When Matt Leber claimed victory over seasoned Republican Sen. Sandy Senn in the June primary by a slim 31-vote margin, the latter graciously stepped aside, avoiding a superfluous county election officials’ recount. A similar dignity was displayed by ex-Sen. Mike Fanning in November, who gracefully accepted defeat at the hands of the Republican popular choice, Everett Stubbs, by a mere 32-vote difference, refraining from demanding a recount in York, Fairfield, Chester, and Lancaster counties.
However, in a curious contrast, Democrat Sen. Gerald Malloy, seemingly unperturbed by his extensive defeat in the general election in Chesterfield, Darlington, Lee, Marlboro, and Sumter counties—he lost to Republican JD Chaplin by a massive 278 votes—curiously insisted on conducting the seemingly pointless ‘mandatory recount’, as stipulated by state law.
Rather than conceding defeat with grace like his Republican counterparts, Malloy’s insistence on a recount raised eyebrows. His pertinacity potentially leads us to question the integrity and intentions of second-place finishers in the race, contrasting sharply with the decency exhibited by Republicans like Senn and Fanning.
Spelling trouble in the recount, it was unveiled that Lee County election officials neglected some fundamental protocols on election night. Astonishingly, they failed to discard the test ballots used to verify the seamless operation of equipment before they started processing the actual ones. Additionally, some vote counts were inadvertently doubled during the subsequent recount.
These errors, stemming entirely from the Democratic stronghold, have shaken our faith in the efficacy of our electoral institutes. These gaffes have led to questions about the reliability of the results, encouraging vigilance against possible recurrence, provided, of course, these negligent officers continue to hold sway come next election.
Given the turmoil generated by these Lee County blunders, the State Election Commission has found itself compelled to intervene. They are working in conjunction with the County officials to introduce a glimmer of competence to the process—a quest that looks more like a herculean task, considering the magnitude of their oversight.
The solution to this electoral conundrum lies in system modification; doing away with the 46 autonomous part-time boards that govern elections within their respective counties. Instead, roping these county offices into the State Election Commission’s ambit, with immediate reporting to the state election director, can go a long way in ensuring streamlined election processes.
Without such a consolidation, the promising alternative is to authorize the state election director to seize stewardship of a county office, should the incumbent county director prove to be incapable. Barring this, we risk a recurrence of the system failure we witnessed with the Lee County debacle.
While we wait, albeit skeptically, for legislative maneuvers to address the larger issue, there does exist an effortless legislative recourse to amplify the likelihood of mistake detection in neck-and-neck races—dissolve the provision that permits losing candidates to call off a recount. It seems only logical to make these recounts compulsory, as intended by state law.
Removing the discretion to annul a recount from candidates in hotly contested races is a step toward safeguarding the integrity of the electoral system. It’s an unfortunate reality that Ms. Senn had to learn this the hard way; expressing remorse for having called off her primary race recount, after encountering the chaos birthed in Lee County.
While Senn’s contrition is appreciated, the chance of a discrepancy in her case is arguably low, given her district was clear from problematic counties like Lee or Richland. However, the possibility grudgingly lingers, serving as a sobering reminder of flawed county processes, albeit unlikely in this instance.
State law presently enables the state director to conduct audits of election results at their discretion, thus offering an additional layer of scrutiny over close races. But, as the Lee County incident vividly illustrates, it’s unwise to leave such audits to discretion alone.
Lessons learned from Lee County bluntly underscore our inability to foresee all potential issues that might arise. Consequently, transforming ‘discretionary’ audits into ‘mandatory’ ones will ensure a vigilant eye on local officials—in instances when oversight truly matters. This, especially before results are official, in cases where even the smallest discrepancy could tip the scale.