The close election boogie
Votes are still being counted from the Nov. 4 election. Photo by Chelsea Schreiber
Among County Registrars of Voters, the joke is that each election eve they say a prayer. “Please, no close elections.”
Well, sorry Dean Logan, LA County Registrar, in the South Bay, we have two…and maybe a third.
In the race for State Assembly, the latest returns has shown a narrowing of the margin between Republican David Hadley and incumbent Democrat Al Muratsuchi to about 0.7 percent. In the race for a seat on the Beach Cities Health District, just 75 votes separate the second (Noel Chun) and third (Joanne Edgerton) candidates, well behind the leader Michelle Bholat. (Only two get elected.)
And on measure Q, the school bond measure on the Hermosa Beach ballot, the yes vote has crept closer to the required 55 percent. Now it is at 54.3 percent.
Close elections trigger two immediate responses. The first is an internal inquiry as to what a candidate might have done to get those extra votes. It is, often, an unanswerable question, but that doesn’t stop people from asking it.
The second is whether to ask for a recount. Recounts in California are not automatic, even if the ultimate differential is a single vote. In order for one to take place, the trailing candidate must pay the costs of the Registrar to perform that task. Thus, the supporters of the losing side must decide how to go about funding such an effort.
The problem was highlighted during the June primary when the race for the second spot in the top two primary system showed that, in the State Controller’s race, 487 votes separated Betty Yee, the ultimate November winner, and then Assembly Speaker John Perez. A recount would need to be statewide, a very expensive proposition, so Perez “cherry picked” districts for recounting that he thought might give him an edge, something he could do since he was paying. It didn’t work out that way and he gave up.
Now, each of the supporters of the trailing candidate or measure must make a financial decision. Is it worth it? For Joanne Edgerton, behind by 75 votes, perhaps it could make a difference. But, for Muratsuchi, the odds get longer and longer as the differential creeps closer, but, perhaps, not close enough.
The real question is whether candidates should have to make this decision anyway. Isn’t there enough of a margin of error in the way we count ballots, that a number can be found where the entity running the election would have to pay to assure voters that the count was correct?
That number exists. After every election, Registrars are required to pull out a certain number of precincts for recounting by hand to assure that something did not go wrong with the technology that performed the count. For example, was there some kind of software glitch that reported an incorrect number.
Over the years, an error factor must have been discovered. Probably, it is less than 1%, since, very often, that differential is zero. However, by going back over past reports, some level of concern can be found.
I would suggest that if a vote differential falls within that margin, the state should pay to recount. It is, after all, likely their mistake.