungan semula yang mudah untuk melihat apakah jumlahnya dijabarkan dengan tepat, mesin pengundian akan diperiksa ketepatannya, apakah semua pemilih dikenal pasti dengan betul sebelum dibenarkan mengundi, apakah jumlah pengundi sama dengan jumlah undi, apakah ada lebih banyak undi di sebuah daerah daripada pengundi berdaftar? Kertas undi itu sendiri akan diperiksa untuk memastikannya direkodkan dengan betul. Akhirnya, dalam hal pemungutan suara komputer, dalam kasus yang keluar dari surat suara itu akan dibandingkan dengan data elektronik yang dikirimkan untuk memastikannya sesuai. Dalam kes lain, perisian itu sendiri akan diperiksa untuk memastikannya beroperasi dengan betul.

Sekiranya terdapat perbezaan antara keputusan yang dilaporkan pada awalnya dan hasil penghitungan semula, biasanya pihak berkuasa pilihan raya tempatan harus menyemak semula angka mereka. Ini kemudian bergantung kepada pejabat negara untuk mengesahkan jumlah negara baru untuk pemilihan.


Penceritaan

Calon Senat Demokrat Minnesota Al Franken bercakap dengan wartawan di Washington pada 19 November 2008

Menjelang 5 Disember, semua 2.9 juta undi yang dilancarkan dalam kempen Senat Minnesota 2008 akan dikaji semula, sebulan setelah pencabarnya Al Franken dan penyandang jawatan Norm Coleman dipisahkan dengan hanya beberapa ratus suara pada Hari Pemilihan. Franken menyatakan bahawa dia kini mendahului dengan 20 atau lebih undi, sementara Coleman mengatakan bahawa dia mendahului dengan ribuan. Sebab perbezaannya: surat suara "dicabar", yang dikatakan oleh wakil dari kedua-dua kempen itu perlu diperiksa lebih lanjut. Kedua-dua calon mengiris, mencincang dan membagi undi besar ini dengan cara yang berbeza sehingga masing-masing boleh mengaku semakin maju. Selepas tarikh akhir penghitungan semula 5 Disember, lembaga negara bebas akan memeriksa surat suara yang dicabar.

Sebilangan besar pakar politik mengharapkan pilihan raya Minnesota diputuskan di mahkamah atau bahkan di senat negeri. Pendek kata, ia menjadi huru-hara. Tetapi itu tidak biasa. Melihat kembali beberapa perlumbaan yang hampir sama & # 151 dan bahkan lebih dekat & # 151 memberikan beberapa pelajaran mengenai kemana mungkin berlaku dalam peraduan Minnesota, satu-satunya perlumbaan Senat 2008 yang masih belum ditentukan. (Saxby Chambliss dari Republikan mengalahkan pencabar Demokrat Jim Martin dalam larian 2 Disember.)

Perlumbaan Senat terdekat dalam sejarah & # 151 untuk kerusi terbuka New Hampshire pada tahun 1974 & # 151 begitu ketat sehingga calon harus mengadakan pilihan raya kedua. Selepas Republikan Louis Wyman mengalahkan Demokrat John Durkin dengan hanya 355 undi, penghitungan semula memberi Durkin memimpin & # 151 tetapi hanya dengan 10 undi, yang bermaksud pengiraan semula. Kiraan ini memberi pilihan raya kepada Wyman & # 151 dengan dua undi. Durkin meminta Senat & # 151 yang mempunyai majoriti Demokratik 60 undi yang selesa & # 151 untuk mengkaji semula keputusannya. Walaupun berdebat selama enam minggu, Senat tidak dapat menyelesaikan masalah itu, dan kedua calon itu setuju untuk mencalonkannya lagi. Dengan perolehan rekod, Durkin menang dengan kira-kira 27,000 undi & # 151 menunjukkan bagaimana pengiraan boleh dan buat membatalkan keputusan pilihan raya.

Mengenai sejarah Minnesota, satu kes penghitungan semula adalah yang paling penting. Dalam perlumbaan gubernur 1962 di negeri ini, penyandang jawatan Elmer L. Andersen tewas dengan margin tipis kurang dari 200 undi kepada pencabar Karl Rolvaag (daripada 1.26 juta undi). Andersen meminta penghitungan semula, yang memerlukan kira-kira 100 pasukan pengulas undi untuk bersaing di seluruh negeri. Penghitungan itu berlangsung selama 139 hari, dan penghitungan terakhir memberi pilihan raya kepada Rolvaag dengan 91 undi, tetapi tidak sebelum Andersen telah mengangkat sumpah sebagai gabenor & # 151 walaupun secara sementara. Nasib baik untuk Rolvaag, dan untuk negara, Andersen membiarkan lawannya menjalankan perniagaan rasmi dalam tempoh menunggu penghitungan ulang sehingga ketika Rolvaag mengambil alih kendali pada bulan Mac 1963, peralihannya berjalan lancar dan bebas drama.

Kami hanya dapat berharap Coleman dan Franken mengambil halaman dari era yang lebih lembut itu, tetapi tidak mungkin. Kempen ini bertempur keras, bersempadan dengan kejam, dengan banyak iklan negatif di kedua-dua belah pihak. Coleman menyaman Franken semasa kempen memfitnah & # 151 kes itu dilemparkan di luar mahkamah & # 151 dan kedua-dua pasukan telah bertengkar di hadapan para hakim kerana menceritakan kembali masalah. Yang mengingatkan kembali kisah yang paling dramatik dan penting dalam sejarah Amerika.

Ah, ya, kegagalan Florida-2000, undi rama-rama, kegagalan televisyen-jaringan yang membingungkan. Perlumbaan presiden antara Al Gore dan George W. Bush akhirnya diputuskan oleh Mahkamah Agung, yang memilih 5-4 untuk menangguhkan aktiviti penghitungan ulang, keputusan yang akhirnya memberikan undi negeri dan Kolej Pemilihannya kepada Presiden kami yang ke-43. Terdapat penghitungan mesin, penghitungan tangan, pemeriksaan undi, perselisihan mengenai undi tidak hadir, setiausaha negara Florida yang kuat bernama Katherine Harris dan cukup banyak peralihan sehingga peralihan antara Bill Clinton dan Bush ditangguhkan selama enam minggu.

Sekiranya parti dan ahli politik mengetahui satu perkara dari tahun 2000, mereka harus bersedia untuk menceritakan semula. Untuk itu, adalah tipikal bagi calon untuk menghantar pasukan peguam ke pejabat dan negeri di mana undi dijangka hampir selesai. Idenya adalah bahawa landasan hukum untuk penghitungan ulang dan pembiayaannya dapat ditentukan lebih awal. John Kerry dan Bush mempunyai pasukan undang-undang yang berpengalaman di Ohio, Florida dan negeri-negeri lain sebelum pilihan raya presiden 2004 atas sebab ini. Seringkali, penghitungan semula dipicu secara automatik oleh margin yang sangat dekat, kerana dalam perlumbaan Minnesota di beberapa negeri, seorang calon dapat meminta pengiraan ulang, membiayai dan diganti dengan dana awam jika penghitungan tersebut membalikkan suara. (Kira-kira tidak datang murah: salah satu yang paling terkenal dalam sejarah baru-baru ini, untuk gabenor Washington pada tahun 2004, menelan biaya Parti Demokrat negara $ 730,000. Ketika penghitungan itu memberikan pilihan raya kepada Demokrat Christine Gregoire, yang kalah awal, negara membayar parti itu kembali Margin akhir: 133 undi daripada lebih daripada 2.8 juta pemeran.)

Tidak mungkin untuk mengatakan bagaimana atau kapan pertandingan Franken-Coleman akan diputuskan. Yang boleh dilakukan oleh Minnesotan & # 151 dan kelas Senator A.S. seterusnya ialah menunggu. Sesiapa yang mencari kejelasan awal pasti akan kosong. Sebagai contoh, tajuk utama blog-blog ini terdapat di laman utama laman web kempen Coleman:

KEMPEN COLEMAN: KAMI MEMIMPIN MENGIKUT 2,200 VOTA! ***
*** (Baiklah, Mungkin Tidak, tetapi Al Franken Tidak Memimpin dalam Pengiraan Semula)


Bush lwn Gore

Editor kami akan menyemak apa yang telah anda kirimkan dan menentukan apakah akan menyemak semula artikel tersebut.

Bush lwn Gore, kes di mana, pada 12 Disember 2000, Mahkamah Agung Amerika Syarikat membalikkan permintaan Mahkamah Agung Florida untuk penghitungan ulang manual pemilihan surat suara pilihan raya presiden A.S. Keputusan 5–4 dengan berkesan memberikan 25 undi Florida di kolej pilihan raya - dan dengan itu pilihan raya itu sendiri - kepada calon Republikan George W. Bush.

Apa itu Bush v. Gore?

Bush v. Gore adalah kes yang didengar di hadapan Mahkamah Agung AS di mana mahkamah itu membalikkan permintaan Mahkamah Agung Florida untuk menghitung secara manual pemilihan surat suara yang dilemparkan pada pilihan raya presiden AS tahun 2000. Keputusan tersebut secara efektif memberikan 25 suara Florida di kolej pemilihan — dan dengan demikian pilihan raya itu sendiri - kepada calon Republikan George W. Bush.

Apa keputusan Mahkamah Agung A.S. Bush v. Gore?

Pada 12 Desember 2000, dalam keputusan 7-2, Mahkamah Agung AS membatalkan keputusan Mahkamah Agung Florida bahawa penghitungan suara secara manual harus dilanjutkan di beberapa daerah, dengan menyatakan bahawa berbagai metode dan piawai proses penghitungan ulang melanggar klausa perlindungan yang sama. Perlembagaan AS. Mahkamah memutuskan 5-4 untuk menyelesaikan masalah tersebut, dengan mayoritas berpendapat bahawa keputusan Mahkamah Agung Florida telah membuat undang-undang pemilihan baru - hak yang diperuntukkan bagi badan legislatif negara - dan tidak ada pengadilan yang dapat dilakukan tepat pada waktunya untuk memuaskan hati persekutuan tarikh akhir pemilihan pemilih negeri.

Apa hasilnya Bush v. Gore?

Keputusan Mahkamah Agung A.S. Bush v. Gore menamatkan proses penghitungan semula di Florida pada pilihan raya presiden AS tahun 2000. Dengan pilihan raya berakhir dengan berkesan, 25 undi pilihan raya Florida diberikan kepada George W. Bush, yang memimpin di negeri ini mencapai 327 undi daripada enam juta undi setelah penghitungan ulang mesin. pada bulan November. Undian pilihan raya Florida membolehkan Bush memenangi jawatan presiden. Lawan Demokratnya, Al Gore, secara rasmi kebobolan pada 13 Disember dan menyatakan dalam pidato di televisyen, "Walaupun saya sangat tidak setuju dengan keputusan pengadilan, saya menerimanya."

Pada malam 7 November 2000, pemenang yang jelas belum muncul dalam pilihan raya presiden A.S. pada hari itu antara Bush dan calon Demokrat Al Gore. Media cetak dan siaran yang dikutip sering kali bertentangan dengan nombor pengundian keluar, dan perlumbaan di Oregon dan New Mexico akan tetap terlalu dekat untuk beberapa hari. Pada akhirnya, peraduan ini tertumpu di Florida. Jaringan pada mulanya memproyeksikan Gore sebagai pemenang di Florida, tetapi kemudian mereka menyatakan bahawa Bush telah membuka jalan keluar yang tidak dapat diatasi. Gore memanggil Bush untuk mengakui pilihan raya, tetapi pada awal pagi keesokan harinya menjadi jelas bahawa perlumbaan Florida jauh lebih dekat daripada yang dipercaya oleh kakitangan Gore. Kurang daripada 600 undi memisahkan calon, dan margin tersebut nampaknya semakin mengecil. Sekitar jam 3:00 pagi, Gore memanggil Bush yang terpegun untuk menarik balik konsesi.

Menurut undang-undang Florida, penghitungan ulang semua undi diperlukan kerana margin kemenangan kurang dari 0.5 peratus. Dalam perlumbaan ini, jurang kelihatan kira-kira 0.01 peratus. Kedua-dua kempen segera menghantar pasukan peguam ke Florida. Tuduhan konflik kepentingan dijatuhkan oleh kedua belah pihak — saudara Bush Jeb adalah gabenor negara itu dan Setiausaha Negara Katherine Harris adalah ketua kempen Bush di Florida, sementara peguam negara Bob Butterworth mengetuai kempen Gore. Menjelang 10 November, penghitungan mesin selesai, dan pendahuluan Bush mencapai 327 undi daripada enam juta pemain. Oleh kerana cabaran mahkamah dikeluarkan atas legalitas penghitungan ulang tangan di daerah terpilih, kisah berita dipenuhi dengan perbendaharaan kata yang tidak jelas dari hakim pilihan raya. Pegawai daerah berusaha untuk mengetahui maksud pemilih melalui awan "gantung chad" (kertas undi yang belum selesai) dan "chad hamil" (kertas undi yang lesung, tetapi tidak ditusuk, selama proses pemungutan suara), serta "suara berlebihan" ( surat suara yang mencatat banyak suara untuk pejabat yang sama) dan "undi undi" (surat suara yang tidak mencatat suara untuk pejabat tertentu). Juga dipermasalahkan ialah apa yang disebut reka bentuk undi rama-rama yang digunakan di daerah Palm Beach, yang menimbulkan kekeliruan di antara beberapa pengundi Gore — mendorong mereka untuk secara tidak sengaja memberikan suara kepada calon pihak ketiga, Pat Buchanan, yang menerima sekitar 3,400 (sekitar 20 persen daripadanya jumlah undi di seluruh negeri).

Tarik perang terjadi antara Harris, yang pada awalnya berusaha untuk mengesahkan keputusan pilihan raya negara itu pada 14 November, dan Mahkamah Agung Florida, yang memutuskan bahwa penghitungan ulang surat suara yang dipersoalkan harus dilakukan di empat daerah dan hasilnya harus dimasukkan dalam kiraan akhir negeri. Pada bulan setelah pemilihan, sekitar 50 gugatan individu diajukan mengenai berbagai penghitungan, penghitungan ulang, dan batas waktu sertifikasi. Pada 8 Disember, dalam keputusan 4–3, Mahkamah Agung Florida memutuskan bahawa penghitungan manual harus diteruskan di semua daerah di mana sejumlah undi secara statistik diperhatikan untuk jawatan presiden.

Kempen Bush segera mengemukakan tuntutan, dan Mahkamah Agung A.S. mengeluarkan surat perakuan untuk mengambil kes itu pada hari berikutnya. Pada 9 Disember, dalam keputusan 5–4, Mahkamah Agung A.S. memutuskan dalam kes Bush v. Gore bahawa penghitungan manual mesti dihentikan, dan ia bersetuju untuk mendengar hujah lisan dari kedua belah pihak. Pada 11 Disember, kedua-dua pihak mengemukakan kes mereka, pasukan Bush menegaskan bahawa Mahkamah Agung Florida telah melampaui kewibawaannya dengan mengizinkan penghitungan suara undi dan pasukan Gore yang menyatakan bahawa kes itu, yang telah diputuskan di peringkat negeri, bukan masalah. untuk pertimbangan di peringkat persekutuan. Keesokan harinya, dalam keputusan 7-2, Mahkamah Agung A.S. membatalkan keputusan Florida, dengan menyatakan bahawa pelbagai kaedah dan standard proses penghitungan semula melanggar klausa perlindungan yang sama dari Perlembagaan A.S. Mahkamah memutuskan 5–4 untuk menyelesaikan masalah tersebut, dengan mayoritas berpendapat bahwa keputusan Mahkamah Agung Florida telah membuat undang-undang pemilihan baru - hak yang diperuntukkan bagi badan legislatif negara - dan tidak ada pengadilan yang dapat dilakukan tepat pada waktunya untuk memuaskan hati seorang persekutuan tarikh akhir pemilihan pemilih negeri.

Keputusan majoriti itu dikritik hebat oleh golongan minoriti. Hakim yang tidak setuju menulis bahawa proses penghitungan ulang, walaupun cacat, harus diizinkan untuk dilanjutkan, dengan alasan bahawa perlindungan perlembagaan setiap suara tidak harus ditundukkan pada garis masa. Terutama terkenal adalah perbedaan pendapat Hakim Ruth Bader Ginsburg, yang diakhiri dengan "Saya tidak setuju" dan bukannya "Saya tidak setuju" tradisional. Dengan penghentian proses penghitungan semula, 25 undi pilihan raya Florida diberikan kepada Bush. Gore secara rasmi mengakui pada 13 Disember dan menyatakan dalam sebuah alamat di televisyen, "Walaupun saya sangat tidak setuju dengan keputusan pengadilan, saya menerimanya."

Penyunting Ensiklopedia Britannica Artikel ini terakhir disemak dan dikemas kini oleh Adam Zeidan, Penolong Editor.


Inilah Yang Berlaku Kali Terakhir Berlaku Pemilihan Pilihan Raya

Skandal penipuan pilihan raya gila di North Carolina hampir, tetapi tidak pernah berlaku dalam sejarah Amerika.

Soalan-soalan yang mendung pada pilihan raya bulan lalu di Daerah Kongres ke-9 North Carolina nampaknya akan menghasilkan binatang politik paling langka: pemalsuan.

Selepas penghitungan undian terakhir, Mark Harris dari Parti Republik mendahului Demokrat Dan McCready dengan 905 undi - perbezaan kira-kira sepertiga dari peratusan mata. Tetapi Lembaga Pemilihan Negeri Carolina Utara menolak untuk mengesahkan hasilnya kerana tuduhan penipuan pengundi - termasuk tuntutan sensasi bahawa Harris menggunakan seorang lelaki yang mengumpulkan surat suara yang tidak hadir sepenuhnya dan tidak dimeteraikan di sebuah daerah di mana Republikan memenangi bahagian undian surat masuk yang lebih besar dari yang dijangkakan.

Ketika Demokrat mengancam untuk menolak untuk menduduki Harris di DPR, kedua-dua pihak dilaporkan sedang merencanakan pemilihan baru - dengan pertanyaan mendesak apakah itu akan termasuk pemula baru. Badan Perundangan negara yang dikuasai GOP meluluskan rang undang-undang minggu lalu yang mewajibkan pemula baru, tetapi Gabenor Demokrat Roy Cooper mengancam akan memveto tindakan tersebut. Sekiranya dewan negara memerintahkan pemilihan baru tanpa undang-undang itu diberlakukan, itu memerlukan tiga calon yang sama - Harris, McCready dan calon pihak ketiga - untuk tampil dalam pemungutan suara, dan hasil pemilihan baru akan menggantikan penghujung November seolah-olah undi lain tidak pernah diberikan.

Do-over tidak pernah terjadi sebelumnya dalam sejarah Amerika, walaupun sudah 44 tahun sejak pilihan raya diulang kerana percubaan pertama gagal menghasilkan pemenang yang meyakinkan. Dan setiap kali kerusi kongres dipertaruhkan, perang partisan bumi hangus biasanya terjadi.

Kali terakhir ada tayangan ulang - midterms pasca Watergate pada tahun 1974 - sebenarnya ada dua tayangan ulang, walaupun secara teknis satu pemilihan khusus.

Pertandingan pertama, peraduan House di Louisiana, benar-benar dilakukan. Pada tahun 1974 — ketika Louisiana masih mengadakan pesta perdana — Rep. John Rarick, yang pernah digambarkan oleh salah seorang rakannya dari Demokrat sebagai "perkauman terkemuka" di DPR, telah diangkat di sekolah utama oleh Jeff LaCaze, 29 tahun. Kekalahan Rarick membuka pintu bagi Republikan Henson Moore, yang muncul sejak pilihan raya umum November dengan kelebihan 44 undi ke atas LaCaze.

Tetapi salah satu mesin pengundian Baton Rouge tidak berfungsi, menimbulkan keraguan pada kemenangan sempit Moore dan melancarkan perlumbaan ke pengadilan. "Pengadilan dihadapkan - apa yang Anda lakukan dalam kasus seperti itu? Adakah semua undi dikira? Tidak ada cara untuk mengatakannya, "kata Moore lebih dari satu dekad kemudian, ketika Dewan sedang membahaskan satu lagi pilihan raya yang dipertandingkan, yang diadakan di Daerah" Berdarah Kelapan "di Indiana.

"Oleh itu, pengadilan memerintahkan agar pemilihan itu dijalankan kembali," kata Moore, menyebutnya "pilihan raya persekutuan pertama dalam sejarah yang pernah dijalankan lagi." (Lebih lanjut mengenai itu kemudian.)

Kali ini — pada awal Januari, beberapa hari setelah Kongres baru diadakan — Moore menang dengan margin yang luas: 54 peratus hingga 46 peratus, atau lebih dari 10,000 suara. Moore menjadi Republikan kedua yang bertugas di DPR dari Louisiana sejak Pembinaan Semula.

Kes Louisiana dibayangi tahun yang sama oleh pilihan raya yang lebih tinggi: perlumbaan Senat di New Hampshire yang akan menjadi pilihan raya besar terdekat dalam sejarah Amerika. Walaupun tahun 1974 adalah tahun yang mengerikan bagi Republikan, nampaknya pada malam pilihan raya GOP memegang kerusi penting Senat ketika Republikan Louis Wyman mendahului 355 suara atas Demokrat John Durkin. Durkin menuntut pengiraan semula, yang membalikkan hasilnya: Kiraan undi menunjukkan Durkin mengalahkan Wyman dengan 10 undi. Wyman, pada gilirannya, meminta penghitungan semula. Dan setelah satu lagi perhitungan mendapati Wyman unggul dengan dua undi, Republikan diberikan bukti dan dilaporkan kepada Washington.

Tetapi Durkin membawa kesnya ke supermajoriti Demokrat di Senat. Setelah kebuntuan lebih dari enam bulan di dalam ruangan atas perselisihan itu, Wyman mengakui bahawa dia tidak akan dapat mengambil tempat. Oleh kerana Wyman adalah pemenang yang diperakui, apa yang berlaku selepas itu tidak secara rasmi dijalankan semula: Senat mengisytiharkan kerusi itu kosong pada bulan Ogos 1975. Gabenor melantik senator sementara untuk berkhidmat sehingga pemilihan khas diadakan pada bulan September itu. Durkin, Demokrat, memenangi pertandingan ulang dengan menentukan dan menghabiskan masa yang tersisa pada tempoh yang belum tamat.

Terdapat contoh pilihan raya lain yang lebih lama dibatalkan dan dijalankan semula. Ketika Louisiana Rep. Bolivar Kemp - yang memegang kerusi yang sama yang akan ditempati Rarick dan Moore kemudian - meninggal dunia pada tahun 1933, gabenor negeri memerintahkan pemilihan khas lapan hari kemudian, yang dimenangkan oleh janda Kemp, Lallie. Tetapi itu melanggar undang-undang negara, yang memerlukan pemberitahuan 10 hari untuk pemilihan khas. Warga daerah mengadakan pemilihan sendiri, memilih calon lain, Jared Sanders. Ketika janda Kemp dan Sanders tiba di Washington, Dewan memilih untuk membuang kedua pilihan raya Sanders akan memenangi pilihan raya khas pada tahun 1934 setelah Lallie Kemp menolak untuk mencalonkan diri lagi.

Profesor University of Minnesota, Eric Ostermeier - yang menulis blog "Politik Pintar", sebuah katalog fakta politik dan trivia - menunjuk kepada contoh-contoh lama pilihan raya, walaupun tidak ada jalan keluar langsung, seperti kes Louisiana 1974. Pada tahun 1919, Dewan menolak untuk menempatkan Wisconsin Socialist Victor Berger, yang telah disabitkan kerana melanggar Akta Pengintipan, dan menyatakan kerusi itu kosong. Setelah Berger memenangi pilihan raya khas berikutnya, dewan itu menolak untuk mendudukinya. Republikan William Stafford mengalahkannya pada pilihan raya 1920, walaupun Berger, yang pernah berkhidmat di DPR dari 1911 hingga 1913, akan kembali ke Kongres setelah sabitan jenayahnya dibatalkan atas rayuan.

Terdapat segelintir percakapan abad ke-19 di Pulau Rhode sebelum negara itu mengubah undang-undangnya untuk membolehkan pemenang majmuk berkhidmat di Kongres tanpa memperoleh majoriti suara. Dan Ostermeier menemui dua pilihan raya khas di Kentucky — masing-masing pada tahun 1827 dan 1833 — yang memerlukan pengundian semula kerana penyelewengan atau margin tipis silet dalam jumlah awal.

Sudah ada pertandingan yang dipertandingkan untuk Kongres sejak tahun 1974, tetapi tidak ada yang menghasilkan pemilihan baru. Dalam perdebatan rancak mengenai Indiana's Bloody Eighth, Republikan meminta Demokrat untuk menyetujui undi do-over antara Demokrat Frank McCloskey dan Republikan Rick McIntyre. (McCloskey memimpin perlumbaan dalam hitungan awal, tetapi pemerintah negeri yang dikuasai GOP mendapati McIntyre hampir mendahului dalam penghitungan semula. Dewan yang dikendalikan oleh Demokrat melakukan penghitungan semula, mendapati McCloskey mendahului dengan empat undi dan duduk di atas panggilan GOP untuk mengadakan undi lagi.)

Perlumbaan Indiana menyumbang kepada penghentian keramahan bipartisan di Dewan. Sekelompok Republikan yang lebih militan, yang dipimpin oleh Rept Newt Gingrich dari Georgia, menentang Demokrat kerana "mencuri" kerusi itu. Gingrich akan naik melalui barisan kepemimpinan Dewan selama dekad berikutnya, menjadi speaker Dewan setelah Republikan memenangi penguasaan dewan dalam pemilihan 1994.

Sejauh ini, pertengkaran kepartian yang sama belum mengikuti perlumbaan North Carolina. Undian awal untuk menunda pengesahan keputusan adalah sebulat suara, walaupun ada bahagian parti dewan pilihan raya negeri. Parti Republik mengakui beberapa penyelewengan yang dikemukakan oleh Demokrat mengenai undi tidak hadir di Bladen County. Tetapi mungkin berhati-hati dengan hubungan Harris dengan Leslie McCrae Dowless, lelaki yang disiasat kerana didakwa mengumpulkan (dan mungkin mengubah) surat suara yang tidak hadir, beberapa orang Republikan berharap pendahuluan baru bermaksud mencalonkan orang lain selain Harris, yang mereka percaya telah dicemari oleh skandal tersebut .

Tetapi ada tanda-tanda gencatan senjata bipartisan mungkin berlaku. Pada hari Jumaat, tiga anggota Kongres Demokrat dari negara itu mengeluarkan pernyataan yang menentang yang baru, menyebutnya sebagai manuver "kemungkinan tidak berperlembagaan" oleh Republikan di Raleigh untuk "melindungi kerusi kongres ini dengan cara yang diperlukan." Dan sementara ancaman veto Cooper difokuskan pada ketentuan undang-undang yang tidak terkait dengan yang baru, ia menandakan peningkatan ketegangan antara pihak-pihak.

Pegawai masih jauh dari memerintahkan pemilihan semula persekutuan pertama dalam empat dekad. Tetapi kerusi kongres tetap seimbang: Republikan melihat Harris sebagai tercemar teruk, sementara Demokrat boleh kehilangan kelebihan mereka jika dia digantikan dengan calon GOP yang lain. Sejarah menunjukkan pertempuran yang sukar akan datang.


Perlembagaan Harian

26 Oktober 2016 oleh Scott Bomboy

Suara perlumbaan dan rsquos presiden semasa mendorong beberapa sarjana melihat dua bahagian penting tetapi kurang difahami dalam proses pilihan raya kami: tunjuk perasaan mengenai pengiraan undi dan pengundian haram selepas pertandingan presiden.

Sejak kebelakangan ini, contoh terbesar dari perselisihan pasca pemilihan adalah pada tahun 2000, ketika Mahkamah Agung memutuskan untuk Bush lwn Gore membantu menyelesaikan kontroversi mengenai penghitungan semula automatik di Florida yang memutuskan pemilihan presiden nasional.

Jumlah pengundian awal begitu dekat di Florida, dengan perbezaan kurang dari 0.5 peratus antara George W. Bush dan Al Gore, sehingga penghitungan semula bermula dengan segera. Mahkamah Agung memutuskan bahawa standard yang berbeza digunakan di daerah Florida dan kaedah alternatif tidak dapat digunakan pada waktunya agar undi pilihan raya negeri & rsquos disahkan di bawah undang-undang persekutuan.

Edward Foley, seorang profesor undang-undang di Ohio State University, telah menulis beberapa artikel baru-baru ini dan memberikan beberapa wawancara mengenai sejarah pertikaian pilihan raya. Kisah terbarunya di laman web Politico menjelaskan bahawa kontroversi pasca-pilihan raya tidak pernah berlaku sebelumnya dalam pilihan raya presiden, menunjukkan contoh pada tahun 1876, 1884, 1916 dan 1960 di mana perlumbaan tidak benar-benar diselesaikan pada malam pilihan raya.

Dalam pilihan raya kecil yang dibincangkan pada tahun 1884 dan 1916, James Blaine dan Charles Evans Hughes harus menunggu dua minggu untuk mengalah ketika komisen memeriksa surat suara di negeri-negeri utama, kata Foley. Dalam perlumbaan 2016 ketika ini, dia juga menunjukkan senario seperti pertandingan Bush-Kerry 2004, di mana John Kerry menunggu hingga keesokan harinya untuk mengakui kerana jumlah undi sementara yang luar biasa lebih besar di Ohio sehingga margin kekalahannya kepada Bush.

& ldquoElections, ia mesti ditekankan, jangan berakhir pada hari terakhir pengundian dan pemilihan ditutup. Mereka secara rasmi berakhir apabila penghitungan semua surat suara akhirnya disahkan, & rdquo Foley berkata.

Hari ini, 43 negeri membenarkan calon yang kalah, seorang pemilih, sekumpulan pemilih atau pihak lain yang bersangkutan untuk mengajukan permohonan penghitungan semula dengan cara tertentu, kata Persidangan Nasional Badan Perundangan Negara. Di antara 15 negara swing yang berpotensi saat ini atau medan perang dalam pilihan raya presiden, hanya enam negeri yang mempunyai peruntukan penghitungan semula automatik berdasarkan margin dekat dalam perlumbaan: Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Michigan, Ohio dan Pennsylvania. Beberapa negeri membenarkan calon atau pihak yang berminat untuk meminta pengiraan semula, jika mereka membayarnya. Sebagai tambahan kepada penghitungan semula, kebanyakan negeri membenarkan pengundi untuk bertanding dalam keputusan pilihan raya, berdasarkan tuntutan pengundian haram, tingkah laku buruk oleh kaunter undi (seperti menerima rasuah), pengiraan undi yang salah atau ketidak layak calon calon.

Di Florida, misalnya, calon, pemilih atau pemilih dapat bertanding dalam pilihan raya berdasarkan tuntutan & ldquoreceipt sejumlah undi haram atau penolakan sejumlah suara sah yang cukup untuk mengubah atau meragukan hasil pilihan raya. & Rdquo

Undang-undang Ohio & rsquos mengatakan bahawa calon atau petisyen yang ditandatangani oleh sekurang-kurangnya 25 pemilih boleh bertanding dalam keputusan pilihan raya, tetapi peserta mesti mengikat bon untuk membayar kos yang berkaitan dengan menyelesaikan perselisihan. Peserta mesti membuktikan bahawa berlaku penyelewengan dan cukup besar untuk mempengaruhi keputusan pilihan raya. Sekiranya tidak, wang itu akan dilucutkan. Undang-undang Pennsylvania & rsquos membenarkan pemilihan presiden dipertandingkan sebagai pilihan raya & ldquoClass II & rdquo dalam keadaan yang serupa.

Yang sama persamaan undang-undang negara adalah bahwa penyelesaian perselisihan pemilihan harus terjadi dalam sistem perundangan negara. Dan masalah yang lebih besar adalah keperluan di bawah Perlembagaan dan undang-undang persekutuan bagi negeri-negeri untuk menghantar senarai pemilih yang disahkan ke Kongres setelah para pemilih bertemu di setiap negeri.

Jangka masa yang padat adalah masalah utama dalam Bush lwn Gore keputusan, yang menyaksikan keadaan luar biasa Mahkamah Agung Amerika Syarikat terlibat dalam pilihan raya yang dikendalikan oleh negeri untuk pejabat persekutuan. Pada tahun 2016, keadaan itu mungkin berbeza dengan Mahkamah yang berpecah pada ideologi.

Di bawah undang-undang persekutuan (3 Kod A.S. & sekte 5) yang dikenali sebagai peruntukan pelabuhan selamat, sebuah negeri mesti menentukan pemilihnya enam hari sebelum ahli Kolej Pemilihan bertemu secara langsung. Pada tahun 2016, tarikh akhir itu adalah 13 Disember, sejak kuliah memilih pada 19 Disember. Kembali pada tahun 2000, Mahkamah Agung yang sangat terpecah, dalam undian 5-4, tidak akan membenarkan lanjutan tarikh akhir pelabuhan selamat yang dicadangkan oleh Hakim Stephen Breyer di kes khusus Florida & rsquos recount.

Scott Bomboy adalah ketua pengarang Pusat Perlembagaan Nasional.


Syarikat bernama lain yang terikat dengan audit

Penemuan Digital

  • Ibu pejabat: Dallas
  • Ditubuhkan: 1998
  • Perkhidmatan: Penyiasatan digital
  • Disahkan oleh Suruhanjaya Bantuan Pilihan Raya A.S.: Tidak

Syarikat yang berpusat di Dallas ini mengkhususkan diri dalam mengumpulkan maklumat yang disimpan secara elektronik terutamanya untuk tuntutan mahkamah. Ia ditubuhkan pada tahun 1998, menurut laman web syarikat.

Anggota Senat GOP mengatakan syarikat ini akan menjadi sebahagian daripada audit, tetapi pada 26 Mei, penghubung Senat Ken Bennett mengatakan bahawa dia tidak pernah bertemu dengan sesiapa pun dari syarikat itu, walaupun mereka mungkin telah bekerja di belakang layar.

Ketua Pegawai Eksekutif Digital Discovery Paul J. Ritter memberitahu The Republic pada 28 Mei bahawa syarikatnya belum mengusahakan audit.

Pengawasan Warganegara

  • Ibu pejabat: El Cajon, California
  • Ditubuhkan: 2006
  • Perkhidmatan: Organisasi bukan untung mempromosikan penglibatan warga negara
  • Disahkan oleh Suruhanjaya Bantuan Pilihan Raya A.S.: Tidak

Officials with the audit said they are hoping to contract with a company called Citizens Oversight to scan digital images of all 2.1 million ballots and compare vote totals with the official election results.

This expansion of the audit was discussed for weeks but now appears likely.

The organization's founder, Ray Lutz, told The Republic that no one has ever hired his company to audit an election, and the technology has never been used in an official election audit.

“I would say absolutely this is a grand test,” Lutz said. “I think it is certainly a big test for me, because I have put a lot of work on it for the last year and a half or so. We have enhanced it to the point now where I believe we can do a lot to provide information about how well (this election) went.”

Lutz, a San Diego area businessman and longtime activist, said he has conducted unofficial audits on election results in Florida and Georgia using a system he created called AuditEngine.

Lutz said the Senate would hire Citizens Oversight directly and that it would not be a subcontractor under Cyber Ninjas.

While Lutz has not officially conducted election audits, he is a longtime government watchdog and elections activist.

Lutz founded Citizens Oversight in 2006. The nonprofit’s stated goal is “to promote civic engagement by citizens providing oversight over their local, state and federal governments.”

The nonprofit sued San Diego County in 2016, claiming it had inaccurately counted ballots in an audit of election results. Lutz said officials failed to include tens of thousands of mail-in ballots. A judge agreed with Lutz and ordered the county to adopt new procedures.

Lutz, 63, lives in El Cajon, a suburb east of San Diego. He has a master's degree in electrical engineering and is president of Cognisys Inc., a consulting and product design company for the medical device industry.

Lutz’s new technology works by mapping the ovals on each ballot and then matching those locations with candidate names. Lutz’s technology examines the oval along with the area directly around it to find votes.


Pennsylvania

Recount law: Yes.

Does state law mandate recounts?: Yes.

Under what circumstances?: .5 percent or less of the total vote in statewide offices or ballot measures.

When must mandatory recount be completed?: Three weeks after election.

Can a non-mandatory recount be requested?: Yes.

Under what circumstances?: No margin is required. Three qualified electors in each district being contested who allege an error may request a non-mandatory recount.

Deadline to request a non-mandatory recount?: Five days after completion of unofficial canvass.

Who pays for non-mandatory recount?: Petitioner, money is returned if fault or error is found.


2020 election ‘most secure in American history,’ federal election security officials say

Will 'first of its kind' recount reverse Georgia election result?

Rep. Doug Collins joins 'Bill Hemmer Reports' with insight into Peach State's effort

This election cycle was the most secure ever, despite a surge in mail-invoting prompted by the coronavirus pandemic.

A joint statement issued on Thursday by the Elections Infrastructure Government Coordinating Council and the Election Infrastructure Sector Coordinating executive committees said this year’s election marked “the most secure in American history.”

“While we know there are many unfounded claims and opportunities for misinformation about the process of our elections, we can assure you we have the utmost confidence in the security and integrity of our elections, and you should too,” the statement read. “When you have questions, turn to elections officials as trusted voices as they administer elections.”

In regards to recounts and uncalled races, the committees said that it is not unusual for states to recount ballots during close elections – but added that there is no evidence any voting system “deleted or lost votes, changed votes, or was in any way compromised.”

President Trump has yet to concede to President-elect Joe Biden, and has repeated unfounded claims about fraud and that the election was “rigged.” His campaign has launched a slew of lawsuits throughout different states challenging election processes.

Trump attempted to sow doubt about the security of the mail-in voting process in the run-up to Election Day, since an extraordinary number of absentee and mail-in ballots were expected.

But voter turnout also appears to have hit a multi-decade high.

With votes still being counted, turnout in the 2020 presidential election has already hit a 50-year high, exceeding the record set by the 2008 presidential election of Barack Obama.

As of Sunday, the tallied votes accounted for 62% of the eligible voting-age population in the U.S. That’s a 0.4 percentage point increase so far over the rate hit in 2008.

The sheer number of votes also set records, although that’s a less remarkable milestone given the country’s growing population. So far 148 million votes have been tallied, with Democrat Joe Biden winning more than 75 million — the highest number for a presidential candidate in history. Trump received more than 70 million — the highest total for a losing candidate.


Recount procedures by state

Alabama

Automatic recount procedures

Alabama requires an automatic recount if a statewide ballot measure or candidate for any public office in a general election "is defeated by not more than one half of one percent of the votes cast." ⎤]

Requested recount procedures

Sections 17-16-21 and 17-16-40 of the Code of Alabama stipulate that any person with standing to contest an election may request a recount, even if the margin of victory falls outside the 0.5% trigger point for an automatic recount. The requester is responsible for costs associated with the recount unless the recount changes the election outcome, in which case any costs paid are refunded. The time period for requesting a recount begins "with the production of the certificate of result and ends 48 hours after the official canvass of county returns." ⎥] ⎦]

The relevant state statutes suggest recounts cannot be requested in elections for the U.S. Senate and U.S. House. ⎧]

Requested recounts that show a change in the election outcome cannot officially change the election outcome but they do constitute grounds to contest the election in court. & # 9125 & # 93

For more information about recount procedures in Alabama, click here.

Alaska

Automatic recount procedures

If two or more candidates receive a tie vote, state law requires an automatic recount paid for by the state. State law does not specify a set deadline for the completion of an automatic recount. ⎨]

Requested recount procedures

A defeated candidate or group of ten qualified voters can request a recount if they believe there was a mistake made when counting the votes. The deadline to request a recount is within three days of the certification of a general election for governor or lieutenant governor and within five days for all other elections. ⎩] The deadline to complete a requested recount is no later than ten days after the start of the recount. ⎪]

The state pays for the requested recount if the margin of victory is less than 0.5% of the votes cast or fewer than 20 votes. If the margin of victory is greater than those covered by the state, the requester is responsible for costs associated with the recount. Any costs paid are refunded if the recount changes the outcome of the election and/or changes the percentage of votes for the requester by 4% or more. ⎫]

For more information about recount procedures in Alaska, click here.

Arizona

Automatic recount procedures

Automatic recounts are required under the following conditions:

A. A recount of the vote is required when the canvass of returns in a primary or general election shows that the margin between the two candidates receiving the greatest number of votes for a particular office, or between the number of votes cast for and against initiated or referred measures or proposals to amend the Constitution of Arizona, is less than or equal to the lesser of the following:

1. One-tenth of one per cent of the number of votes cast for both such candidates or upon such measures or proposals. 2. Two hundred votes in the case of an office to be filled by state electors and for which the total number of votes cast is more than twenty-five thousand. 3. Fifty votes in the case of an office to be filled by state electors and for which the total number of votes cast is twenty-five thousand or less. 4. Two hundred votes in the case of an initiated or referred measure or proposal to amend the constitution. 5. Fifty votes in the case of a member of the legislature. 6. Ten votes in the case of an office to be filled by the electors of a city or town or a county or subdivision of a city, town or county.

B. Subsection A does not apply to elections for precinct committeemen, school district governing boards, community college district governing boards, fire district boards or fire district chiefs or secretary-treasurers or boards of other special districts. ⎬]

Automatic recounts are paid for by the county or town, depending on the race. ⎭] There is no set a deadline for the completion of an automatic recount.

Requested recount procedures

Arizona does not allow requested recounts. ⎮] ⎯]

For more information about recount procedures in Arizona, click here.

Arkansas

Automatic recount procedures

Arkansas does not require automatic recounts.

Requested recount procedures

Arkansas allows any candidate voted for in an election to request a recount if he or she is dissatisfied with the returns from any precinct. ⎰] If the number of outstanding absentee/mail-in ballots is not enough to change the election results, such a request must be made within two days after the declaration of unofficial results. If the number of outstanding absentee/mail-in ballots is enough to change the outcome, a request must be made any time before results are certified. ⎰] There is no set deadline for the completion of a requested recount.

The requester is required to pay for the recount. If the recount changes the outcome of the election, the requester is refunded. ⎰]

Additionally, a county board of election commissioners may choose to conduct a recount without a request. ⎰]

For more information about recount procedures in Arkansas, click here.

California

Automatic recount procedures

California does not require automatic recounts.

Requested recount procedures

Any voter may request a recount. The requester is responsible for the costs unless the recount changes the outcome of the election in favor of the requester. The deadline to request a statewide or multi-county recount is within five days before 5:00 p.m. on the fifth day, beginning on the 31st day after the election. The deadline to request a recount in an election taking place in a single county is within five days of the county's canvass. ⎱] There is no deadline for the requested recount's completion. As a voter, candidates may request recounts following these guidelines.

A court may also order one or more recounts if a request from a district attorney is made within 25 days following an election. The district attorney must have probable cause to believe that misconduct occurred or mistakes were made when tabulating the election results. The court may order payments to cover the costs of the recount(s). ⎱]

An election official may order a recount if he or she believes ballots in the precinct have been miscounted and there is no explanation as to why the miscounting occurred.

The governor may order a recount paid for by the state within five days after the Secretary of State files a statement of the vote. In order for the governor to request a recount, there must be a close vote margin of either 1,000 votes or 0.015% of the total vote, whichever is less, between the winning and losing candidate or position, in the case of ballot measures. ⎲] In a primary election, the deadline to complete such a recount is three business days before the Secretary of state publishes the official candidate list for the general election. In a general election, the deadline is within 60 days of the order.

A write-in candidate may request a hand tally of undervotes under certain circumstances, which can be found here.

For more information about recount procedures in California, click here.

Colorado

Automatic recount procedures

Colorado requires automatic recounts under the following conditions:

A recount of any election contest shall be held if the difference between the highest number of votes cast in that election contest and the next highest number of votes cast in that election contest is less than or equal to one-half of one percent of the highest vote cast in that election contest. If there is more than one person to be elected in an election contest, a recount shall be held if the difference between the votes cast for the candidate who won the election with the least votes and the candidate who lost the election with the most votes is less than or equal to one-half of one percent of the votes cast for the candidate who won the election with the least votes. A recount shall occur only after the canvass board certifies the original vote count. ⎬]

Automatic recounts are paid for by the entity that certified the candidate or ballot measure in question. ⎳] Automatic recounts must be completed no later than 35 days after Election Day for all state, district, and county races. ⎳] Recounts for nonpartisan elections not coordinated by the county clerk must be completed no later than 40 days after Election Day. ⎳]

Requested recount procedures

Any of the following interested parties may request a recount:

[T]he candidate who lost the election, the political party or political organization of such candidate, any petition representative identified pursuant to section 1-40-113 for a ballot issue or ballot question that did not pass at the election, the governing body that referred a ballot question or ballot issue to the electorate if such ballot question or ballot issue did not pass at the election, or the agent of an issue committee that is required to report contributions pursuant to the "Fair Campaign Practices Act", article 45 of this title, that either supported a ballot question or ballot issue that did not pass at the election or opposed a ballot question or ballot issue that passed at the election. ⎬]

The requester is responsible for costs unless the recount changes the outcome of the election in his or her favor or changes the results of the election to a margin where an automatic recount would have been required. Requested recounts must be completed no later than 37 days after the election. ⎳]

For more information about recount procedures in Colorado, click here.

Connecticut

Automatic recount procedures

Automatic recounts are required under the following circumstances:

General elections: If the margin of victory is less than 0.5% of total votes cast for office but not more than 2,000 votes, or fewer than 20 votes. ⎴] Primary elections: If the margin of victory is less than 0.5% of total votes cast for office but not more than 1,000 votes, or fewer than 20 votes. ⎴] All elections: If election officials discover a discrepancy in vote totals. ⎵]

State law does not specify a deadline for the competition of an automatic recount.

Requested recount procedures

Connecticut does not allow requested recounts.

For more information about recount procedures in Connecticut, click here.

Delaware

Automatic recount procedures

The requirements for automatic recounts vary by office and type of election:

State Senate, House, and county offices in a general election:

If the number of votes separating a candidate and the closest opposing candidate in an election for State Senator, State Representative, or county office is less than 1,000 votes or 1/2 of 1% of all votes cast for the 2 candidates, whichever is less, the Court shall recount the ballots cast in that election at state expense. ⎬]

All candidate races in a primary election:

If the number of votes separating a candidate and the closest opposing candidate in a primary election is less than 1,000 votes, in the case of a statewide contest, or ½ of 1% of all votes cast for the 2 candidates, in the case of any other contest, whichever is less, the Department shall recount the ballots cast in that election at state expense as part of the canvass of the vote. ⎬]

The municipal Board of Elections shall recount the ballots if the difference between the top 2 candidates is 1/2 of 1% or less than the total votes cast for the office. Where electors vote for more than 1 candidate for an office, the municipal Board of Elections shall recount the ballots if the difference between the last candidate elected and the next closest candidate is 1/2 of 1% or less than the total votes cast for the office. ⎬]

Requested recount procedures

The requirements for requested recounts vary by office and type of election:

Statewide offices in a general election:

Any candidate for statewide office in a general election may apply to the Court for a recount of all the ballots cast and recorded for such office if the number of votes separating such candidate and the closest opposing candidate is less than 1,000 votes or less than one half of one percent of all votes cast for the two candidates, whichever amount is less. Such recount shall thereupon be conducted by the Court at state expense. The request for a recount under this subsection must be presented before the adjournment of the board of canvass for the election in question and any recount that takes place shall not extend beyond the petitioner’s contest. ⎬]

Requested recounts of this type are paid for by the state.

School board, tax levies, and school bond elections:

25 or more persons who voted in the aforesaid public school election may petition the Department of Elections that conducted the election for a recompilation of the results, if the difference in the election of a school board member or in an election conducted in accordance with Chapter 19, 20 or 21 of this title was less than 10 votes or 1/2 of 1 percent of the total vote whichever is larger. The petition shall contain the printed name, signature and the voting location of each petitioner. The recompilation shall be conducted no later than 5 business days after the verification of the petition. ⎬]

Costs for requested recounts of this type are not mentioned in state law.

Use the following links for more information about Delaware's recount procedures in general, primary, municipal, and school board/bond elections.

Florida

Automatic recount procedures

Automatic recounts are required if a candidate or measure is defeated by less than 0.5% of the total votes cast. The initial recount is conducted using automatic tabulating equipment and consists of all ballots cast. ⎶] If the results of the initial recount show a new margin where a candidate or measure is defeated by less than 0.25% of the total votes cast, a second recount is conducted by hand. The second recount, if required, consists only of overvotes and undervotes. The second recount is not required if the total number of such votes is not large enough to change the outcome of the election. ⎷]

Below are the deadlines for recounts by stage and election type: ⎸]

  • Regularly-scheduled primary election: no later than 3:00 p.m. on the fifth day after the election.
  • General/special elections: no later than 3:00 p.m. on the ninth day after the election.

Second recount (if required):

  • Regularly-scheduled primary election: no later than 5:00 p.m. on the seventh day after the election.
  • General/special elections: no later than 12:00 p.m. on the twelfth day after the election.

Provisions regarding automatic recounts do not apply to presidential preference primaries and elections for political party executive committee members. ⎸]

Requested recount procedures

Florida does not allow requested recounts.

For more information about recount procedures in Florida, click here.

Georgia

Automatic recount procedures

Georgia does not require automatic recounts.

Requested recount procedures

Under Georgia law, recounts may be requested under the following conditions: ⎹]

  • A candidate may request a recount within two business days following the certification of results if the margin between candidates is less than or equal to 0.5%. This threshold was set in 2019 following the passage of H.B. 319.
  • An election official may order, at his or her discretion, a recount if it appears there is a discrepancy or error in the returns. In precincts using paper or scanned ballots, any candidate or political party may petition the election official to make such an order. In precincts using voting machines, any three electors of the precinct may do the same.
  • For constitutional amendments and binding referendum questions, the Constitutional Amendment Publication Board may, at its discretion, request a recount if the margin is less than or equal to 0.5% within two business days following the certification of results.
  • The Secretary of State may request a recount at his or her discretion if a candidate for federal or state office petitions the office regarding an apparent discrepancy or error in the returns.

State law specifies neither deadlines for completion nor who is responsible for requested recount costs. Citizens for Election Integrity Minnesota writes, "According to the Office of the Georgia Secretary of State, for recounts authorized under Title 21, the petitioners are not responsible for any of the costs incurred by election officials." ⎺]

For more information about recount procedures in Georgia, click here.

Hawaii

Automatic recount procedures

Automatic recounts are required if election results show a margin of victory less than or equal to either 100 votes or 0.25% of the total votes cast, whichever is greater. The deadline to complete an automatic recount is no later than 72 hours after polls close on Election Day. ⎻]

Requested recount procedures

Hawaii does not allow requested recounts.

The laws governing Hawaii's recount procedures can be found here. Rules pertaining to recounts can be found here.

Idaho

Automatic recount procedures

Idaho does not require automatic recounts.

Requested recount procedures

Any candidate or person supporting or opposing a ballot measure may request a recount within twenty days of the canvass. ⎼]

The state covers the cost of the recount if the margin of victory separating the requester from the winning candidate or ballot measure position is less than or equal to either five vote or 0.1% of all votes cast, whichever is greater. ⎼]

In all other instances, the requester is responsible for the costs of the recount and must specify the number of precincts to be recounted. Costs paid by the requester are refunded if certain requirements are met. The requester must ask for a recount in a prerequired number of precincts and the result of the recounts in those precincts, if extrapolated across all precincts in the election, must be enough to change the outcome of the election in favor of the requester. ⎼]

The deadline for completion of a requested recount is no more than ten days from the date the recount was ordered. ⎼]

For more information about recount procedures in Idaho, click here.

Illinois

Automatic recount procedures

Illinois does not require automatic recounts.

Requested recount procedures

A losing candidate may request a recount if he or she received at least 95% of the vote of the winning candidate. The recount must be requested within five days after the canvass. The deadline for completion is three days after notice of the recount is sent to the winning candidate. ⎽]

In Illinois, a requested recount cannot directly change the election outcome but can be used to contest the election. At the end of that process, the court may choose not to levy costs against the prevailing party. ⎾] ⎿]

For more information about recount procedures in Illinois, click here.

Indiana

Automatic recount procedures

Indiana does not require automatic recounts.

Requested recount procedures

Any candidate may request a recount by 12:00 p.m. two weeks after the election. If a candidate does not request a recount by that time, his or her party chair has three extra days to request a recount. ⏀] Any voter who voted in the election may request a recount for a ballot measure. In order to make such a request, the voter must present a petition containing signatures from at least 10% of the total number of voters who voted on the measure in question. ⏀] In all instances, the requester is responsible for costs associated with the recount. Any costs paid by the requester are refunded if the recount changes the election outcome. ⏀]

State law does not specify a deadline for the completion of a requested recount.

For more information about recount procedures in Indiana, click here.

Automatic recount procedures

Iowa does not require automatic recounts.

Requested recount procedures

Any candidate may request a recount. If the margin of victory separating candidates is 50 votes or 1% of the total number of votes cast, whichever is greater, the state covers to cost of the recount. In all other instances, the candidate is responsible for costs associated with the recount. Costs paid by the candidate are refunded if the recount changes the election outcome. ⏁]

Voter(s) may request a recount on a ballot measure by submitting a petition under the following guidelines: ⏁]

The petition shall be signed by the greater of not less than ten eligible electors or a number of eligible electors equaling one percent of the total number of votes cast upon the public measure. Each petitioner must be a person who was entitled to vote on the public measure in question or would have been so entitled if registered to vote. ⎬]

The voter(s) making the request are responsible for costs associated with the recount. State law does not mention whether voter(s) are refunded if the recount changes the election outcome.

In the above two instances, the recount can be requested up to three days after the county canvass. The deadline for completion is 18 days after the county canvass.

An election official may also request a recount paid for by the state if he or she suspects voting equipment malfunctions or receives reports of counting errors. State law does not specify deadlines for the completion of such a requested recount but does indicate that the request may be made after the canvass.

For more information about recount procedures in Iowa, click here.

Kansas

Automatic recount procedures

Kansas does not require automatic recounts.

Requested recount procedures

Any candidate may request a recount. If the margin between candidates is less than or equal to 0.5%, the state covers the costs. In all other instances, candidates are responsible for costs associated with the recount. Costs paid by the candidate are refunded if the recount changes the election outcome. ⏂] Any voter may request a recount on a ballot measure. The voter is responsible for costs associated with the recount. Costs paid by the voter are refunded if the recount changes the election outcome. ⏂]

A county board of canvassers may request a recount if a majority of its membership determines that there were errors that might affect the outcome of the election. ⏂]

For requested recounts in a single-county, the request must be made by 5:00 p.m. on the day following the county canvass. For recounts in multiple counties, the request must be made no later than 5:00 p.m. on the second Friday following the election. The deadline for completion of the recount is 5:00 p.m. on the fifth day after the request was made. ⏂]

For more information about recount procedures in Kansas, click here.

Kentucky

Automatic recount procedures

If an election official discovers an administrative or clerical error during the election and vote-counting process, he or she must report to the county clerk. The county clerk must then, within 15 days of the election, request a recount in the precinct(s) where the error was discovered. ⏃]

Requested recount procedures

In primary elections, any candidate may request a recount. In general elections, any candidate may request a recount, with the exception of candidates for the offices of governor, lieutenant governor, the General Assembly, and some municipal offices. ⏄] In both types of election, the requester is responsible for costs associated with the recount. State law does not mention any refunds of costs. Candidates requesting recounts must do so within 10 days after the election. ⏃]

Any voter who was qualified to vote and did vote on a constitutional convention or ballot measure may request a recount in those elections. The requester is responsible for costs associated with the recount. State law does not mention any refunds of costs. Voters requesting recounts must do so not more than 15 days after the official canvass. ⏃]

Kentucky does not specify a set deadline for the completion of any requested recount.

For more information about recount procedures in Kentucky, click here.

Louisiana

Automatic recount procedures

Louisiana does not require automatic recounts.

Requested recount procedures

Candidates and voters (with regards to ballot measures) may request a recount of absentee/mail-in ballots only if the number of such ballots could change the election outcome. The recount must be requested by 4:30 p.m. on the third day after the election. Requesters are responsible for costs associated with the recount. Costs paid by the requester are refunded if the recount changes the election outcome. ⏅]

Candidates may also request a reinspection of votes cast on direct recording electronic machines. The deadline to make a request is 4:30 p.m. on the third day after the election. Candidates are responsible for costs associated with the reinspection. State law does not mention a refund if the reinspection changes the election outcome. ⏆]

Candidates and voters may also request a recount of absentee/mail-in ballots before a contested election trial if they allege an error that would change the outcome of the election. ⏇] Requesters are responsible for costs unless the court determines an error was made that changes the election outcome, in which case no costs are levied. ⏈]

There are no set deadlines for the competition of recounts or reinspections.

For more information about recount procedures in Louisiana, click here.

Maine

Automatic recount procedures

Maine does not require automatic recounts.

Requested recount procedures

Requested recount procedures vary depending on the requester and the office. In all instances, requesters are responsible for costs associated with a recount if the margin is larger than those described below. If a requester pays for a recount and the recount changes the election outcome, the requester is refunded. Additionally, a requester may receive a refund even if the recount does not change the outcome if the amount paid was greater than the actual cost of the recount.

Candidate-requested recounts
The deadline to request a recount is no later than five business days after the election. Any losing candidate may request a recount unless ranked-choice voting was used, in which case only the top three finishers in the second-to-last round may request a recount. The state covers the cost of the recount under the following circumstances:

  • State legislative and single-county offices: if the margin between the requester and the winning candidate is less than or equal to 1.5% of the total votes cast. ⏉]
  • Statewide and multi-county offices: if the margin between the requester and the winning candidate is less than or equal to 1% of the total votes cast. ⏉]
  • Municipal offices: varies depending on the combined vote totals: ⏊]
    • Less than or equal to 2.5% if the combined vote totals for the candidates is 1,000 or less.
    • Less than or equal to 2% if the combined vote totals for the candidates is between 1,001 and 5,000.
    • Less than or equal to 1.5% if the combined vote totals for the candidates is 5,001 or more.

    Voter-requested recounts
    Voters may request recounts of ballot questions by meeting certain requirements:

    • Statewide: voters must submit a petition signed by at least 200 registered voters within eight business days after the election. ⏋] If the margin is less than or equal to 1% or 1,000 votes, the state covers the cost of the recount. ⏋]
    • Municipal: voters must submit an application of 10% or 100 registered voters in the municipality, whichever is less. Cost responsibilities pertaining to municipal ballot measure recounts are the same as those for municipal offices listed above. ⏌]

    Use the following links for more information on Maine's recount procedures for state and county offices, municipal offices, statewide ballot measures, and municipal ballot measures.

    Maryland

    Automatic recount procedures

    Maryland does not require automatic recounts.

    Requester recount procedures

    Candidates and voters (with regards to ballot measures) may request a recount. If the margin between the winning candidate/position and the losing candidate/position is less than 0.1% of the total votes cast, the state covers the cost of the recount. In all other instances, the requester is responsible for costs associated with the recount unless the recount changes the election outcome or changes the results by 2% or more in favor of the requester, in which case the costs are refunded. ⏍]

    The deadline to request a recount is within three days after the certification of the election results. There is no set deadline for the competition of the recount.

    For more information about recount procedures in Maryland, click here.

    Massachusetts

    Automatic recount procedures

    Massachusetts does not require automatic recounts.

    Requested recount procedures

    The requirements for requested recounts varies by race and office type. ⏎]

    • In statewide and district-wide races, candidates can request a recount only if the margin of victory is less than or equal to 0.5% of all votes cast for the office.
      • For statewide offices, a recount request must be accompanied by signatures from at least 1,000 registered voters.
      • For district-wide offices, a request must be accompanied by a number of registered voters equal to one-fourth of the number of nominating signatures required for state primary candidates.

      The state covers the cost of the recount. For statewide and local offices, the deadline to request a recount is by 5:00 p.m. within six days after a primary. For district-wide offices, the deadline is by 5:00 p.m. within three days of the primary. For all elections, the deadline is by 5:00 p.m. within ten days after a general election. ⏎]

      The statewide, district-wide, and local margin, signature, and timing requirements apply to voters requesting a recount of statewide, district-wide, and local ballot measures, respectively.

      For more information about recount procedures in Massachusetts, click here.

      Michigan

      Automatic recount procedures

      Automatic recounts are required under the following conditions:

      A recount of all precincts in the state is automatically conducted if the difference between the number of votes received by a candidate nominated or elected to a statewide office and the number of votes received by the second place candidate is 2,000 votes or less. The provision does not extend to the office of State Board of Education, University of Michigan Regent, Michigan State University Trustee or Wayne State University Governor. A recount of all precincts in the state is similarly conducted if the difference between the “Yes” vote and the “No” vote cast on a statewide ballot proposal is 2,000 votes or less. ⎬]

      The deadline to complete a recount is no later than 20 days (primary) or 30 days (general) after either the last day to file counter petitions or the first day that recounts may begin. ⏏]

      This provision does not apply to presidential primary elections. ⏐]

      Requested recount procedures

      A candidate can request a recount if all of the following conditions are met: ⏑]

      1. The candidate ran for one of the following offices: president and vice president, state executive (e.g., governor), U.S. Senate, U.S. House, circuit judges, or state senators and state representatives elected from districts that span more than one county ⏒]
      2. The request "alleges that the candidate is aggrieved on account of fraud or mistake in the canvass of the votes"
      3. The request "shall contain specific allegations of wrongdoing only if evidence of that wrongdoing is available to the petitioner. If evidence of wrongdoing is not available, the petitioner is only required to allege fraud or a mistake in the petition without further specification."
      4. The request "sets forth as nearly as possible the nature and character of the fraud or mistakes alleged and the counties, cities, or townships and the precincts in which they exist."
      5. The request "specifies the counties, cities, townships, and precincts in which the recount is requested."


      Additionally, if a state Senate race is determined by 500 votes or fewer or a state House race is determined by 200 votes or fewer, a state party chair may request a recount following the guidelines described above. ⏑] Voters may also request recounts for ballot measures following guidelines similar to the above.

      The requester is responsible for costs associated with the recount unless the recount changes the election outcome, in which case the costs are refunded. If during the course of a recount, a precinct is deemed not recountable or is not recounted due to the withdrawal of the request, the costs paid by the requester to recount that precinct are refunded. ⏓]

      The deadline to request a recount is no later than 48 hours following completion of the canvass of votes. The deadline to complete a recount is no later than 20 days (primary) or 30 days (general) after either the last day to file counter petitions or the first day that recounts may begin. & # 9172 & # 93

      For more information about recount procedures in Michigan, click here.

      Minnesota

      Automatic recount procedures

      Following an election, Minnesota requires a post-election audit of votes cast. An automatic recount is required under the following circumstances:

      If the results from the countywide reviews from one or more counties comprising in the aggregate more than ten percent of the total number of persons voting in the election clearly indicate that an error in vote counting has occurred, the secretary of state must notify the postelection review official of each county in the district that they must conduct manual recounts of all the ballots in the district for the affected office using the procedure outlined in section 204C.35. The recount must be completed and the results reported to the appropriate canvassing board within two weeks after the postelection review official received notice from the secretary of state. ⎬]

      Requested recount procedures

      A losing candidate may request a recount of his or her race. A voter may request a recount of ballot measure results after submitting a petition containing the signatures of 25 voters who were eligible to vote on the ballot measure. ⏖]

      The state covers the cost of the requested recount if the results are within the margins described below: ⏖]

      • Statewide, and district judicial offices:
        • Less than 0.25% of the total votes counted for the office, or
        • Less than ten votes when the total number of votes cast for the office is less than or equal to 400.
        • Less than 0.5% of the total number of votes counted for the office, or
        • Less than ten votes when the total number of votes cast for the office is less than or equal to 400.
        • Less than 0.25% of the total number of votes counted for the office, or
        • Less than 0.5% of the total number of votes cast for the office when the total number is more than 400 but less than 50,000, or
        • Less than ten votes when the total number of votes cast for the office is less than or equal to 400.
        • County, school district, and municipal ballot measures:
          • Less than 0.25% of the total number of votes counted for the measure, or
          • Less than 0.5% of the total number of votes cast for the measure when the total number is more than 400 but less than 50,000, or
          • Less than ten votes when the total number of votes cast for the measure is less than or equal to 400.

          In all other instances, the requester is responsible for costs associated with the recount. Costs are refunded if the recount changes the election outcome or if the difference between the initial and recounted totals is greater than the standard for acceptable voting system performance. ⏖] The standard for acceptable voting system performance is a difference between electronic and hand-counted vote totals less than or equal to 0.5%. ⏕]

          For federal, statewide, district judicial, and state legislative recounts, the request must be filed no later than 5:00 p.m. on the second day after the primary or general election canvass. For county, school district, and municipal offices and ballot measures, the request must be filed no later than 5:00 p.m on the fifth day after the primary election canvass or no later than 5:00 p.m on the seventh day after the general election canvass. ⏖]

          The secretary of state may also request a recount using the following guidelines:

          The secretary of state may conduct a recount to verify the accuracy of vote counting and recording in one or more precincts in which an electronic voting system was used in the election. The results of the recount must be reported to the appropriate canvassing board. Time for notice of nomination, election, or contest for an office recounted pursuant to this section must begin upon certification of the results of the recount by the canvassing board. ⎬]

          There is no set deadline for the completion of a requested recount.

          For more information about recount procedures in Minnesota, click here.

          List of site sources >>>


          Tonton videonya: Избори 2021 Трейлър - Всички са тук! (Disember 2021).