The statewide canvassing board passed two motions this morning aimed at ensuring that every properly cast vote is include in the U.S. Senate recount. The five-member panel, which includes four judges and Secretary of State Mark Ritchie, agreed to accept election returns from a Minneapolis precinct that includes 133 lost ballots.
The canvassing board also passed a motion recommending that county election officials sort rejected absentee ballots into five piles — four stacks of ballots rejected for valid reasons, with the fifth pile representing votes mistakenly left out of the initial tally. This directive could presumably pave the way for such votes to be included in the recount.
According to the Secretary of State’s Office, 49 counties have already sorted rejected absentee ballots in this manner and reported the results. What they discovered: 638 ballots were improperly rejected in those counties, or 13 percent of the total. Extrapolating out across all 87 counties, this means it’s likely that roughly 1,500 absentee ballots were wrongly rejected — more than enough to sway the outcome of the election.
The canvassing board’s actions were largely in line with positions advocated by Al Franken’s campaign. “We are pleased that the state canvassing board has affirmed what we always believed to be true: Minnesota is not a state that disenfranchises its voters,” said Andy Barr, communications director for the Franken campaign, in a statement released after the hearing. “Today’s decisions represent positive and productive steps towards ensuring that this election is decided fairly and accurately, as well as a complete rejection of the Coleman campaign’s effort to throw out lawful votes from Minnesotans.”
The canvassing board’s actions will likely keep the electoral contest out of the courts for now. But it remains to be seen whether counties that previously refused to sort rejected absentee ballots into five piles (most notably Ramsey and Washington) will now do so. According to Washington County elections supervisor Carol Peterson, they have not yet determined how to proceed in light of the board’s decision. “It hasn’t been re-evaluated yet,” said Peterson. “That is something that we would run past our county attorney’s office.” (Ramsey County elections manager Joe Mansky could not immediately be reached for comment.)*
Secretary of State Ritchie stated that he can’t predict whether the reluctant counties will now move forward with sorting the ballots, but said he believes they want to make sure their tally is accurate. “Most of the counties I’ve talked to are very anxious to correct errors that they find,” he said.
The canvassing board also implored both campaigns to reduce the number of challenged ballots. Roughly 6,600 ballots were initially disputed by representatives of the Coleman and Franken camps. But both sides have since rescinded more than 1,000 of those challenges, leaving roughly 4,200 ballots in dispute.
The canvassing board is slated to begin inspecting the challenged ballots on Tuesday in order to make the final determination on which candidate a voter intended to support. That process is scheduled to last just four days, but presumably could drag on much longer if the tally of challenged ballots doesn’t continue to drop significantly.
Ritchie told reporters after the canvassing board hearing that the outcome of the Senate contest remains very much up in the air. “Absolutely no one can tell or predict who will have the most votes from Minnesota voters from November 4th until this process is completed,” he said.
*UPDATE*
I just spoke with Mansky. He says that they’re going to meet with the Ramsey County Attorney’s Office on Monday to discuss how to proceed. But local election officials have already gone through the rejected absentee ballots and determined that there were 156 (including 34 in St. Paul) that were improperly left out of the initial count. So the physical process of actually sorting the ballots into the notorious five piles would not be particularly difficult if they decide to proceed.













11 Comments »
Comment posted December 12, 2008 @ 2:28 pm
Cue the morons screaming about a stolen election.
Comment posted December 12, 2008 @ 2:43 pm
Cry baby cry, stick your finger in your eye.
The Republican whiners that do not want to count legal absentee ballots and suppress the
turnout of voters are gearing up to do some major shrieking. Over 4% of the absentee ballots
were spoiled, (12K of 288K not counted), this is a criminal amount. It is treason not
to count legal ballots and those that do not should be prosecuted.
Comment posted December 12, 2008 @ 2:46 pm
Yes, John, the election will be stolen – by the voters !!!
Comment posted December 12, 2008 @ 3:00 pm
just another democratic piece of trash trying to steal another election.
Comment posted December 12, 2008 @ 3:06 pm
I love the way that a hand recount is now considered less accurate than the original tally. Go Franken. By Any Means Necessary.
Comment posted December 12, 2008 @ 4:04 pm
No, a ballot that got lost and therefore can’t be re-counted is considered less accurate than the original counted vote. It’s very simple, really. Best Evidence.
Comment posted December 12, 2008 @ 4:24 pm
Yep, John, when Coleman people vanish 133 votes it is definitely more accurate
to use the original count. WHAAAH, it hurts when you can’t steal the election for Coleman, doesn’t it? Fortunately, the people of Minnesota have greater integrity than Georgia (for Saxby Chambliss), Florida (1st Shrub election) or
Ohio (2nd Shrub election). When Al Franken takes office, it will keep Minnesotans from having find another senator when Coleman goes to prison.
Comment posted December 12, 2008 @ 5:09 pm
“I love the way that a hand recount is now considered less accurate than the original tally.”
I think it’s pretty obvious that a hand recount is less accurate than the original tally when 133 of the original ballots have mysteriously disappeared. There is no way that the slightly more accurate hand recount could compensate for 133 missing ballots.
Comment posted December 12, 2008 @ 5:13 pm
John, the criteria is that the MOST ACCURATE between the hand recount and the original tally, with deference going to the hand recount. In one case, and one case only, the evidence shows that the most accurate count is from the original tally instead of a known incorrect hand recount.
There is no contradiction in always using the most accurate count when two counts are available. That is the point of the process, to come up with the most accurate count. If you know of any inaccuracies in any hand recount that rise to the level of the 133 lost votes, you should bring it in front of the Board.
Comment posted December 13, 2008 @ 5:51 am
After the original ballot count, Mark Ritchie, before these became “lost ballots” stated that by counting envelopes they had determined that at least 129 ballots were mistakenly run through machines twice. After having had time “to reflect” he now says he is not so sure and maybe the envelope AND ballot hand counts were wrong. (LOL)
Funny how that works. Funny too how the 8 years going “selected not elected” crowd suddenly becomes the “Cue the morons screaming about a stolen election” crowd.
Move along folks. Nothing to see here.
Comment posted December 13, 2008 @ 10:03 pm
Myerson, they have four envelopes labeled “2 of 5″ on up to “5 of 5″. No “1 of 5″. The log and the machine count match, but one envelope containing 133 votes is missing. Is that impossible to understand?
The “ran through the machine twice” story wasn’t Ritchie’s and was abandoned a week ago by everyone but you.
The fact-free morons screaming about a stolen election are in the house. Joy.
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL
Leave a comment