Disputed races spark scrutiny of elections

Two disputed contests on Election Day in North Carolina had all the flavor of the 2000 presidential race, featuring everything except the hanging chads.

Now, with one of the races only recently decided and the other still up in the air, the partisan nature of the State Board of Elections and North Carolina’s mechanisms for deciding close races have come under fire.

Democrats hold a 3-2 edge over Republicans on the Board of Elections, which many say has led to partisan decision-making. And the prolonged legal wrangling has legislators calling for reforms to the system.

“We ought to be able to see a clear winner,” said N.C. Rep. Doug Vinson, R-Mecklenburg. “It’s not fair to the voters or candidates.”

The race for the commissioner of agriculture ended Feb. 4, three months after the votes were tabulated when Democrat Britt Cobb conceded to Republican Steve Troxler. Only then was Troxler able to perch himself upon a tractor last Tuesday to take the reins of the agriculture department.

The delays in the race began when electronic voting machines in coastal Carteret County lost 4,438 ballots. The state does not have a means to produce paper trails when electronic votes are lost.

The N.C. State Board of Elections was set to rule on the case again before Cobb conceded. The board had previously ordered another statewide election, but a judge overturned the ruling, deeming it too costly.

Troxler attempted to have residents in Carteret County sign sworn affidavits affirming their votes for him. But Cobb decided to forgo his appeals to prevent those affidavits from being used and setting what he said would be a dangerous precedent.

“I firmly believe that affidavits should not be in the electoral process,” he said. “The problem needs to be addressed and solved.”

Cobb criticized the partisan Board of Elections for not deciding the race sooner and for dragging it out for three months.

“The partisanship got into it,” he said. “The two Republicans would not vote to do what the law says.”

But the nature of politics cannot be ignored in these cases, said Jack Fleer, professor of political science at Wake Forest University. Partisanship can be minimized but not removed.

“Each side favored different endings. That’s what politics is about. They might lose some credibility.”

Schorr Johnson, spokesman for the N.C. Democratic Party, said the board was faced with a thankless task in trying to decide the race’s outcome.

“It’s not the board as much as it was an unfair election,” he said. “There are problems with electronic voting.”

Education stalemate

The race for state superintendent has bounced between various courts and the Board of Elections to no avail. In dispute is the validity of 11,310 provisional ballots that were cast in the wrong precincts, which is against state law.

The state Supreme Court on Feb. 4 ruled that those voters were allowed to vote improperly and sent the case back to a Wake County judge to determine how to fix the vote total.

Republican Bill Fletcher trails Democrat June Atkinson by about 8,500 votes out of about 3 million cast. If, after the disputed ballots are thrown out, Atkinson’s lead shrinks to less than 4,438 —the number of ballots lost in Carteret County — a new statewide election might be necessary.

Democrats have grumbled that the Supreme Court justices who ruled on the case, all Republicans, were playing partisan politics. But their ruling states that it is imperative that the court follow state law and not party lines.

“The overriding issue that has been thrust upon this court in the present case, and the concern of this court, is not the ultimate outcome of the two elections involved,” stated a ruling by Republican Justice George Wainwright.

“Rather, the sole issue and concern for this court in this matter is whether these two elections were conducted in accord with the will of the people of North Carolina, as expressed by them in their constitution and in their statutes as enacted by their representatives.”

Democratic legislators — led by Sen. Dan Clodfelter of Mecklenburg County and their Senate leader, Tony Rand — have filed a bill opposing the court’s ruling.

The proposal would set up a procedure to decide disputed contests and would make the law retroactive to 2004 to include the superintendent’s race.

The complexities of state law are to blame for the delay in the race as much as partisan politics, Fleer said.

“There should be some efforts to try to clarify the situation. There were two reasonable interpretations of the law and the (state) constitution.”

Fleer added that the court would be justified in dismissing the votes because that is what the law dictates.

“With a mobile society, people should know where to vote,” he said. “The law has to be followed.”

But the latest twist in the disputed race is undemocratic to one pundit.

Ferrel Guillory, director of UNC’s Program on Southern Politics, Media and Public Life, said throwing away ballots should outrage voters.

“I find it a very distressing development,” he said. “This ought to concern people.”

Guillory said the court had to follow the written law. But the N.C. General Assembly’s clear intent was to make sure all North Carolinians’ votes were counted when using provisional ballots, he said.

The N.C. Republican Party applauded the court’s ruling.

“The state’s highest court has met its responsibility to say what the law is, and North Carolina’s law does not permit out-of-precinct provisional ballots to be counted,” stated Ferrell Blount, party chairman, in a press release.

Johnson, for his part, said that people voted in good faith at the direction of election officials and that the votes should count.

“They were told it’s OK to vote,” he said.

“There is nothing underhanded going on here. It is a dark day for democracy in North Carolina.”

Contact the State & National Editor at stntdesk@unc.edu.