Is it important to know the final vote count (tally) of an election very soon after Election day?

Question

I realize that political parties and their candidates would like to know what the vote count is as soon as possible after the polls close. But I'm also aware that vote count is not finalized for at least 10 days after the polls close (when the final deadline for Overseas ballots occurs). Furthermore, in close races, the vote count may not be finalized until recounts are finished.

Is there some other reason that, beside candidate's curiosity and anxiety , that vote counts have to be finalized prior to 10 days post election.

Answer 1

No, there is no particular reason that election results need to be presented quickly. There are legal deadlines that prevent election results from being excessively delayed — for instance, electors have a bit over a month to cast their votes in a presidential election — but that is hardly 'quick' by modern standards. In the 19th century, the general populace might not have known the results of a national election until December or January; slow communication methods presented any faster dissemination. This is part of the reason that the new president isn't sworn in until January (originally March); this gave the population time to learn of the results and prepare for the inauguration.

Modern US citizens tend to have shorter attention spans and to demand immediate gratification — functions of our mass-media-driven world — and Trump is currently working on those anxieties to produce fear and confusion (a typical part of his political strategy). But in the end, the election process will carry on at its own, slow, inexorably bureaucratic pace, and we'll be forced to wait and see.

Answer 2

Not really. This is especially true with vote-by-mail. According to Nate Silver, we could have an election week instead of an election day because of the mail-in ballots and taking time to count. I think that they will try to hurry it to maintain public confidence.

However, results need to be delivered by the time the Electoral College meets.

Answer 3

It is important (almost mandatory) that the election result is known by the time at which the constitution requires the newly elected body to constitute itself. In the US case, the President is sworn on the 20th January and the new congress constitutes itself on the 3rd of January according to the 20th Amendment so by these days the result should really be known. In the case of the presidential vote, the date the electors meet in the states (mid-December) might actually be the more important legal deadline.

Other states or their sub-levels may have different constitutional or legal requirements. For example, Bavarian communal elections must happen in March and any runoff elections must happen exactly 14 days after the first election – which immediately implies that the vote tally for the offices of mayor and Landrat must be known soon enough that the runoff can be held after 14 days. Furthermore, town and regional councils must constitute themselves in May so those tallies must also be known by that date. (Incidentally in the 2020 local election one result was only finalised days before the council first met – which was important because the composition of said council depended on a couple of disputed votes. Ultimately, the recount tipped the tally in favour of the person who had not been elected according to the provisional numbers.)

None of these legal dates are exceptionally close to the actual voting date though; I believe the 14 days span between first and runoff elections is close to the tightest it can get. Thus, there is no requirement for the vote count to be known ‘very soon’ (within a day or two). In fact, look no further than to the 2000 US presidential election which hinged on the result of Florida which in turn wasn’t decided until 12th December. (The results of the other 49 states and DC gave neither candidate a majority without Florida.)

Answer 4

Shorter vote counting times can lead to shorter lame duck periods (over time).

Until 1937, inauguration day in the US was in March, about 4 months after the election. This allowed time for votes to be tabulated and reported, which took more time given the technological limitations of the day. One downside to this was the lengthy lame duck period between the election and inauguration, creating the potential for ineffectual or erratic leadership. Over time, as vote counting became speedier (among other things), this lengthy lame duck session became unnecessary, resulting in the 20th amendment, which moved inauguration day to January. In this case, improvements in vote counting times contributed to a real change in how political power is wielded between an election and inauguration.

The upper limit of vote counting times is naturally the lower limit of the lame duck period - you shouldn't schedule an inauguration day any earlier than you're certain to have the final count. If votes could reliably be tabulated on election day itself, it would be possible to move inauguration day to the very next day, eliminating lame duck tenures entirely. I'm not suggesting this would be a worthwhile or desirable endeavor, but reducing lame duck sessions is a reasonable goal of tabulating votes in a timely manner, which extends beyond simple curiosity or anxiety about the result. How much one might want to reduce the lame duck period is another matter for debate (4 months to 2 months seems reasonable to me, 2 months to 1 day perhaps not).

For any scheduled election/inauguration, however, there is no real benefit to tabulating votes immediately or the day before inauguration - so long as the tally is ready in time, it doesn't matter if it's early. For the upcoming election, finalizing the vote count earlier than 10 days post-election would have no immediate benefit.