Timeline for Typically, are actual ballots required to be visible to election recount observers?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
12 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 17, 2020 at 9:20 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
Commonmark migration
|
|
| Dec 9, 2016 at 17:17 | comment | added | Bobson | @agc - Interesting. Depending on what actually happened, it may have been technically illegal, but I doubt anyone's going to prosecute. It could be grounds for invalidating that particular recount if someone wanted to argue it, though - what if an observer altered the ballot? | |
| Dec 8, 2016 at 6:36 | comment | added | agc | Re "even then they can't touch": Don, Iowa County reports "Observers were allowed to view the proceedings up close, handle the ballots and ask questions." | |
| Dec 6, 2016 at 6:24 | vote | accept | agc | ||
| Dec 6, 2016 at 6:00 | comment | added | Bobson | @agc - See the bold in the middle paragraph of the second quote. Everyone present who doesn't work for the board is an observer - some observers are candidates or work for them (and thus have more access) and others aren't. Presumably you can't just show up and say "I'm Stein's representative" without her (or her campaign) informing the board ahead of time that you're who you say you are. Party representatives have no special standing, only people directly associated with the candidate do. | |
| Dec 6, 2016 at 5:52 | comment | added | agc | @Bobson, it's unclear what the distinction between representative and observer is; i.e. under these WI laws is a Green Party Observer a representative of the Green Party? | |
| Dec 5, 2016 at 13:56 | history | edited | Bobson | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Clarify "examine" and summarize.
|
| Dec 5, 2016 at 13:53 | comment | added | Bobson | @Joël - Maybe I chose a bad word there - "examine" is not part of the law at all. To quote it again: "The board of canvassers must, however, allow the candidates and their representatives and/or legal counsel to view and identify the election materials." Nowhere does it say that observers other than candidates and their representatives have any right to view the ballots. I've edited my word choice. | |
| Dec 5, 2016 at 13:37 | comment | added | Joël | That's really not how I interpret the law, and I am sure a judge would agree with me. "Examine" doesn't mean "watch from as far away" as one tells you. It means that you can get as close as you want to have a good view of everything. If the Door County observer of the question was refused this, it is illegal and a complaint should be filled. The only justification for refusing an observer is when the surrounding of the counting table are already full of other observers, but this doesn't seem to be what happened based on the report, who says that all observers were kept apart. | |
| Dec 5, 2016 at 11:36 | comment | added | Bobson | @Joël - Basically, it goes back to the OP's question. If you're not a representative of a candidate, you don't have any explicit right to look at the ballots themselves. You just get to watch the process from as far away (or as close) as the designated area is. If you're able to see them, great; if not, too bad. | |
| Dec 5, 2016 at 4:50 | comment | added | Joël | Thanks for finding those laws. They seem to set a pretty reasonable set of rules in my opinion. But I don't follow your interpretation "independent observers [do not] get to examine the ballots.". It depends what you exactly mean by "examine", but it seems to me that according to the law you quote, any observers can examine them, by looking closely at them during all the recount process. Similarly, in a museum you can "examine" a painting as long as you want, but not touch it. | |
| Dec 4, 2016 at 19:04 | history | answered | Bobson | CC BY-SA 3.0 |