The law I was relying on was Title IX, Chapter 102.112:
Deadline for submission of county returns to the Department of State; penalties.
(1) The county canvassing board or a majority thereof shall file the county returns for the election of a federal or state officer with the Department of State immediately after certification of the election results. Returns must be filed by 5 p.m. on the 7th day following the first primary and general election and by 3 p.m. on the 3rd day following the second primary. If the returns are not received by the department by the time specified, such returns may be ignored and the results on file at that time may be certified by the department.
The bold is mine. Note the use of the word "must" (not "shall" as I had earlier reported), which implies an action which is specifically required, and the use of the word "may" which implies discretion. Thus if I were the judge my ruling match that of Harris, that counties must submit by 1 week after the election, but that Harris had discretion in deciding whether or not to accept late returns.
I did not see that quote regarding November 24th in the article, but based on the part you posted, it says that they have until the 24th to submit counts of absentee ballots, not that they can submit regular counts that late. It seems that Harris has been pushing the counties to report the absentee ballots earlier, and that 65 of the 67 counties have complied. It isn't impossible that the remaining 2 counties will hold their absentee results for another week just to delay things.
As for the Seminole county activity, what happened apparently was that county employees, while on duty, helped Republican applicants fill out requests for absentee ballots by filling in numbers for them if the application was incomplete. Note that this was on the application for a ballot, not on the ballot itself. It seems to me that it is clearly wrong for the county to assist one party's candidates, but not the other. The question is what the punishment should be. Should be employees be censured? Surely. Should they be terminated? I would. Should the people who were assisted lose their right to vote? I don't think so. If the county had returned the ballots to them, they would have realized there was a problem, and they could have either fixed it and resubmitted it, or voted in the regular election. As it was they received an absentee ballot back in the mail and re-submitted it, probably unaware that there was ever a problem. Compare this to an applicant who comes in and can't read, but wants an absentee ballot. If a county employee helps him fill out the application, does his vote become invalid? It seems clear that the employees must be punished, but I don't see why the votes themselves should be disallowed.
I also note that late miltary ballots received without a postmark, or postmarked in the US are being disallowed. This is also as it should be. They do not comply with the requirements for being counted, so they shouldn't be.
Carl |
