Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Republican Steve Troxler Appeals New Statewide Election as NC Agriculture Commissioner
AP ^ | 01-05-05 | Robertson, Gary D,, AP

Posted on 01/09/2005 11:17:12 AM PST by Theodore R.

Troxler Appeals New Statewide Election for Ag Race By Gary D. Robertson The Associated Press

(01/05/05 - RALEIGH) — As expected, the fight over the agriculture commissioner's post is back in the courts. Republican agriculture commissioner candidate Steve Troxler filed an appeal Tuesday in Wake County Superior Court asking a judge to block a new statewide election and name him the winner of the Nov. 2 race.

The State Board of Elections ordered the election last week because the number of missing ballots in Carteret County after a voting machine malfunction exceeded Troxler's 2,287-vote margin over Democrat Britt Cobb.

In the appeal, Troxler's lawyers said the board broke the law requiring four members to approve a new election. Only three -- all Democrats -- voted for one Dec. 29.

Troxler wants the board to ask the 4,438 Carteret voters whose ballots weren't recorded to revote to complete the election. The board had the power to do so, he argued.

"In the face of lawful alternative remedies, the board chose an unlawful one: an 'order' for a new statewide election without the consent of four of its members," Troxler attorney Marshall Hurley wrote in the appeal.

Since "no lawful remedy" has been imposed by the board, the court should step in to block the latest order and declare Troxler the victor, Hurley contends.

Board chairman Larry Leake, a Democrat, has said the board was only amending its Nov. 30 order to set a special election for 18,500 potential voters in Carteret County. A trial judge rejected that idea and sent the order back to the board for another solution.

Hurley wrote the board's reasoning doesn't square with two earlier votes by the board to reject a new statewide election. "The slim Democratic majority knew it lacked the four (votes) necessary for a new election order, but they pressed on -- in contempt of this court and the taxpayers," he wrote.

A new statewide election is the only resolution allowed under state law, Cobb has said. Cobb campaign spokesman Tim McKay said it's Troxler who can't follow the rule of law.

"Mr. Troxler has said 'I will do anything I have to do to make sure I win this thing.' He has proved he will do just that," McKay said in a news release.

Republican have complained that a statewide election would cost counties $3.5 million and throw out millions of lawfully cast ballots. Without the missing votes, GOP-leaning Carteret cast more votes for Troxler than Cobb.

In the appeal, Troxler doesn't ask specifically for a revote of the 4,438 displaced voters. Cobb would have to receive at least 75 percent of those votes to overtake Troxler.

Hurley said he and Troxler "have never waived from honoring the votes of the 4,400" voters and want them to be able to revote.

Troxler hopes to buttress his arguments by asking displaced voters to sign affidavits swearing they voted for him in the Nov. 2 election. He plans to hold a news conference in Morehead City on Wednesday seeking voters to sign them.

A hearing on the appeal could come next Monday, Hurley said. Judge Henry Hight, who threw out the special Carteret County election, is presiding in another county and isn't available to hear the case further.

In the other statewide race yet to be settled, the Republican candidate for superintendent of public instruction has filed written arguments with the state Supreme Court challenging the count of certain provisional ballots.

In a brief filed late Monday, Bill Fletcher says ballots cast on Election Day outside of the voters' home precinct are unlawful and shouldn't have been counted.

Fletcher trails Democrat June Atkinson by 8,535 votes. The state election board called Atkinson the official winner, but justices blocked her from taking office for now and ordered a Jan. 18 hearing on the out-of-precinct ballots.

Atkinson must file her arguments by Jan. 13.


TOPICS: Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: brittcobb; carteretco; democrat; henryhight; larryleake; marshallhurley; moreheadcity; nc; raleigh; republican; revote; stevetroxler
In NC, "the democracy" favors a revote when it was trailing by over 2,000 votes on Nov. 2. In liberal WA State, "the democracy" says there is no constitutional precedent for a revote for governor when it "so happens" that the WA Democrat is "leading" by 129 votes in the race on the "third recount."
1 posted on 01/09/2005 11:17:13 AM PST by Theodore R.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Theodore R.

Good point.


2 posted on 01/09/2005 11:56:07 AM PST by GOPRaleigh (Results may vary.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Theodore R.
Rather than re-vote a precinct, a county, or even the whole state, thus potentially counting people who chose to not vote the last time, why not limit the re-vote to those who were recorded as voting on the malfunctioning machine. Voter registration files include home addresses and they record who actually votes in each election. Mail absentee ballots to those, and just those, who were disenfranchised so they may vote on the one race in doubt. If the records aren't specific enough to determine whose votes went into that machine, then re vote the smallest possible number certain to include all those in doubt. Allow a reasonable time for casting the ballots and also allow those folks to cast their votes in person at designated sites (the courthouse and perhaps open just the polling place(s) implicated. Some original voters will change their votes, including deciding not to vote this time. A handful of voters who voted other races, but left this one blank, may cast new votes in the race. Out of 4000+ re-votes such changes are unlikely to affect a race with a 2000 vote lead over the rest of the state. Letting all the folks, who chose to not vote in November, vote now is far more likely to change the result.

There is sure to be plenty of local media coverage. A few original voters will be unreachable because of travel, death, etc., but certainly fewer than the 2000 net difference needed to change the election. If prior record keeping practices require re-voting more than the 4000+ the machine goofed, than revise them to avoid similar complications in future elections. Learn from this mistake.

Now, to compare this to the Washington State fiasco, recall that King County was permitted to contact individual provisional voters after the election to correct their invalid registration files.

3 posted on 01/09/2005 12:15:03 PM PST by JohnBovenmyer (I)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson