We completed the hand count of votes in the 6 precincts selected by Mr. Kirchner and Ms. Bell today. In each instance, the hand count of votes, using statutory guidelines for voter intent, matched the machine count from election night. In four instances, voters used either check marks or Xs to mark their ballots. It appears that the machine counted those on election night.

We are ecstatic that the hand count has shown the accuracy of the new voting equipment.

I believe the hand count was the most important part of today’s discovery recount. At the same time, I think it is important to note that there are a number of issues that routinely have come up in recounts around the state. Mr. Kirchner and Ms. Bell will no doubt be reviewing those as they decide whether to file for a full recount with the circuit court. This post merely serves to give confidence to the public about the equipment. It in no way should lead anyone to believe that I have any judgments about the merits of the cases of Mr. Kirchner and Ms. Bell.

I’ve updated the time for filing for an election contest. It is 10 days from the canvass, not 30. The 30 day timeline is for a general election and for public policy questions. Nominations are 10 days. Thanks to Bob Kirchner for pointing this out.

It appears that the County Board District 9 race will be subject to a discovery recount. Here is a little primer on how the process works.

There are two steps in seeking to overturn the results of an election. The first is to file for a discovery recount. (10 ILCS 5/22-9.1) The second is to petition the circuit court for a full recount known as contesting an election. (10 ILCS 5/23)

A discovery recount can be filed by any candidate who receives 95% of the vote cast for the winning candidate. In practicality, discovery recounts rarely are filed unless the margin is much closer than that. It is far less of a recount and far more of a discovery. Much like discovery in civil litigation, discovery in an election involves looking at the materials in the election and using the information gathered as evidence to present to a judge in asking for a full recount. There are no determinations made by anyone in the discovery process that change election results. The petition for discovery recount must be filed within 5 days of the canvass of votes. The canvass was yesterday, April 4th. I think this portion of the statute explains it well:

“A petition under this Section shall be filed with the election authority for purposes of discovery only. The petition shall ask that ballots, voting machines, or ballot cards – as the case may be – shall be examined, that any automatic tabulating equipment shall be tested, and that ballots, recorded votes, or ballot cards – as the case may be – shall be counted in specified precincts, not exceeding 25% of the total number of precincts within the jurisdiction of the election authority. “10 ILCS 5/22-9.1

A person can petition the circuit court for an election contest within 10 days of the canvass of votes. This is the only process that can result in an actual change in the election outcome. The petition to contest the election puts forth the reasons why the contestant believes that the results as certified are not accurate. If the circuit court judge grants the petition for the election contest, a recount of ballots would be conducted. Presumably it would involve all precincts in County Board District 9, but it appears that a judge could call for a recount of only some precincts, which I believe would not be in the public’s best interest. The role my office would play in an election contest is up to the circuit court judge.

One point I should make. I know that the machines are incapable of consistently reading X’s and check marks on ballots. Some of those may be present in this race. No election system has been designed to fully account for voters making mistakes in how they vote. With punch card, voters might fail to put their punch card ballot in the machine completely or put it in backwards. Those resulted in nonvotes. Now, with optical scan, we have voters who fail to fill in the oval on the ballot. Sometimes that results in nonvotes. I believe that with the optical scan system we have fewer voter errors. The new equipment also prevents voters from voting for too many candidates for an office which eliminates more errors. Additionally, with the optical scan system, if the voter does make an error by voting with an X, we should be able to determine their intent. With punch card, determining voter intent when a ballot was incorrectly inserted was nearly impossible (even if some people thought they could.)

I welcome a recount on this race. Our office will work over the coming weeks to assist both candidates as we seek to get a fair and accurate count of the votes.