The recount in FL-13 is over, and Republican Vern Buchanan leads Democrat Christine Jennings by 369 votes. But it ain't over yet.
For those that haven't followed the race closely, the election in FL-13 can best be summed up by the phrase "the machine ate my vote." Or something like that.
An astounding 18,300 people in Sarasota County, or 13 percent of voters, did not cast a vote for the high-profile congressional race. When a voter does not vote in a particular race, that is called an "undervote." The undervote average in the remaining areas of FL-13? Less than five percent.
On Monday, the state will officially certify Buchanan as the winner, triggering the 10-day time period during which Jennings may challenge the results. If Jennings decides to go to court, she may argue that the only remedy is a new election. Is there precedent for a nullifying an election? Yes.
In 1998, the election for Miami mayor turned ugly when widespread fraud was committed in the collection of absentee ballots. After reviewing the evidence, a judge nullified the election results and called for a new election. A state appeals court reversed the decision days later, concluding that the proper remedy was not a new election, but the nullification of all votes case by absentee ballot. The court's decision not to call for a new election hinged on its view that "[u]nlike the right to vote, which is assured every citizen by the United States Constitution, the ability to vote by absentee ballot is a privilege."
Here, of course, in the FL-13 fiasco, those 18,000 voters or so who didn't vote in the congressional race weren't voting absentee; they were exercising their right to vote in the voting booth, on some seriously screwy machines. If Jennings does decide to go to court, will she be able to convince a court that a new election is the proper remedy? It's quite possible.
From a public policy perspective, it looks like calling for a new election may be the most fair thing to do. After all, an untold number of voters went to the polls, but for one reason or another, were unable to voice their intent in the congressional race. Rich Brooks writes in the Herald Tribune about his personal encounter with the undervote glitch:
Moving toward my booth, [my wife] said she was disappointed that she wasn't able to vote for either Christine Jennings or Vern Buchanan in the 13th Congressional District.
That race was not on the ballot, she said.
At the time, I thought it was odd that the biggest race of the season was not on the ballot. And when the race appeared on my ballot, I attributed the mix-up to my wife's Luddite tendencies.
"When I saw that race on the other ballot, I knew I screwed up," she said.
It wasn't until we read the newspaper the following day that we learned how many other voters also screwed up.
She felt somewhat vindicated learning that the undervote in Sarasota County reached a disproportionate 13 percent. Typically, undervotes -- those ballots in which a race is left blank -- in major races such as one for Congress are just 2 percent.
The Herald-Tribune conducted an unscientific mini-survey of about 300 voters, and this is what they found:
The vast majority of voters interviewed by the Herald-Tribune reported one of two major problems.
Either they couldn't find the District 13 race as they scrolled through their voting screens (about 36 percent) or their votes for either candidate did not initially register on the ballot summary page (more than 62 percent).
Although most of the callers say they voted for Jennings, about 18 percent of the voters who reported problems were Republican.
A new election is needed. The voters of Sarasota County--Republican and Democrat alike--deserve no less.