D.C. Board of Elections Tells Court Write-ins Are Too Much Bother to Count

[Cold Highway]

The Board’s brief says, “Because tabulation of all write-in votes would need to be done by hand, the increased personal costs would be a substantial burden on the Board’s limited resources.” Also, the Board says, “Requiring the Board to tabulate all write-in results would cause a significant delay in the reporting of election results because all write-in votes need to be tabulated by hand.” The Board does not give any other governmental interest in refusing to tally the votes for declared write-in presidential candidates.

Whoever came to this conclusion in the board needs to be seriously fired.

Ballot Access News Blog Archive D.C. Board of Elections Tells Court Write-ins Are Too Much Bother to Count

 

[jackalope]

One of the commentors at the site made a good point about a 5% threshold for federal funding for the next campaign (and a minor party might feasibly reach 5% if write-ins were tabulated).

I don't think their contention that write-ins would delay reporting of results. Couldn't they report results, including a total for all write-ins, and tabulate the write-ins individually later?

 

[Kandahar]

Whoever came to this conclusion in the board needs to be seriously fired.

Ballot Access News Blog Archive D.C. Board of Elections Tells Court Write-ins Are Too Much Bother to Count

Unless there are enough write-in votes where a write-in candidate could potentially win, what exactly is the problem?

 

[danarhea]

Unless there are enough write-in votes where a write-in candidate could potentially win, what exactly is the problem?

Don't you have to count them first to find out?

 

[content_curmudgeon]

Don't you have to count them first to find out?

As long as one knows the total vote count, one can know when the write-in candidates have lost. Since they lose in almost every election, counting write-in votes to determine a winner is nearly always unnecessary.

 

[Kandahar]

Don't you have to count them first to find out?

Not unless the write-ins are a plurality of the votes. If 55% of the votes are for Smith, 40% of the votes are for Jones, and 5% of the votes are write-ins, I think it's pretty safe to say that no write-in candidates won the election.

 

[PeteEU]

Unless there are enough write-in votes where a write-in candidate could potentially win, what exactly is the problem?

:shock:

All votes have to be counted....that anyone even can contemplate not doing so.. is... :shock:

 

[Oftencold]

As long as one knows the total vote count. . ..

SooooOOOOOOOOooooooooooo, this would seem to indicate a need to count something. What? Ballots maybe?

 

[Kandahar]

:shock:

All votes have to be counted.

Why?

that anyone even can contemplate not doing so.. is... :shock:

The purpose of an election is to determine who the people want to fill the office. Its purpose is to not to determine whether Joe WriteIn got 1.4% or 1.8% of the votes.

If the number of write-in votes suggests that a write-in candidate could actually win, that's a different matter. But it's comparatively rare. I have no problem whatsoever with saving the taxpayers money by not handcounting write-in votes when they don't matter.

 

[Kandahar]

SooooOOOOOOOOooooooooooo, this would seem to indicate a need to count something. What? Ballots maybe?

In most states, you can write-in a candidate but you still have to fill in the bubble or punch the hole or whatever next to your write-in candidates name. You can determine the TOTAL number of write-ins with a computer scan. It requires a handcount to determine WHO the write-in votes are for.

 

[apdst]

Unless there are enough write-in votes where a write-in candidate could potentially win, what exactly is the problem?

Because everyone's vote has to be counted.

 

[apdst]

Why?

Because everyone's vote carries the same value and should be counted. First you come up with a reason not to count this vote, then a reason not to count that vote, then before you know it, someone makes the decision to count only the votes he wants and those votes turn out to be all the votes cast for his guy.

The purpose of an election is to determine who the people want to fill the office. Its purpose is to not to determine whether Joe WriteIn got 1.4% or 1.8% of the votes.

If the number of write-in votes suggests that a write-in candidate could actually win, that's a different matter. But it's comparatively rare. I have no problem whatsoever with saving the taxpayers money by not handcounting write-in votes when they don't matter.

That can only be determined by counting the votes.

 

[jallman]

:shock:

All votes have to be counted....that anyone even can contemplate not doing so.. is... :shock:

Oh dear god...I just agreed with Pete and now I feel dirty.:mrgreen:

 

[Kandahar]

Because everyone's vote carries the same value and should be counted. First you come up with a reason not to count this vote, then a reason not to count that vote, then before you know it, someone makes the decision to count only the votes he wants and those votes turn out to be all the votes cast for his guy.

It's got nothing to do with counting "only the votes you want" since this is about write-ins in general and not even specific candidates. Write-in votes are a nuisance to count individually; that does not apply to any other kind of vote.

That can only be determined by counting the votes.

The total number of write-in votes can be determined through a machine scanning, just like any other vote. In most states, you still have to vote for a write-in candidate the same way you would for any other candidate (punch the hole, color in the bubble, etc). I know for a fact that this is the case in DC, where this story is taking place.

You have to hand-count the ballots to determine the specific person each write-in vote is for. And unless write-in votes constituted a plurality of the total votes (thus providing the possibility that a write-in candidate could win), there is simply no reason to do this.

 

[apdst]

It's got nothing to do with counting "only the votes you want" since this is about write-ins in general and not even specific candidates. Write-in votes are a nuisance to count individually; that does not apply to any other kind of vote.

Do away with write in votes. But, don't tell people they can write in a vote, then turn around and tell them it won't be counted.


There's no way to determine, with 100% accuracy how the write in votes will decide the election, without counting them. Count them, or do away with them.

 

[Kandahar]

Do away with write in votes. But, don't tell people they can write in a vote, then turn around and tell them it won't be counted.


There's no way to determine, with 100% accuracy how the write in votes will decide the election, without counting them. Count them, or do away with them.

Yes there is. You can count the total number of write-in votes with a machine, just like any other vote. You only need to count them by hand to determine which specific write-in candidate the votes are for.

If the results of a machine count show that Smith has 55% of the vote, Jones has 40% of the vote, and write-ins are 5% of the vote, you don't need to handcount each write-in vote to know that none of the write-in candidates won the election.

 

[apdst]

Yes there is. You can count the total number of write-in votes with a machine, just like any other vote. You only need to count them by hand to determine which specific write-in candidate the votes are for.

If the results of a machine count show that Smith has 55% of the vote, Jones has 40% of the vote, and write-ins are 5% of the vote, you don't need to handcount each write-in vote to know that none of the write-in candidates won the election.

I would rather not leave that up to someone's discretion...call me crazy!...:rofl

 

[Kandahar]

I would rather not leave that up to someone's discretion...call me crazy!...:rofl

Leave what up to someone's discretion? The votes are fed into a computer and scanned, you determine if it's mathematically possible for a write-in candidate to win, and if it's not then you don't handcount those votes. If total write-in votes are not a plurality of the votes, there is simply no way for a write-in candidate to win. What exactly is subjective about this? The basic rules of math are the same for everyone, regardless of their politics.