The recount is officially ON in Wisconsin. Two separate petitions were filed, although neither by Trump or Clinton. Jill Stein and an Independent Candidate, Roque De La Fuente, both filed requests.
Here is Rocky’s filing which details why he strongly believes we need a recount.
He states the following:
“The relevant facts fall into two categories:
Evidence of suspicious anomalies and unexpected results in the unaudited computer output that have been certified by Wisconsin’s county boards of canvass as final election results, which are consistent with outcome-altering fraud or error; and
Known ongoing defects and vulnerability of Wisconsin’s election technology and its management, which creates the probability of undetected errors or fraud in the results certified by Wisconsin’s county boards of canvass.
Therefore, certifying the results of this election before verification would be highly irresponsible and contrary to one of our most basic freedoms: the right to self-government through elections. We cannot tolerate a system in which computer hackers or glitches are free, undetected to substitute their will for the will of the people. Because Wisconsin law contains no requirements that election officials verify accuracy except at the initiative of the candidates themselves, through 9.01, Wis. Stats, this petition must be granted, or Wisconsin’s results in this election will forever be in question, with no basis for public confidence in the election results.”
Earlier today the Wisconsin Elections Commission release the following statement:
“MADISON, WI – The Wisconsin Elections Commission today received two recount petitions from the Jill Stein for President Campaign and from Rocky Roque De La Fuente, Administrator Michael Haas announced.
“The Commission is preparing to move forward with a statewide recount of votes for President of the United States, as requested by these candidates,” Haas said.
“We have assembled an internal team to direct the recount, we have been in close consultation with our county clerk partners, and have arranged for legal representation by the Wisconsin Department of Justice,” Haas said. “We plan to hold a teleconference meeting for county clerks next week and anticipate the recount will begin late in the week after the Stein campaign has paid the recount fee, which we are still calculating.”
The last statewide recount was of the Supreme Court election in 2011. At that time, the Associated Press surveyed county clerks and reported that costs to the counties exceeded $520,000, though several counties did not respond to the AP’s survey. That election had 1.5 million votes, and Haas said the Commission expects the costs to be higher for an election with 2.975 million votes. “The Commission is in the process of obtaining cost estimates from county clerks so that we can calculate the fee which the campaigns will need to pay before the recount can start,” Haas said. The Commission will need to determine how the recount costs will be assessed to the campaigns.
The state is working under a federal deadline of December 13 to complete the recount. As a result, county boards of canvassers may need to work evenings and weekends to meet the deadlines. “The recount process is very detail-oriented, and this deadline will certainly challenge some counties to finish on time,” Haas said.
A recount is different than an audit and is more rigorous, Haas explained. More than 100 reporting units across the state were randomly selected for a separate audit of their voting equipment as required by state law, and that process has already begun. Electronic voting equipment audits determine whether all properly-marked ballots are accurately tabulated by the equipment. In a recount, all ballots (including those that were originally hand counted) are examined to determine voter intent before being retabulated. In addition, the county boards of canvassers will examine other documents, including poll lists, written absentee applications, rejected absentee ballots, and provisional ballots before counting the votes.
Haas noted that the Commission’s role is to order the recount, to provide legal guidance to the counties during the recount, and to certify the results. If the candidates disagree with the results of the recount, the law gives them the right to appeal in circuit court within five business days after the recount is completed. The circuit court is where issues are resolved that may be discovered during the recount but are not resolved to the satisfaction of the candidates.
“Wisconsin has the most decentralized election system in the United States,” Haas said. “The system has strong local control coupled with state oversight, resting on the partnership between the Wisconsin Elections Commission, the 72 county clerks, and the 1,854 municipal clerks. State law clearly gives each county’s Board of Canvassers the primary authority to conduct the recount, and to decide which ballots should and should not be counted. Recounting votes is an open, transparent process in which each of the candidates may have representatives present to raise objections, and where the public may be present to observe.”
Just a reminder, a recount is different than an audit. An audit selects a random amount (usually around 5%) to check for discrepancies. A recount is a FULL recount. This is significantly more time consuming and expensive.
Let’s see if any other states follow suit.
Posted on November 26, 2016 by Sarah P