One of the challenges facing officials overseeing Election 2000 concerns how to determine the "voter's intent." The punch card used in many of the Florida precincts results in numerous ambiguous records. Doug Lewis, director, The Election Center, notes that "Anything you cannot determine, you set aside. If the contest is still one where you cannot decide who wins, then you put that group of ballots in front of a judge and let the judge decide" (CNN Interview, Nov. 17, 2000)

There is a long history of judicial action in this area. In a dramatic case from South Dakota, one judge examined two disputed ballots under a 40x microscope. That county-level race came down to a single bit of bulging or pregnant chad.

Judges look closely for the voter's intent. In that 1993 South Dakota Supreme Court decision, the court stated that "...a vote shall be counted if the voter's intent is sufficiently plain" (see Illustration A at right)

The most recent example, a 1996 democratic primary in Massachusetts, the state's seven member Supreme Judicial Court poured over 956 disputed ballots, and declared a winner by counting ballots that were only dimpled.

The Court stated that the cardinal rule in such a situation is that "if the intent of the voter can be determined with reasonable certainty from an inspection of the ballot ... effect must be given to that intent and the vote counted..." (see Illustration B at right). The Court add that "...a voter who failed to push out a chad completely could have done a better job of expressing his or her intent. (But) such a voter should not automatically be disqualified."

A 1990 case in Illinois hinged on 30 partially punctured punch card ballots. It was a Republican primary race to determine a nominee for state representative. The Supreme Court of Illinois looked at the disputed ballots and counted them. The Court ruled that, "Nothing in our Election Code... requires voters to completely dislodge the chad from the ballot before their vote will be counted" (see Illustration C at right).

There have been other examples where judges have ruled that the intent of the voter must be considered. A 1987 case in Alaska resulted in a judicial ruling that allowed votes to be counted in cases where the punch card was marked with a pen. A court in a 1981 case in Indiana counted "hanging chads" (see Illustration D at right).

The sage judges in the 1996 Illinois decision left us with an important thought on this matter. They ended their ruling by stating, "the voters are the owners of the government."

Butterfly Ballots and Bifocals

Actual Palm Beach Florida Ballot

back

© Copyright 2000 Infoimagination