Jill Stein's unsuccessful effort to force a recount of Michigan's presidential election did reveal a serious problem in many precincts: a discrepancy between the number of voters who checked in and the number of ballots. The problem was greatest in Wayne County, where Detroit is located, but also occurred in other counties.
Voting machines in more than one-third of all Detroit precincts registered more votes than they should have during last month’s presidential election, according to Wayne County records prepared at the request of The Detroit News.
Detailed reports from the office of Wayne County Clerk Cathy Garrett show optical scanners at 248 of the city’s 662 precincts, or 37 percent, tabulated more ballots than the number of voters tallied by workers in the poll books. Voting irregularities in Detroit have spurred plans for an audit by Michigan Secretary of State Ruth Johnson’s office, Elections Director Chris Thomas said Monday. . . .
Overall, state records show 10.6 percent of the precincts in the 22 counties that began the retabulation process couldn’t be recounted because of state law that bars recounts for unbalanced precincts or ones with broken seals.
The problems were the worst in Detroit, where discrepancies meant officials couldn’t recount votes in 392 precincts, or nearly 60 percent. And two-thirds of those precincts had too many votes.
The Detroit Free Press concluded that the discrepancies were likely due to human or machine error, not fraud:
In 248 precincts, there were a total of 782 more votes tabulated by voting machines than the number of voters listed as picking up ballots in the precincts’ poll books. That makes up just three-tenths of 1% of the total 248,211 votes that were logged in Detroit for the presidential election. That number was far too small to swing the statewide election results, even in this year’s especially tight race that saw a Republican win Michigan for the first time since George Bush in 1988. . . .
The Free Press analysis found there were 248 precincts in Detroit where voting machines tabulated more Election Day votes than people who were counted as checking in to vote. The affected precincts represent 37% of the city's 662 precincts.
Most of those overages were by small amounts — on average about 3 votes — with the largest being 12 votes in a single precinct. Those small numbers, which add up to 782 total spread out across more than 200 precincts, tend to point to human or machine malfunction as the culprit, rather than widespread fraud.
In 158 precincts, the number of ballots tabulated by the optical-scanning voting machines was inexplicably less than the number of people who signed in to vote. At least 362 ballots were not counted in those precincts, even though the voters had been listed in poll books.
Whether due to fraud or human/machine error, these discrepancies show that Michigan has a serious problem of election administration that it needs to address, whether through better procedures, better training, better equipment, or all of the above. To their credit, Michigan's Secretary of State and local election officials are taking these problems seriously and seeking to identify the sources of the discrepancies and address them.
There have been a lot of moving parts with the presidential election recount requested by Green Party Jill Stein in Michigan. Here's an outline of recent events:
- Donald Trump won Michigan by 10,704 votes over Hillary Clinton. Green Party candidate Jill Stein received 51,463 votes out of 4,799,284 total votes cast in the state.
- Michigan certified the election results November 28, triggering a 48-hour deadline for requesting a recount, and Stein petitioned for a
recount on November 30. Trump objected to the recount on December 1, and the Michigan Board of Canvassers met to consider the objection on Friday, December 2.
- The Michigan Board of Canvassers voted 2-2 along party lines, which meant there was no action on the objection and the recount would go forward. Michigan has a two-business-day waiting period after a decision of the Board of Canvassers before a recount begins, which allows counties to prepare for the recount. Counties expected to begin the recount on Tuesday or Wednesday of this week.
- Recounts are conducted at the county level, by hand, and likely must be completed by Tuesday, Dec. 13, though the deadline under federal law may be later. County election officials began preparing as soon as Stein announced her plan for a recount and have scrambled to find space and personnel to conduct the recounts, and many counties are still struggling to find volunteers to recount ballots.
- After the Board of Canvassers' vote, Stein challenged the two-day waiting period in federal district court. The judge held a hearing on Sunday, December 4, and issued an order in the early hours of Monday morning, requiring that counties begin the recount at noon on Monday.
- Earlier today (Tuesday, December 6), a three-judge panel of the Michigan Court of Appeals held a hearing on Trump's suit to stop the recount, in which the Michigan Attorney General has intervened. Shortly after the hearing ended, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in an appeal of the district court order:
In a 2-1 ruling, the federal appeals court upheld an order from U.S. District Court Judge Mark Goldsmith, who ruled that delaying the recount could jeopardize the state’s ability to complete it by a Dec. 13 deadline.
But the panel also suggested that Goldsmith should reconsider his order if state courts ruled against Stein.
“If, subsequently, the Michigan courts determine that plaintiffs’ recount is improper under Michigan state law for any reason, we expect the district court to entertain any properly filed motions to dissolve or modify its order in this case,” said the 6th Circuit Court opinion.
A Michigan Court of Appeals panel has ordered the Board of State Canvassers to reconsider and reject a recount petition filed by Green Party candidate Jill Stein, ruling she did not meet the qualifications for the request because she has no chance at winning the presidential election.
The unanimous ruling, released late Tuesday, could delegitimize the statewide hand recount already underway in several Michigan counties, but the court did not explicitly order that process to stop. Separately, a federal appeals court on Tuesday upheld an order forcing the state to start the recount Monday.
The three-judge state panel ruled Stein does not meet the definition of an “aggrieved” party necessary for a proper recount petition.
So what happens now?:
Although a ruling on federal constitutional law takes precedence over a state court ruling, Schuette said his attorneys plan to aggressively argue to stop the recount at a hearing in the Michigan Court of Appeals today, because the issue at hand is one of state law, not federal law. If there are conflicting rulings from state and federal court, the case could ultimately end up in front of the U.S. Supreme Court, he said.
"Michigan law prevails," Schuette said. "You can't make up -- like the federal judge is attempting to do -- a constitutional right to a recount."
The attorney general said state law is clear that Stein can't ask for a recount because she only received just over 1% of the vote. Therefore, a recount can't overturn the result for Stein and she is not an "aggrieved" party under state law, Schuette said.
The Michigan Secretary of State is posting recount information here.
There has been a lot of news and misinformation surrounding Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein's efforts for a statewide recount in Pennsylvania. Here are the facts:
While it is unlikely that Stein will be successful in obtaining a statewide recount, some precincts in Pennsylvania will be recounting votes cast in those precincts. The news regarding the recount efforts is changing rapidly; stay tuned for more information.
As expected, today Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein officially petitioned for a recount of Michigan's presidential election results. The recount in Michigan will be conducted by hand at the county level, and local election officials are scrambling to acquire the space and personnel necessary, all at great expense to Michigan taxpayers:
Green Party candidate Jill Stein’s quest to recount Michigan’s 4.8 million ballots in an unprecedented autopsy of a presidential election could cost taxpayers more than $4 million.
Stein formally requested Wednesday a hand recount of the state’s presidential election, a labor-intensive undertaking that is expected to begin Friday morning and could result in marathon counting sessions until the Dec. 13 deadline.
Republican President-elect Donald Trump won by 10,704 votes over Democrat Hillary Clinton, getting 47.5 percent of the vote to the former secretary of state’s 47.27 percent. Stein received 51,463 votes or about 1.1 percent.
The Green Party nominee’s attorneys left a $973,250 check at the state Bureau of Elections to cover Stein’s legally required fees for seeking a recount of 6,300 precincts.
While the total cost of the recount is not yet known, it is estimated to be at least $3 million and as much as $12 million:
Secretary of State Ruth Johnson said Wednesday the recount cost could total $5 million, leaving the state and county governments on the hook for the remaining $4 million.
Michigan Republican Party Chairwoman Ronna Romney McDaniel blasted the request as a “reckless attempt to undermine the will” of Michigan’s voters. She noted Stein and her lawyer, Mark Brewer, have provided no evidence of vote fraud.
“Jill Stein made her 1 percent temper tantrum official and will waste millions of Michigan taxpayers’ dollars, and has acknowledged that the recount will not change anything regarding the presidential election,” McDaniel said.
Cost estimates for the recount have varied wildly between Johnson’s estimate of up to $3 million to Michigan GOP attorney Eric Doster’s estimate of $12 million, the cost of a full statewide election.
While recounts are useful and necessary tools for checking the accuracy of election results in close races, where no fraud or irregularities are suspected (as in North Carolina's gubernatorial race recount where irregularities have been found or are suspected in several counties), they can be misused as a political and publicity tool at the expense of taxpayers' funds and local election officials' time. Such misuse is, unfortunately, the case with the Michigan recount.
RNLA officially called upon the Clinton campaign to condemn plans by the Green Party to hold recounts of the presidential election results in several states:
The Republican National Lawyers Association (RNLA) calls upon the campaign
of Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton to stand down and condemn the recount effort in
Wisconsin and possibly other states. We are extremely disappointed by the change of heart of
Secretary Clinton in deciding to participate. This is an unprecedented effort to divide our country.
RNLA President Larry Levy said: “The alleged concerns that the recount is to ensure every vote is
properly counted is ludicrous. If that were true, why aren’t they seeking recounts in every state or at
least include New Hampshire where Secretary Clinton won by a scant 2,736 votes or other states
with narrow Democrat wins? This effort diverts attention from the critical work of President-elect
Trump and his team to form a new Administration and to be prepared to lead America forward on day
one.”
The recount is pointless, a waste of resources, a squandering of taxpayer funds, and flies in the face
of the long tradition of accepting results. Do not take our word for it. Look at the past statements of
Secretary Clinton and her lawyer. Further, RNLA agrees with the Obama Administration in its
opposition to the recount.
1. Previously, Secretary Hillary Clinton called the very thought of not accepting the election results
“horrifying.” . . . 2. To be clear, there is no doubt about the election results. This is why the Clinton campaign decided
previously not to pursue the recount. . . . 3. The Obama Administration also agrees that there is no basis for a recount . . . .
Whatever the fundraising and publicity goals of the Green Party are, Secretary Clinton and her campaign should not approve them. As her running mate Sen. Kaine said the day after the election, "Nobody — nobody had to wonder about Hillary Clinton, whether she would accept an outcome of an election in our beautiful democracy."
The current recounts of the presidential election requested or planned by Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party are not about ensuring the integrity of the election outcomes:
RNLA President Larry Levy said: “The cynical and false narrative being pushed by Jill Stein and the
Green Party that they are trying to ensure all votes were properly counted is nothing more than an
effort to undermine our democracy and proud history of peaceful administration change through
contested elections. Ms. Stein doesn’t concern herself with any contests won by Secretary Clinton,
including the razor thin margin she enjoyed in New Hampshire, rather she is attempting to disrupt the
Electoral College vote for Donald J. Trump in an un-American and vulgar attempt to delegitimize the
next President chosen by the American people. And Secretary Clinton’s support for this effort is a
disgrace that exposes the hypocrisy she practices.
“We cannot and will not stand silent in the face of this malicious effort to undermine our democracy.
Join the Republican National Lawyers Association and all people of good will in fighting this insidious
attack and show the world that democratic elections still count in America.”
RNLA Board of Governors Member John Ryder further explained: “A recount does not shift more than
a few hundred votes unless there are allegations of irregularities or vote fraud. There are no such
allegations in this case.”
Dr. Stein has said in multiple interviews that she is not attempting to change the outcome of the election through her recount requests. But she, with the support of Hillary Clinton, is putting states and election officials through an expensive process in a fool's errand to accomplish a victory through the press that liberals could not accomplish at the polls.
