Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Election Official Calls Recount Request Frivolous, Insulting
Channel Cincinnati ^ | November 22, 2004 | AP

Posted on 11/22/2004 1:57:51 PM PST by finnman69

CINCINNATI -- Third-party candidates for president said they would sue in federal court Monday to force a recount of Ohio ballots before returns are certified next week - prompting one election official to say he might mobilize fellow counties to resist a recount.

"Counties are very upset," said Keith Cunningham, director of the Allen County Board of Elections and incoming president of the Ohio Association of Election Officials, who called the lawsuit "frivolous."

"Commissioners are beginning to understand - and if they don't, will understand soon - what kind of financial impact this is going to have on them, in a year when elections already cost a great deal more than expected."

Libertarian Michael Badnarik and the Green Party's David Cobb said last week that they had raised more than $150,000 to cover the state's fee for a recount. Ohio law requires payment of $10 per precinct, or $113,600 statewide, but election officials say the true expense would be far greater.

"It's going to crush county governments," Cunningham said.

Carlo LoParo, spokesman for Secretary of State Kenneth Blackwell, has estimated the actual cost at $1.5 million.

(Excerpt) Read more at channelcincinnati.com ...


TOPICS: Extended News; Politics/Elections; US: Ohio
KEYWORDS: 2004; badnarik; davidcobb; recount

1 posted on 11/22/2004 1:57:52 PM PST by finnman69
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: finnman69

Once again, the liberals cost us money...


2 posted on 11/22/2004 1:59:46 PM PST by RockinRight (Liberals are OK with racism and sexism, as long as it is aimed at a Republican.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: finnman69
Keith Cunningham, director of the Allen County Board of Elections

Small world - when I lived in Lima, Keith was my neighbor.

He's a good guy, and tough as nails.

3 posted on 11/22/2004 2:04:30 PM PST by TonyInOhio ("May they go to hell!" the soldiers shouted, and Allawi replied: "To hell they will go.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: finnman69
"It's over Johnny, it's over"

On DU, they quote Kerry's spokesman David Wade as saying

"We have 17,000 lawyers working on this..."

No good can come from 17,000 lawyers working on anything.

4 posted on 11/22/2004 2:04:42 PM PST by abc1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: finnman69

The Libertarian surprises me in a way, given what they believe about government...and this isn't even close.

But his campaign here in Ohio was basically to vote for Badnarik in order to punish Bush. Obviously, the Dems have taken over the upper apparatus of the libertarian party.


5 posted on 11/22/2004 2:05:23 PM PST by xzins (Retired Army and Proud of It!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: finnman69
Well let's see...

John F. Kerry did have left over campaign money.
6 posted on 11/22/2004 2:06:34 PM PST by .cnI redruM (Idiots so love to bury a god. - Charles Buckowski)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: finnman69
Libertarian Michael Badnarik and the Green Party's David Cobb said last week that they had raised more than $150,000 to cover the state's fee for a recount.


7 posted on 11/22/2004 2:09:20 PM PST by kesg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: finnman69

What I don't understand is why the Ohio law only requires a $113,000 filing fee to conduct a recount, when the actual cost to the counties is estimated at $1.5 million.

In Florida, it was mandated by law because of the closeness of the race, but if a party wants to recount an election that isn't even close, it seems to me they should have to foot the whole bill.


8 posted on 11/22/2004 2:10:05 PM PST by dawn53
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: finnman69

Do the counties have any legal basis for resisting the recount request?


9 posted on 11/22/2004 2:12:34 PM PST by Bonaventure
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: finnman69
Libertarian Michael Badnarik and the Green Party's David Cobb...

The weenies and the greenies are at it again...

10 posted on 11/22/2004 2:19:02 PM PST by Prime Choice (I like Democrats, too. Let's exchange recipes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: abc1
No good can come from 17,000 lawyers working on anything.

You can say that again...


11 posted on 11/22/2004 2:20:43 PM PST by Prime Choice (I like Democrats, too. Let's exchange recipes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: dawn53

Probably because when the law was passed generations ago that was a reasonable amount to pay to cover the costs.


12 posted on 11/22/2004 2:21:23 PM PST by mbraynard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Bonaventure
Do the counties have any legal basis for resisting the recount request?

I don't know, but if I were in charge, I'd have my county file bankruptcy before asking my constituency to pay for this. If someone wants a recount outside of the normal legally-required criteria, then they should foot the entire bill. Period.

13 posted on 11/22/2004 2:22:27 PM PST by meyer (Our greatest opponent is a candidate called Complacency.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Bonaventure
From Polipundit "Why not the second route? Ohio is a very “red” state, and Kerry can’t get the recount by pressuring the big counties in Ohio. His only hope is to get close enough to trigger the recount automatically, because if he can’t get within 27,409 votes, there’s not a lot of officials in Ohio eager to change the results as they stand now." Application or Automatic Any losing nominee or candidate in a primary, general, or special election can request a recount. Also, a group of five or more voters can request a recount on a question or issue. The recount process begins by filing a written application with the Board of Elections of each county in which votes are to be recounted. R.C. 3515.01. The application must be filed within five days after the results were declared. R.C. 3515.02. The application must also list each precinct within the county where votes are to be recounted, and for each precinct a $10 deposit must be paid. R.C. 3515.03. If the margin of victory of the nominee, candidate, or issue is less than one-half of one percent of the vote, section 3515.011 of the Revised Code triggers an automatic recount in all county, municipal, and district elections. An even slimmer margin —one-fourth of one percent—triggers an automatic recount in a statewide election. § 3515.03 Recount; deposit required; notice; witnesses; losing candidate may stop recount Each application for recount shall separately list each precinct as to which a recount of the votes therein is requested, and the person filing an application shall at the same time deposit with the board of elections ten dollars in currency, bank money order, bank cashier's check, or certified check for each precinct so listed in such application as security for the payment of charges for making the recount therein applied for, which charges shall be fixed by the board as provided in section 3515.07 of the Revised Code. Upon the filing of an application, or upon declaration by the board or secretary of state that the number of votes cast in any election for the declared winning nominee, candidate, question, or issue does not exceed the number of votes cast for the defeated nominee, candidate, question, or issue, by the margins set forth in section 3515.011 of the Revised Code, the board shall promptly fix the time, method, and the place at which the recount will be made, which time shall be not later than ten days after the day upon which such application is filed or such declaration is made. If the recount involves a candidate for election to an office comprising more than one county, the director of the board shall promptly mail notice of the time and place for such recount to the board of the most populous county of the district. If the contest involves a state office, the director shall promptly notify the secretary of state of the filing for such recount. The director of the board shall mail notice of the time and place so fixed to any applicant and to each person for whom votes were cast for such nomination or election. Such notice shall be mailed by certified mail not later than the fifth day before the day fixed for the commencement of the recount. Persons entitled to have such notice mailed to them may waive their right to have it mailed by filing with the director a written waiver to that effect. Each person entitled to receive such notice may attend and witness the recount and may have any person whom the candidate designates attend and witness the recount. At any time after a winning nominee or candidate is declared but before the time for a recount pursuant to section 3515.011 of the Revised Code commences, the declared losing nominee or candidate may file with the board a written request to stop the recount from commencing. In the case of more than one declared losing candidate or nominee, each of whom is entitled to a recount pursuant to section 3515.011 of the Revised Code, each such declared losing candidate or nominee must file with the board such written request to stop the recount from commencing. The board shall grant such request and shall not commence the recount. In the case of a recount of votes cast upon a question or issue, any group of five or more qualified electors, who voted upon such question or issue and whose votes were in opposition to the votes of the members of the group of electors who applied for such recount, or for whom such recount was required by section 3515.011 of the Revised Code, may file with the board a written statement to that effect, shall designate therein one of their number as chairman of such group and may appoint an attorney at law as their legal counsel, and may request that the persons so designated be permitted to attend and witness the recount. Thereupon the persons so designated may attend and witness the recount. § 3515.04 Procedure for recount; stopping recount At the time and place fixed for making a recount, the board of elections, in the presence of all witnesses who may be in attendance, shall open the sealed containers containing the ballots to be recounted, and shall recount them. If a county used punch card ballots and if a chad is attached to a punch card ballot by three or four corners, the voter shall be deemed by the board not to have recorded a candidate, question, or issue choice at the particular position on the ballot, and a vote shall not be counted at that particular position on the ballot in the recount. Ballots shall be handled only by the members of the board or by the director or other employees of the board. Witnesses shall be permitted to see the ballots, but they shall not be permitted to touch them, and the board shall not permit the counting or tabulation of votes shown on the ballots for any nomination, or for election to any office or position, or upon any question or issue, other than the votes shown on such ballots for the nomination, election, question, or issue concerning which a recount of ballots was applied for. At any time before the ballots from all of the precincts listed in an application for the recount or involved in a recount pursuant to section 3515.011 of the Revised Code have been recounted, the applicant or declared losing candidate or nominee or each of the declared losing candidates or nominees entitled to file a request prior to the commencement of a recount, as provided in section 3515.03 of the Revised Code, may file with the board a written request to stop the recount and not recount the ballots from the precincts so listed that have not been recounted prior to the time of the request. If, upon the request, the board finds that results of the votes in the precincts recounted, if substituted for the results of the votes in those precincts as shown in the abstract of the votes in those precincts, would not cause the applicant, if a person for whom votes were cast for nomination or election, to be declared nominated or elected or if an election upon a question or issue would not cause a result contrary to the result as declared prior to such recount, it shall grant the request and shall not recount the ballots of the precincts listed in the application for recount that have not been recounted prior to that time. If the board finds otherwise, it shall deny the request and shall continue to recount ballots until the ballots from all of the precincts listed in the application for recount have been recounted; provided that, if the request is denied, it may be renewed from time to time. Upon any such renewal, the board shall consider and act upon the request in the same manner as provided in this section in connection with an original request. As used in this section, "chad" and "punch card ballot" have the same meanings as in section 3506.16 of the Revised Code.
14 posted on 11/22/2004 2:24:07 PM PST by Perdogg (W stands for Winner)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: RockinRight
Once again, the liberals cost us money...

They see it as the governments money, not yours and mine.

15 posted on 11/22/2004 2:25:58 PM PST by fella
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: finnman69

The really disgusting thing is that two parties that have no stake in the recount, since neither has a hope of winning, can force this type of expenditure on the citizens of Ohio. The law ought to set a numerical closeness standard before a recount can be allowed under any circumstances, require the requesting party to pay its entire cost, and provide that the only party with standing to make a request is the one in whose favor the elction's result could be changed.


16 posted on 11/22/2004 2:28:31 PM PST by libstripper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: finnman69

I wonder how big a news story this is in Ohio? Would seem to me, that this could backfire on the blue team for next election. In Florida this time, the margin would lead me to think that the antics in 2000 cost the blue machine a few hundred thousand votes.


17 posted on 11/22/2004 2:32:08 PM PST by Professional
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dawn53

RE: "What I don't understand is why the Ohio law only requires a $113,000 filing fee to conduct a recount, when the actual cost to the counties is estimated at $1.5 million. "

Well, let's see... The Pubbies and Rats make the law and usually, they are the only two parties that would call for a recount.

So usually, it would be the guys making the law who's campaign funds would have to pay the bill.

Hmmm. And you need to ask why they wrote the law so that it only costs $10 per county for a recount?


18 posted on 11/22/2004 2:33:08 PM PST by RatSlayer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Bonaventure
"Do the counties have any legal basis for resisting the recount request?"

Do the parties making the request have any legal basis for doing so, other than that they apparently have the money?
19 posted on 11/22/2004 2:41:05 PM PST by Steve_Seattle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Bonaventure

It probably never occurred to lawmakers that anyone would be so idiotic as to throw away $100,000 to demand a meaningless recount. Lawmakers probably asssumed that the people running political parties would be sane.


20 posted on 11/22/2004 2:45:09 PM PST by Steve_Seattle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Perdogg
Boy, that was long. This sentence looks like the most interesting.

Each application for recount shall separately list each precinct as to which a recount of the votes therein is requested, and the person filing an application shall at the same time deposit with the board of elections ten dollars in currency, bank money order, bank cashier's check, or certified check for each precinct so listed in such application as security for the payment of charges for making the recount therein applied for, which charges shall be fixed by the board as provided in section 3515.07 of the Revised Code. [bold added]

If I understand this correctly, the money the L's & G's have fronted is just earnest money, & they will have to pony up more at some point. It says the charges are fixed, so they probably won't have to pay the full cost, but wouldn't it be sweet if they got clipped for a bill of half a million or so?

21 posted on 11/22/2004 3:02:46 PM PST by nina0113
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Steve_Seattle

I grew up in Ohio and if my Uncle was still alive, you can bet money that Miami County Commissioners would never approve such an expenditure.

Better never hear on this forum again how wonderful the Libs are because they are going to get blasted. This is abject insanity to request a recount in Ohio by two 3rd party candidates that have no chance of winning but are fronting for Kerry.


22 posted on 11/22/2004 3:20:27 PM PST by PhiKapMom (AOII Mom -- Thanks Oklahomans for giving Pres Bush the win in all our counties!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: nina0113
You got it! The $10 is only to START the process of recounting and mounting up a bigger bill. Here in WV a recount basically incolves paying the salaries of 4 county employees for as many days as it takes (although there are other officials involved, who already get a fixed salary and just do the recount as part of their duties and don't get paid more).

Why else would a candidate or committee even bother requesting that a recount stop, and the recount board accept OR DENY the request, with further requests allowed? That would make no sense if it was "free" after the first $10. I believe that the law is written to make people think long and hard about incurring an open-ended expense like that.

Here in our county, the GOP candidate who came within 200 votes (1%) in what was almost a historic upset, decided NOT to call for a recount precisely for that reason.

23 posted on 11/22/2004 3:30:18 PM PST by wildandcrazyrussian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: finnman69

Why is the LP in favor of a scheme that will squander taxpayers money this way? Real libertarians should be shaking their heads over how the LP has evolved. The experiment is over. It's an utter failure.


24 posted on 11/22/2004 4:14:18 PM PST by kcar (theUNsucks.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dawn53
"What I don't understand is why the Ohio law only requires a $113,000 filing fee to conduct a recount, when the actual cost to the counties is estimated at $1.5 million.
In Florida, it was mandated by law because of the closeness of the race, but if a party wants to recount an election that isn't even close, it seems to me they should have to foot the whole bill."

Seems to me they should up th fee for frivolous recounts to at least $10 Million, and increase it by twice the rate of inflation every year, to prevent, rabidly evil parties like the Green Party loonies from screwing up life for everybody and leaving taxpayers with huge bills.
25 posted on 11/22/2004 4:42:23 PM PST by KwasiOwusu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson