Near as I can tell, in the upcoming Dec. 11 recount for Ashland supervisor, the issue seems to be whether or not to actually look at ballots.
Surely everyone remembers the most famous recount of all, the Florida recount of 2000 that made George Bush president, which alienated about half the country and still rankles many.
Who can ever forget all those funny pictures of folks peering at cards trying to discern the intention of voters who, for one reason or another, failed to completely push out a tiny piece of cardboard indicating who they preferred as their next president.
In the Ashland recount, a three judge panel will decide if actual ballots are examined, or whether a printout which summarizes the ballots is sufficient.
It has been widely reported that there are 19 “undervotes” for supervisor in the contest. And since candidate Via bested candidate Damian by only 15, it would seem to make sense that they be looked at to see why they are “undervotes.“
But from the judge’s Recount Procedural Order, it seems that for that to happen, recount officials will have to decide that the printout summary from the optical scanners is not “clear,“ whatever that may mean. Only then would the ballots be run through the optical scanner and “undervotes” set aside to be counted by hand.
Candidate Via’s attorney has urged that the examination of the printout is sufficient, while candidate Damian wants to see the actual ballots that are deemed “undervotes.“
It may cost a little more money, but the challenger has to pay if there is no change after the whole process, not the taxpayer. Anyone who voted or has seen a ballot must understand that it should be easy to determine if the “undervotes” are indeed, real votes.
So, by all means, for the sake of public trust in the electoral process, run them through again, and count the questionable paper ballots by hand.
