NY-20 Vote Count Going Forward -- Slowly
The remaining vote-count in the NY-20 special election is starting to take shape, with the lawyers and local election officials set to gather on Thursday to review...about 200 ballots.
Judge James V. Brands just handed down an order formalizing an agreement from both sides.
About 200 ballots that were opened up but objected to on the basis of voter intent -- that is, a campaign challenged it based on how the voter marked it, similar to the ballot-challenges we saw in Minnesota -- will be brought to the State Elections Board, as a centralized location, on Thursday.
The campaigns' lawyers will then sit down with the county election officials and try to come to an agreement over these votes.
Of course, this still leaves over 1,000 absentee-ballot envelopes that are still sealed (though the campaigns both probably have some good ideas of what's in them). These ballots have generally been challenged on the basis of voter-eligibility within the district, and are still being fought over.
Meanwhile, the Washington Times reports that former Rep. Tom Davis (R-VA), who chaired the NRCC during some better cycles for his party -- 1998, 2000 and 2002 -- isn't feeling bullish on this result: "We lost the special election in New York. It's gone."
Josh
Matt
Eric
Brian
THIS IS EXCELLENT NEWS!! FOR HILLARY!!!
April 20, 2009 3:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
The next fascinating question: What happens to the Man of Steele?
April 20, 2009 3:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Isn't "rearguing" a judge's decision very unlikely to win that judge's favor? I can't see how the Tedisco campaign can seriously think that is going to do any good.
There is only so far Tedisco can take this--NY state law is not like MN's. With dems in control of the state government, there is no way Tedisco can delay the final result to the extent Norm Coleman has.
To paraphrase Kenny Rodgers, "time to fold 'em and walk away."
April 20, 2009 3:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Plus the House is not the Senate. Even if Tedisco managed to tie this up in the NY courts - or even get an injunction against issuance of an election certificate - the House can just go ahead and seat Murphy.
What the NY courts have to say about it really doesn't matter all that much unless the House chooses to defer to them. The US Constitution is quite clear that the House - NOT the NY judiciary - is the judge of this election. Unlike the Senate, there is no filibuster procedure on the House to prevent it from doing it's Constitutional duty.
April 20, 2009 4:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Not only that, but dragging this out just wastes Republican resources - it's not as though any votes in the House hang in the balance. So go ahead, Repubicans - take this case all the way to the Intergalactic Court of Relative Justice. No skin off Dems' noses.
April 20, 2009 8:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
I like this one:
The campaigns' lawyers will then sit down with the county election officials and try to come to an agreement over these votes.
Who exactly is in charge? Who decides whether or not a given ballot can be counted? County officials? The BOE? The Judge? The lawyers? All? None?
And "try to come to an agreement"? With who? What if no one can "come to an agreement"? Then what? Will the judge decide then?
These things are made a lot harder than they have to be. Just get everyone together in one room and knock it out in a morning. The Judge's rulings are final upon oversight and review of the State SC for legal confirmation of decisions. That can probably be done in about 10 minutes as well.
The reason these things take so long is the system is designed to allow anyone and everyone the ability to avoid responsibility; or at least the appearance of responsibility. That way, all the officials are nice and safe in their little cocoons of plausible denial.
While the voters get screwed out of representation and constituent services.
It will get to the point where no candidate, no matter what the margin, as long as its relatively close, will concede. Unless ordered too by a court of law.
And why should they? There seems to be no real penalty for NOT doing it. And the national committees will back you up with big bucks, all day long.
Soon, it will just be expected. Even by the voters.
Wow!!!!
April 20, 2009 4:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
What, you thought you were living in a democracy? ;)
April 20, 2009 5:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
If Tedisco loses his political career is over. His own party had him give up his leadership roll and he has given up any sense of dignity as he tries to use the legal system to change the election results.
Challenging Senator Gillibrants absentee ballot spoke volumes of his lack of judgement and character.
He is not viewed as a sympathetic person and a worse candidate.
April 20, 2009 10:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
The Republican (notice I didn't say, Tedisco) strategy at this point is simple. If you are behind by 273, and you know more counting in general will simply add to Murphy's net total lead, keep the number of uncounted ballots above Murphy's net total lead number.
As long as the number of uncounted ballots remains above Murphy's net total lead, he cannot reasonably declare victory and be seated by the House of Representatives.
So that's number 1.
Number 2 is to push for as many Murphy challenges (a Tedisco vote, probably) to be counted as possible, while at the same time, keeping Tedisco challenges from being counted, and move to dismiss those votes as having been presented illegally (using whatever argument you think might work).
Its a balancing act that could go on for quite some time.
I don't believe Tedisco, at this point, is in charge of anything. The RNC and RCCC are calling the shots.
April 21, 2009 6:05 AM | Reply | Permalink