Over the past few months, state courts and election boards outlined historic rulings and criteria for the American voting process in multiple states. These ballot measures are ushering in an entirely new era of election integrity as the nation inches closer to the highly anticipated 2024 Presidential Election.
Recently important swing states like Georgia and Pennsylvania are imposing new rulings on ballot authenticity, accuracy and security, which inflamed those who feel any election rules will counteract free elections. In contrast, those supporting the new measures claim they are upholding free elections.
Georgia
Perhaps the most explosive of the recent ballot rulings, the Georgia State Election Board voted on a rule which requires poll workers to hand count paper ballots once polls close on election day.
Critics of the election board’s rule claim it will slow down the counting process and election reporting. Interestingly, neither of those concerns seemed to be a problem in the 2020 Presidential Election when ballot counting information was still being reported almost a week after election night.
In an article from the Associated Press, the new rule “requires that the number of ballots — not the number of votes — be counted at each polling place by three separate poll workers until all three counts are the same.”
By design, the rule is structured to ensure counts match what is physically printed out from voting machines and what is entered from those ballots onto electronic interfaces.
AP also reported poll workers will count in “piles of 50,” and if any discrepancies arise between the physical amount counted and the number the electronic machine shows the “poll manager needs to explain and fix, if possible, any discrepancies, as well as document them.”
Naturally, county election officials, the Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger and leaders from the Georgia Association of Voter Registration and Election Officials raised concerns with the new rule, citing slow counts and poll workers being overworked.
One of Georgia’s State Election Board members who helped author the rule, Janelle King, responded to criticism, claiming correct numbers trumped speed when counting ballots:
“‘What I don’t want to do is set a precedent that we’re OK with speed over accuracy,’ she said as the board was discussing the rule proposal, adding that she’d rather wait an extra hour or so for results than hear about lawsuits over inaccurate counts later.”
Pennsylvania
In another instance of states ensuring elections are accurately reporting ballots, the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania agreed to consider whether or not counties must accept flawed mail-in ballots.
The case revolves around ballots named “naked ballots” due to them being submitted without the secrecy envelope provided with a mail-in ballot.
Two voters tried to cast their ballots without the secrecy envelope in Butler County, PA, where the ballots were rejected. The voters sued and Butler County Court ruled against the voters, rendering the ballot illegitimate, while a Commonwealth Court ruled the votes must be counted.
However, the Keystone State’s highest tribunal picked up the case and is evaluating its decision.
The case follows other recent election security cases in Pennsylvania, which have been tightening mail-in ballot criteria, with a ruling from the state’s Supreme Court allowing counties to throw out mail-in ballots received past their required exterior dates.
The Associated Press reported that the Pennsylvania Supreme Court is also allowing voters to receive provisional ballots if their ballots are rejected.
“But the high court indicated it also may rule on the wider issue of permitting provisional ballots for voters whose mail-in ballots get rejected for other reasons.”
It seems both cases in Georgia and Pennsylvania were raised due to raging concerns about the integrity and security of American elections. The COVID-19 pandemic spurred conversations and debate around creating secure processes for how, where and when Americans can vote.
New cases, laws and rulings occuring in critical swing states will influence and ensure the elections in the United States of America are accurate and authentic, allowing the voices of the people to be heard.
However, what drives those who challenge such cases? This question should elicit the most accurate and authentic answer of them all.
0
0
Be First to Comment