OSU Navigation Bar

Election Law @ Moritz Home Page

Election Law @ Moritz

Election Law @ Moritz


Information & Analysis

CT-2: Few Provisional Ballots to Affect Recount

This analysis was prepared by Sarah Cherry, Moritz College of Law, Class of 2007. Connecticut’s 2nd District congressional race triggered an automatic recount when the original count showed Courtney (D) leading incumbent Simmons (R) by only 167 votes. As of November 10th, the Connecticut Secretary State shows the same margin of 167 votes, although one news account states that Simmons picked up one vote in the recount so far. A November 9th news account states that this tally includes absentee and military ballots, although it does not include provisional ballots. However, apparently there were only fifty-seven provisional ballots cast in the entire district, making it less likely they will affect the result. C.G.S.A. § 9-311 read together with § 9-311a require the recount begin within five business days of the election; Secretary of State indicates the recount must be completed within five business days, but that Veteran’s day will push the deadline back to Wednesday, November 15. A phone call placed with the Connecticut Secretary of State on November 9 confirmed that only fifty-seven provisional ballots remain to be counted, and that one-hundred percent of precincts had reported their counts for regular and absentee ballots. The Secretary of State employee also stated that he knew of no voting problems in the district. In Connecticut, an automatic recount is triggered when the difference between candidates’ vote totals is less than one half percent of the total votes cast in the race but is not more than 2000 votes. C.G.S.A. § 9-311a. An automatic recount is also triggered any time the margin of victory falls below twenty votes. Id. As for provisional ballots, officials should complete verifying and counting them “not later than six days after the election or primary” and should report the results “forthwith.” C.G.S.A. § 9-232n.

Commentary

Edward B. Foley

Of Bouncing Balls and a Big Blue Shift

Edward B. Foley

It is a fortuitous coincidence that the University of Virginia’s Journal of Law & Politics has just published a piece of mine that shows the relevance of the current vote-counting process in Virginia’s Attorney General election to what might happen if the 2016 presidential election turns on a similar vote-counting process in Virginia. 

Read full post here.

more commentary...

In the News

Daniel P. Tokaji

Ohio treasurer receives OK to host town halls

Professor Daniel Tokaji was quoted in an article from the Associated Press about an attorney general opinion that allows the Ohio treasurer to conduct telephone town halls using public money. The opinion will likely have broad ramifications for the upcoming elections, Tokaji said.

“As a practical matter, while that legal advice is certainly right, very serious concerns can arise about whether these are really intended to inform Ohio constituents about the operations of his office or if they’re campaign events,” he said.

more EL@M in the news...

Info & Analysis

U.S. Supreme Court strikes down aggregate campaign contribution cap

The U.S. Supreme Court issued its opinion today in McCutcheon v. FEC, striking down aggregate limits on political campaign contributions but leaving in place limits on contributions to individual candidates.

more info & analysis...