Florida, undervotes, and voting irregularities — yes, again

There are nine unresolved House races remaining, but none are quite as interesting — or likely to be as contentious — as the fight over Florida’s 13th. Not incidentally, it’s the open-seat contest created after Katherine Harris (R) ran for the Senate.

Though Republican Vern Buchanan was favored to win, Democrat Christine Jennings surprised a lot of people with the strength of her support. On Election Night, Jennings trailed, but by fewer than 400 votes. The closeness sparked an automatic recount, but that’s not the real problem. The issue here: 18,000 votes that seem to have disappeared.

In Sarasota County, 18,000 voters — fully 13 percent of people who voted — did not cast a ballot for either Buchanan or Jennings, a huge “undervote” when compared to the adjacent counties, where the percentage of voters not casting a ballot in the same race was about 2 percent. Some election officials have suggested that those voters in Sarasota intentionally chose not to cast a vote in that race, as a protest against an ugly campaign. But the unusually high undervote rate compared to the neighboring counties makes that highly unlikely: “The idea that this is some kind of protest vote simply makes no sense,” says Mark Lindeman, a political scientist at Bard College.

Many Sarasota County voters complained to election officials and watchdog groups about the ES&S iVotronic machine, which shows voters a review screen to check over their ballot before submitting it, but leaves no paper trail. Some voters reported that when they viewed the machine’s summary screen, no candidate had been checked in the Buchanan-Jennings race, so they had to recast that vote. How many other voters had the same problem, and just didn’t notice, hastily paging through the review screen?

In other words, in one of the closest House races in the country, 18,000 votes — more than enough to dictate the outcome — may never be counted because voting machines didn’t work as they were supposed to, and there’s no paper trail.

Jennings’ lawyers have asked a state court to secure the voting machines and election data, as part of an aggressive legal strategy.

Paul Kiel explained:

It’s just the first step of what is likely to be a litigious aftermath to a close and ugly election (thanks in part to the NRCC’s rampant robo calling in the district). The state began a recount and audit of the election yesterday. Once the audit and second recount is completed and the results certified on November 20th, the Jennings campaign has ten days to contest the results of the election if they still show Jennings down. Before the recounting began, she was down 386 votes. […]

A study by the local paper, The Herald Tribune, found that one in three of Sarasota election officials “had general complaints from voters about having trouble getting votes to record” on the electronic machines for the Congressional race. Since 53% of voters in Sarasota County picked Jennings over the Republican Vern Buchanan, those missed votes would likely have put Jennings in front.

I suppose it could have happened anywhere, but there’s just something beautiful about this happening in Florida. Likewise, it could have happened in any of Florida’s 25 congressional districts, but it just had to be Katherine Harris’ district.

For what it’s worth, Buchanan and Jennings are both attending freshman orientation on Capitol Hill this week, though only one will be coming back in January.

As I recall, the House ultimately has control of who it seats and recognizes. It would strike a blow for fairness and against audit-preventing electronic voting machines if the new Democratic majority refused to seat Buchanan. Any Rethug who can, with a straight face, say the simple arithmatic does anything other than show that Jennings had more voters show up at the polls than Buchanan is welcome to make that case to the American public (who, after last week, appears to be a little smarter than I previously gave them credit for).

  • If this isn’t a red flag, I don’t know what is. And if the Dems miss this opportunity to finally end the existing e-voting nightmare, they are the party of stupid, not the Republicans.

  • Zeitgeist- maybe so, but we don’t really want the House to essentially determine elections. That’s a little too far beyond the ‘democracy’ which we live in.

    The best thing that we can hope for is, really, that everyone just agrees that electronic voting in its current inception is a really bad idea, and we go back to nice (countable!) paper ballots until such time that someone can come up with a more efficient solution which actually works.

  • The only fair solution is to have a re-do election with countable paper ballots and purple faced election officials forced to produce an honest result.

  • What gets me were the comments of many election officials who discounted the overvotes and theorized that these thousands of voters were just generally “disgusted” at the campaigns and deliberately withheld their votes. Talk about callous

  • The solution is to have a run-off election at government expense. Set the vote sometime in the first part of Dec.

  • What a sickening story. No good solution, but I think holding a second election is the only good way to go. (Maybe that’s a nonstarter legally, I’m just talking about fairness to voters and the candidates.) If it’s legal but unlikely given Florida politics, maybe the House can force it with Zeitgeist’s gambit – just seat no one from the 13th until Florida gets it together.

  • Zeitgeist (#1) is correct that Congress has the ultimate say on seating someone. And I agree with Castor Troy (#3) that we don’t really want Congress itself determining election results. Therefore the election should be redone, with Congress forcing the issue by refusing to seat anyone from the district if the courts refuse to order a new election. (Courts are generally reluctant to order a new vote unless there is prove of intentional wrongdoing.) I believe this has happened in the past (though, thankfully only very rarely).

  • MW, I was thinking that as well, but I am havingtrouble finding the example. I thought the House refused to seat a contested winner in the 70s or early 80s — similar thing, as I recall, a very close election with some irregularities. Anyone have a better memory (or better research skills) than I do?

  • Anyone have a better memory (or better research skills) than I do?

    You’re talking about the dispute in the Indiana 8th district in the 1984 election. Here’s the Wikpedia write-up from it’s bio on Frank McCloskey:

    1984 election
    In the 1984 election, Rep. McCloskey faced conservative state senator Rick McIntyre. Buoyed by President Reagan’s strong coattails, McIntyre trailed McCloskey by only 72 votes after the initial vote count. A tabulation error, however, resulted in an overcounting of McCloskey votes and the Republican Indiana Secretary of State certified McIntyre as the winner by 34 votes, ignoring other recounted tallies that actually showed McCloskey was in the lead. The Democratic-controlled House refused to seat either McIntyre or McCloskey and conducted their own recount. In the end, the House seated McCloskey after declaring him the winner by just four votes (116,645 to 116,641). The vote was largely along partisan lines and in response every Republican House member marched out of the chamber in protest.

  • “Zeitgeist (#1) is correct that Congress has the ultimate say on seating someone. And I agree with Castor Troy (#3) that we don’t really want Congress itself determining election results.”

    The Rapepublicans of the 109th did that already this YEAR, when they sat Brian Bilbray, even though his election was as bogus as a barn swallow with eyeglasses.

    (The Busby/Bilbray race was to replace Duke Cunningham).

    “Therefore the election should be redone,”

    Florida AND Ohio have LAWS BARRING ALL USE OF PAPER BALLOTS.

    Redoing one election, you would have to redo all of them.

    These six races are still being contested; Dems apparently believe they will win three.

    NC-8 Larry Kissel (D) 60,016 / Robin Hayes (R)* 60,481
    CT-2 Joe Courtney (D) 121,321 / Rob Simmons (R)* 121,151
    FL-13 Christine Jennings (D) 118,739 / Vern Buchanan (R) 119,116
    NM-1 Patricia A. Madrid (D) 103,376 / Heather Wilson (R)* 104,863
    OH-15 Mary Jo Kilroy (D) 98,100 / Deborah Pryce (R)* 101,636
    OH-2 Victoria Wulson (D) 112,952 / Jean Schmidt (R)* 115,817

    http://www.bradblog.com/ (more there)

    Also, on Bilbray, this (from Bradblog):

    “In California’s 50th Congressional district, Francine Busby (D) has still refused to concede in her race against Brian Busby (R) in which she reportedly trails 54 to 43 percent. We applaud Busby’s refusal to concede given the outrageously bad administration of the election across the entire San Diego County as overseen by Registrar Mikel Haas, one of the country’s worst.

    “A Zogby poll taken on Election Day shows an unexplained 6 point disparity with the final results as we reported last week.

    “As reported earlier today, Haas’ resignation was called for on Election Night by San Diego County Democratic Party Chair, Jess Durfee after voters were disenfranchised across the county when Diebold touch-screen systems failed to work and not enough paper ballots were made available for voters. Many of those voters ended up voting on Spanish language paper ballots after English ballots had run out by 9am on Election Day, others simply gave up and went home or to work without being able to cast a vote at all.”

    Haas also hired teenagers and gave them voting machines to take home three weeks before the election, even though minors cannot sign binding contracts. Sleepovers of machines occured nationwide, and is a HUGE problem — easily treated by eliminating e-voting machines, eh?

    In California, we have a new SecState, the HONEST Debra Bowen. Hopefully she will uncover sufficient malfeasance to remove Haas and also the LA Country RoV, Connie McCormack — who is crooked as a corkscrew.

  • I read that Courtney has been declared the winner in CT-2 after the recount. He won by under 100 votes. Another seat for the Dems!

    On the FL matter, I think a re-vote is what is needed. But only of those who voted the first time.

  • Comments are closed.