The Unsettled Drama of Mail Ballots in the Pennsylvania Election
The legal landscape of ballot counting in Pennsylvania continues to seesaw. Recently, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court reiterated that undated or misdated mail ballots cannot be counted in the election, a decision that could scupper Democratic U.S. Sen. Bob Casey’s hopes of a recount and litigation to combat a sizeable voter deficit.
Casey’s challenge to the ruling
Sen. Bob Casey, determined to challenge the outcome of the initial vote, had wagered on overcoming his just over 17,000-vote deficit to Republican David McCormick via a recount. However, this recent ruling tapped into motions by officials from Democratic-controlled counties to include supposedly forbidden ballots, undermining Casey’s hopes and potentially confirming a Republican victory.
Why are undated mail ballots controversial?
Despite the valid controversy surrounding the need to write a date on mail ballots, it’s important to note that these dates are not employed to determine whether ballots are legitimate. Instead, administrators simply count the ballots received between the distribution duration and Election Day. This process system makes it impossible for any vote to be counted outside of that timeline, regardless of what date a voter chooses to annotate on the ballot.
The Republican standpoint
Republicans insist on the exclusion of these votes due to a state law that requires voters to date their mail ballots. This inflexible interpretation of the law resembles a tightrope of legitimacy, with the fate of each vote hanging on a thin line.
The Democrats’ viewpoint
Democrats, on the other hand, argue that to dismiss mail ballots without a written date is to compromise the right to vote, as protected by the state constitution.
The unanswered question
This raise an unanswered query: does the dismissal of undated ballots, what Democrats describe as a simple technicality, truly infringe upon voters’ rights according to the state constitution? The court has yet to tip the scales on this pertinent question.
Legal skirmishes over provisional ballots
Moving beyond the undated mail ballots issue, another legal contention rises in the form of provisionary ballots. This argument sees both Casey and McCormick wrangling over the legitimacy and, indeed, the existence of such votes across several counties.
What are provisional ballots?
A provisional ballot is essentially a fail-safe mode of voting; a solution for voters who face complications verifying their eligibility at the precincts where they cast their vote. This provides a safety net for those who may have registered at the deadline and whose names have not yet appeared in the state’s database. It is these ballots that are now being questioned.
Provisional ballots – Democrat and Republican views
The Democrats argue that genuine ballots risk being disqualified due to errors made by poll workers. The Republicans, on the other hand, argue for a narrow, letter-of-the-law interpretation of election rules, alleging that ballots with defects must be excluded, regardless of the origin of these shortcomings.
Concluding thoughts
As this fight over ballots plays out in the courts, its implications resonate in polling stations and households alike. It is imperative that the law and its interpretation ensure that the electoral process remains free, equitable, and trustworthy.
Originally Post From https://www.inquirer.com/politics/philadelphia/pennsylvania-supreme-court-undated-mail-ballots-senate-recount-20241118.html
