(Source: MIRS.news, Published 03/13/2024) Legislation described as the most significant reform to the state’s recount law in decades received its first hearing Wednesday amid rave reviews from voting access advocates, but opposition from groups expressing concerns over potential voter fraud.
Sen. Stephanie Chang (D-Detroit)’s SB 603 and Sen. Jeremy Moss (D-Southfield)’s SB 604 tackles two major complaints about Michigan’s recount law: Too often, precincts are ineligible to be recounted for seemingly excusable reasons and voters can order up a recount even if it’s impossible that their request will change the election’s result.
The bills create an automatic recount trigger if election results are close. It doubles the fees needed to start a recount and then sets the fees to the rate of inflation.
It mandates that a recall be requested within 48 hours (not six days) of the final canvass's certification. It sets $500-per-precinct fees for recounts in elections in which the results were not as close. If they are closer, it's $250 a precinct.
The bills come in response to at least four noteworthy events in recent years:
- Green Party candidate Jill Stein’s request for a total recount of Michigan’s 2016 presidential election, even though she had no realistic shot of winning Michigan.
- The 2017 Detroit City Clerk’s race, in which 33 precincts couldn’t be recounted due to technical rules that are unique to Michigan
- The 2020 presidential race in which former President Donald Trump and his supporters made unproven accusations of voter fraud that nearly held up state certification of the election.
- Passage of Proposal 2 and Proposal 3 in 2022, in which a recount was requested in specific areas, but the number of votes being challenged did not equal the margin by which the proposals lost.
“This is just a huge improvement of the law,” said former Elections Director Chris Thomas.
Pure Integrity for Michigan Elections (PIME) and Stand Up Michigan turned in cards of opposition, presumably in large part to the deletion of a requirement that those seeking a recount must make accusations of fraud or illegal voting. Both Republican senators – Ed McBroom (R-Waucedah Twp.) and Ruth Johnson (R-Holly) – questioned the need to strip any reference to fraud from the law.
The response was that canvassers – at either the county or state level – are not able to investigate voter fraud. This is a law enforcement issue. So, to require those petitioning for recount to declare there was any fraudulent or illegal voting doesn’t make sense, Thomas said.
“I am not aware of any board of canvassers, anywhere, who have ever done a fraud investigation,” said Thomas, Michigan’s elections director from 1981-2017. “That is not their business. It’s not their expertise. They don’t have the facts to do them."
“Fraud implies criminal activity," he added. "It’s not what they are there to do.”
If someone requesting a recount was required to document fraud or error before a recount could occur, that would wipe out recounts, he said. Nobody will be able to affirmatively prove fraud in that short of a time period.
A cornerstone of the bill is to prevent recounts in which it's impossible for the activity to change the outcome of a race. Chang noted a national report by FairVote that found that recounts conducted in cases in which the margin is not close can do more harm than good when it comes to increasing voter confidence in the process.
The bills also allow the local or state canvassers to allow for recounts in precincts in which the number of voters that showed up at the polls doesn’t match the total votes. It also allows for recounts of precincts in which a zip-tie was accidentally busted, or the security mechanism was accidentally damaged if there’s no dispute in the story about what happened.
No vote was taken on the Senate Elections and Ethics Committee bills, although Chair Jeremy Moss (D-Southfield) signaled a vote may be coming soon.
