Is Joe Miller Trying to Disenfranchise Alaskans?
A challenged ballot is shown Thursday, Nov. 11, 2010, in Juneau, Alaska. U.S. Sen. Lisa Murkowski's campaign on Thursday accused observers for rival Joe Miller of making petty challenges in the counting of voters' write-in ballots in an attempt to tilt the Alaska Senate race in their favor.
/ APJoe Miller, the Tea Party-backed Republican nominee for Alaska Senate, may be on the cusp of losing the Senate race to Sen. Lisa Murkowski, who ran as a write-in candidate after losing the GOP primary to Miller.
There were more write-in votes than there were votes for Miller, and the vast majority of those ballots seem to have been cast for Murkowski. Miller chosen to address this by challenging votes that appear to have been for Murkowski even when there is only the smallest of justifications for doing so.
Consider: According to the Associated Press, an observer for Miller today challenged a vote that seemed to be for Murkowski because even though her name was spelled and printed correctly, the "L" in Lisa was written in cursive. (Or just have a look at the challenged ballot pictured above.)
Other challenges have been for sloppy handwriting or tiny misspellings - "Lisa Merkowski," for example. While it would seem to be obvious that a write-in for "Lisa Merkowski" is a vote for Murkowski, Miller doesn't want it counted.
Alaska officials have said they will take into account voter intent when considering the ballots - which presumably means that the "Merkowski" vote would go to Murkowski. But Miller's legal team argues that state law does not allow such an interpretation: If the name on a write-in ballot does not exactly match the name of the candidate, they say, it doesn't count.
The legal question will be settled next week, when Miller's legal challenge to the state's position will be heard in court. (Miller already filed suit to stop the count altogether, but a judge turned him down.) If Miller's camp can successfully challenge enough ballots to overcome Murkowski's apparent lead - and the courts decide that their interpretation of the law is correct - he will become a senator.
The issue isn't just a legal one, however. Should Miller triumph by disqualifying a large number of ballots despite clear voter intent, he will have essentially have "won" an election in which he was not the candidate for whom Alaskans tried to cast the most votes.
Alaska officials say they want to count votes for Murkowski that are less than perfect because it means not disenfranchising Alaskans simply for sloppiness or spelling errors. For Miller, however, what the voters meant appears to be less of a concern than finding a way to Washington.
Popular in Politics
- Michelle Obama decries "slander" that educated blacks are "trying to act white" Play Video
- Adviser on White House scandals: "Partisan fishing expeditions" won't distract Obama 172 Comments
- Benghazi-disciplined diplomat a prolific poet
- Romney condemns "breach of trust" in Washington
- Obama: Racism is no excuse for not excelling Play Video
- Republicans continue beating Benghazi drum 111 Comments
- Officials on Benghazi: "We made mistakes, but without malice"
- Obama to discuss legality of drone program
Does the rule of law have any meaning in Alaska???
They set forth the requirements for write-in votes before the election, and write-in vote requirements are spelled out very explicitly in Alaska State Law, and they even went to the Supreme Court to allow a printed list of write-in candidates to be provided to voters... and now they want to disregard those laws and requirements because it favors the anointed one. How is that fair or just?
The law says:
---
(11) A vote for a write-in candidate ... shall be counted if the oval is filled in for that candidate and if the name, >>>as it appears on the write-in declaration of candidacy<<<, of the candidate or >>>the last name of the candidate<<< is written in the space provided.
(12)(b) The rules set out in this section are mandatory and there are no exceptions to them. A ballot may not be counted unless marked in compliance with these rules.
---
Can it be any more clear?
Is her last name Merkowski? Murcowski? Merkowsky? NO! And a write-in votes for any of those names DOES NOT COUNT as a vote for Lisa Murkowski under the unambiguous terms of Alaskan law. "NO EXCEPTIONS!"
If folks don't like that fact, they should call on the Alaskan legislature to change the law, instead of trying to twist, or simply disregard, the law in order to unfairly win an election.
The title should be Is Lisa Murkowski trying to disenfranchise voters. Affidavits of Voter Intimidation and Fraud concerning the Murkowski Team are either on file or soon to be filed. http://*****/gXiZv
A story so big, even CBS won't be able to ignore it. How's your team doing running down that story or are you just a shill for Murkowski?
As for the Recount, no ballot is valid unless Murkowski's name is spelled correctly and the oval is filled in...either they got it right or they didn't...Hence the reason Murkowski went to such great lengths to ensure voters spelled her name correctly. To include invalid ballots would disenfranchise voters who followed the law, n'est pas?
Maybe you'd prefer Democrat tactics of stationing armed militants in front of the polls.
http://www.consortiumnews.com/2001/111201a.html