Why Recounts Don't Always Change the Winner

When it comes to close elections, the idea of recounts has emerged as a fashionable topic of debate. Recounts are a critical part of the electoral process, where previously counted votes are re-counted to ensure accuracy. However, it is a common misconception that recounts can change the election outcome, especially when margins are slim. This article aims to clarify why and how recounts work, and why they don't always lead to a different winner.

Understanding the Function of Recounts

Recounts are just that: A re-tallying of existing votes. They serve as a final, detailed verification step to ensure that the original count is accurate. Most of the time, the margin of victory remains unchanged. This is because the goal of a recount is not to change the result, but to create confidence in the final tally.

Why Recounts May Not Change Outcomes

1. Margins of Victory: In close elections, the margin of victory can be very narrow. Recounts focus on these extremely close votes. Detailed scrutiny of individual ballots or handwriting analysis can only add or subtract a few votes, which may not be enough to change the overall result.

2. Discrepancies in Mail-in Voting: The rise of mail-in voting presents new challenges, including potential discrepancies such as invalid signatures or unclear addresses. While these issues may seem significant, their impact on the outcome is often negligible. In many cases, the total number of disputed votes far outweighs the potential margin of victory in a close election. The presence of dead people on the voter rolls is another concern, but judicial rulings have typically upheld the validity of votes from deceased individuals.

Legal and Ethical Considerations

3. Legal Framework and Merits: When a recount request is made, it is a legal process determined by the relevant election laws and regulations. Judges often dismiss such requests if they are deemed baseless or frivolous. The merit of a recount must be scrutinized based on evident and clear evidence of inaccuracies or fraud, rather than vague concerns. In cases involving mail-in ballots, judges generally do not find grounds for excuses based on procedural errors, such as issues with signatures or the sending of ballots.

Conclusion

In summary, recounts serve an essential function in elections by verifying the accuracy of the initial vote count. However, it is crucial to understand that their primary aim is not to change the winner but to ensure confidence in the results. A narrow margin of victory means that recount outcomes are often similar to the initial counts. While mail-in voting presents new challenges, legal and ethical considerations ensure that these challenges do not significantly alter election outcomes.

References

1. Census.gov: Deceased Voters in Mailing Lists Explained 2. VoteSmart: 2020 Election Mail-in Voting 3. Supreme Court Decision on Mail-in Ballots