Posted on 11/11/2010 3:34:25 PM PST by mdittmar
Joe Miller, the Tea Party-backed Republican nominee for Alaska Senate, may be on the cusp of losing the Senate race to Sen. Lisa Murkowski, who ran as a write-in candidate after losing the GOP primary to Miller.
There were more write-in votes than there were votes for Miller, and the vast majority of those ballots seem to have been cast for Murkowski. Miller chosen to address this by challenging votes that appear to have been for Murkowski even when there is only the smallest of justifications for doing so.
Consider: According to the Associated Press, an observer for Miller today challenged a vote that seemed to be for Murkowski because even though her name was spelled and printed correctly, the "L" in Lisa was written in cursive. (Or just have a look at the challenged ballot pictured above.)
Other challenges have been for sloppy handwriting or tiny misspellings - "Lisa Merkowski," for example. While it would seem to be obvious that a write-in for "Lisa Merkowski" is a vote for Murkowski, Miller doesn't want it counted.
Alaska officials have said they will take into account voter intent when considering the ballots - which presumably means that the "Merkowski" vote would go to Murkowski. But Miller's legal team argues that state law does not allow such an interpretation: If the name on a write-in ballot does not exactly match the name of the candidate, they say, it doesn't count.
The legal question will be settled next week, when Miller's legal challenge to the state's position will be heard in court. (Miller already filed suit to stop the count altogether, but a judge turned him down.) If Miller's camp can successfully challenge enough ballots to overcome Murkowski's apparent lead - and the courts decide that their interpretation of the law is correct - he will become a senator.
The issue isn't just a legal one, however. Should Miller triumph by disqualifying a large number of ballots despite clear voter intent, he will have essentially have "won" an election in which he was not the candidate for whom Alaskans tried to cast the most votes.
Alaska officials say they want to count votes for Murkowski that are less than perfect because it means not disenfranchising Alaskans simply for sloppiness or spelling errors. For Miller, however, what the voters meant appears to be less of a concern than finding a way to Washington.
“Simply a spelling error” is NOT a minor thing when dealing with write in ballots.
I recognize these voters PROBABLY meant to vote for the senator, but as a legal principle I can see requiring exact spelling on a write in.
How else can you possibly “know” who someone really planned to vote for on a write in??? There is no other way.
I’d like to dis-something at cBS.
If I write in “John Smythe” then John Smith cannot have that vote. That should be obvious.
Oh for cripes sake. Democrats steal elections by the boatload and Miller insists ballot counters abide by state law and he’s violating the will and intent of the voters? Typical MSM BS.
A letter Frank Murkowski wrote to the Legislature:
http://www.legis.state.ak.us/basis/get_jrn_page.asp?session=23&bill=HB266&jrn=0965&hse=H
“...Section 18 of the bill would amend AS 15.15.360(a) on the rules for
counting ballots, to provide a uniform definition of what constitutes a
vote as required by sec. 302(a)(6) of the HAVA...
Sincerely,
/s/
Frank H. Murkowski
Governor”
Even her daddy, years ago, knew he didn’t want her winning this election!
HAVA refers to the Help America Vote Act:
“302 (a)(6) Uniform definition of what constitutes a vote.—Each
State shall adopt uniform and nondiscriminatory standards that
define what constitutes a vote and what will be
counted as a vote for each category of voting system used in the
State.”
Even nore irony- the HAVA was written to prevent another Florida fiasco, like this!
They’re still on the air???
The same can be said about that RINO Mutturdski (misspelling deliberate). Didn't she lose the primary and, instead of refusing to accept that Alaskans primary voters didn't want her, she pulled a Charlie Crist as though that Senate seat is hers by entitlement?
How about a constitutional convention where the Constitution is amendment to limit the terms of those serving in the House and the Senate and to BAN family members from running for those seat? This entitlement mentality is going to be the death of us.
Alaska Statutes - Section 15.15.360.: Rules for counting ballots.
(a) The election board shall count ballots according to the following rules:
(1) A voter may mark a ballot only by filling in, making “X” marks, diagonal, horizontal, or vertical marks, solid marks, stars, circles, asterisks, checks, or plus signs that are clearly spaced in the oval opposite the name of the candidate, proposition, or question that the voter desires to designate.
(2) A failure to properly mark a ballot as to one or more candidates does not itself invalidate the entire ballot.
(3) If a voter marks fewer names than there are persons to be elected to the office, a vote shall be counted for each candidate properly marked.
(4) If a voter marks more names than there are persons to be elected to the office, the votes for candidates for that office may not be counted.
(5) The mark specified in (1) of this subsection shall be counted only if it is substantially inside the oval provided, or touching the oval so as to indicate clearly that the voter intended the particular oval to be designated.
(6) Improper marks on the ballot may not be counted and do not invalidate marks for candidates properly made.
(7) An erasure or correction invalidates only that section of the ballot in which it appears.
(8) A vote marked for the candidate for President or Vice-President of the United States is considered and counted as a vote for the election of the presidential electors.
(9) Write-in votes are not invalidated by writing in the name of a candidate whose name is printed on the ballot unless the election board determines, on the basis of other evidence, that the ballot was so marked for the purpose of identifying the ballot.
(10) In order to vote for a write-in candidate, the voter must write in the candidate’s name in the space provided and fill in the oval opposite the candidate’s name in accordance with (1) of this subsection.
(11) A vote for a write-in candidate, other than a write-in vote for governor and lieutenant governor, shall be counted if the oval is filled in for that candidate and if the name, as it appears on the write-in declaration of candidacy, of the candidate or the last name of the candidate is written in the space provided.
(12) If the write-in vote is for governor and lieutenant governor, the vote shall be counted if the oval is filled in and the names, as they appear on the write-in declaration of candidacy, of the candidates for governor and lieutenant governor or the last names of the candidates for governor and lieutenant governor, or the name, as it appears on the write-in declaration of candidacy, of the candidate for governor or the last name of the candidate for governor is written in the space provided.
(b) The rules set out in this section are mandatory and there are no exceptions to them. A ballot may not be counted unless marked in compliance with these rules.
Subsection 11....Does it really mention spelling?
What Miller issaying is there is a law. If we ignore this one, which others will we also ignore?
The law states that the name on the ballot must match the name on the application.
No one told you we live in an Oligarchy?
Did you actually...read...the law ?
From HERE paragraphs six and seven seem pretty clear to everyone but the Democrats and Eskimos:
“Alaskan statute 15.15.360. states a vote ‘shall be counted if the oval is filled in for that candidate and if the name, as it appears on the write-in declaration of candidacy, of the candidate or the last name of the candidate is written in the space provided.’
The statute continues with “there are no exceptions” to this statute; ‘A ballot may not be counted unless marked in compliance with these rules.’ “
14 posted on Thursday, November 11, 2010 11:03:47 AM by Oatka
If he doesn’t have the votes, he doesn’t have the votes. It seems like he probably ought to concede rather than try to win this way.
The law is the law, but I’m sure the whiny, dishonest loser will figure a way to weasel her way in.
I’m in Washington State,take heart Alaskans,it could be worse;)
What is a CBS? And why should we care what it thinks?
It merely says...last name...and a write in ballot by it's very definition, assumes human eyes on the ballot.
Close counts.I don't like the outcome but it is Just.
Maybe we should challenge the outcome of the Alaska election because they did not adopt uniform and nondiscriminatory standards that
define what constitutes a vote and what will be
counted as a vote for write in ballots....
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.