Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger’s office refused to provide training on the SEB’s rule until a court decides the matter after unsuccessfully trying to stop the Georgia State Election Board ( SEB ) from ensuring precincts match physical ballot counts with machine counts.
According to a report obtained by The Federalist, Blake Evans, the secretary of state’s office’s election producer, gave advice to county election officials saying the state would not care offering “additional training… until any court decisions are made.”
The State Election Board ( SEB ) held a meeting on September 20 and 23 and our office is continuing to review recent rule changes that are not yet in effect. SEB Rule 183-1-12- may be altered by one of those modifications. 12 ( a ) ( 5 ) to require hand counting of paper ballots after polls close on election night”, the guidance states.
As you may be conscious, trials have been scheduled in these cases for this week as a result of pending court difficulties to the legality of these rules, according to the advice. The Attorney General’s office stated in a memo to the SEB that the proposed rule amendment was” not tied to any statute ] and is therefore possible the exact type of illegal legislation that agencies never do.”
The SOS Elections Division wo n’t provide additional training on SEB rules until after any court decisions are made because the SEB rules are involved in litigation and because poll workers training has already begun in many counties and there is only a short window of time for additional training.
In September, the SEB was sued by the Democratic National Committee and the Democrat Party of Georgia for approving Rule 183-1-12-. 12 ( a ) ( 5 ). After the “paper ballots from each poll box” are removed, the “poll director and two witnesses” shall record the date and time that the ballot box was emptied and present to three sworn downtown surveys officers to freely count the number of ballots that have been divided into stacks of 50, counting until each of the three surveys officers has completed each vote count, beginning with the process where all of the ballots have been divided.
The poll manager shall immediately determine the cause of the inconsistency, fix the inconsistency, if possible, and fully document the inconsistency or problem along with any corrective measures taken if the three poll officers discover that” the numbers recorded on the precinct poll pads, ballot marking devices]BMDs ] do not reconcile with the hand count ballot totals.”
It’s a procedure known as healing.
The DNC and the Democrat Party of Georgia’s fit argued, among other things, that the SEB lacks the authority to implement for shift.
However, a healing procedure is already in place that states how each election” director… may examine the register figure with the certificates returned by the poll officers showing the number of people who voted in each corridor or the number of ballots cast.”
Janelle King, a SEB member, explained at a recent SEB meeting that several counties already use hand counting to abide by state reconciliation laws, and that approving the new rule would merely provide uniform guidance across the state, which she claims is “part of” the SEB’s role.
” I just want to point out that according to our Georgia code, the role of the]SEB], part of our role, is to ‘ promulgate rules and regulations to define uniform and nondiscriminatory standards,'” King , said, purportedly reading from the state election , code. ” Having some counties counting manually and some counties not, does not establish uniformity,” as we have stated before. We do have the authority to do that, and this rule will do that.
Additionally, the DNC and the Democrat Party of Georgia claimed that the SEB acted too close to an election.
This assertion is comparable to Charlene McGowan, the secretary of state’s general counsel. According to 11 Alive, McGowan wrote a letter to SEB members in which they claimed the rule changes were being made too close to Election Day. The state’s attorney general also sent a letter to SEB members arguing that the “proposed rules are not tethered to any statute — and are, therefore, likely the precise type of impermissible legislation, that agencies cannot do”, according to 11 Alive.
Despite the challenges, King said in a statement to The Federalist,” Fortunately, some election offices have already started their training and are fully prepared to move forward”.
” I do n’t understand why there are complaints about the rule change being too close to the election while also putting off training,” King said. ” This seems more adversarial than solution-focused”.
For more election news and updates, visit , electionbriefing.com.
Brianna Lyman is a correspondent for The Federalist on elections. With a degree in international political economy, Brianna received her degree from Fordham University. Her work has been featured on Newsmax, Fox News, Fox Business and RealClearPolitics. Follow Brianna on X: @briannalyman2
