Alaska Lt. Governor Craig Campbell contended today that Republican Joe Miller’s campaign has changed its tune when it comes to pushing a “literal interpretation” of the write-in ballot count laws in the contentious Alaska Senate race.
Miller’s campaign filed a lawsuit yesterday, arguing that the state should not count misspelled write-in ballots as votes for write-in candidate Lisa Murkowski, since the law stipulates that write-in votes may only be counted “if the name, as it appears on the write-in declaration of candidacy, of the candidate or the last name of the candidate is written in the space provided.”
In a press conference this afternoon, Campbell argued that the Miller campaign had previously objected to such a “literal interpretation” of the law, back when Campbell initially announced that write-in votes cast for Miller would be tossed since he is not a declared write-in candidate. At the time, Miller accused Campbell of “bias” when he refused to count those votes, and Campbell quickly decided to count them.
Campbell said today that he decided to count those votes because he wanted as many votes as possible to be included if “voter intent” could be determined. The Miller campaign argued at the time that the law required those votes to be counted.
Campbell told reporters today that the state has given itself a November 29 deadline to decide the election, which accounts for extra time for potential recounts and legal challenges. “We expect to have a recount,” he said. “We expect that it may go to court.”
He explained that though there is no specific standard for the write-in ballots, they are allowing “minor misspellings” as long as “voter intent” can still be determined. “If it is so badly misspelled that it cannot be recognized, it will be not be counted.” He added that each ballot is overseen by two election officials, as well as a representative from each of the campaigns.
“The intent is to not disenfranchise voters,” Campbell said, adding that previous court cases have given the state “latitude” to look at voter intent “so as not to disenfranchise.” One reporter pointed out that the cited court cases focused on how much the oval on the ballot was filled-in, not how the name was spelled. Campbell contended that the two cases were comparable.
But, interestingly, he also noted that ballots with a name written in the write-in slot would not be counted if the oval was not filled in, even if the name is spelled correctly. “The oval part was determined to be a very clear indication that you intended to vote for that person,” he said, adding that the law is clear that the oval must be filled in.
The law says: “In order to vote for a write-in candidate, the voter must write in the candidate’s name in the space provided and fill in the oval opposite the candidate’s name.”
Campbell also said that a judge will hear from both sides in a hearing today.
Enough write-in ballots were cast to force a count to see how many were for Murkowski. Miller currently has about 11,000 fewer votes than the write-ins.
