November 1, 2006 Reinhardt Asks for Clarification of Election Law

In several posts at the end of September (26th, 27th, and 29th), I reported on the "Election Contest" filed by former Commissioners Edwin Osborne and Bobby Reinhardt after the August 3 Election.

In official and unofficial Election Reports handed out on Election Night, there were numerous mathematical oddities and conincidences as described at the Election Contest trial in September.

Ultimately, a Special Master (former Criminal Court Judge Eddie Beckner) was appointed. Beckner examined the machines and also reviewed the absentee and paper ballots cast in the District 1 race (Osborne-Lebel) and the District 4 race (Reinhardt-Sexton).

Subsequently, the vote count and the winners in both races (Lebel and Sexton) were left as originally reported.

Now an appeal has been filed by Bobby Reinhardt with the Trial Court and with the Tennessee Court of Appeals.

In addition, a direct appeal has been made to the Tennessee Supreme Court, seeking an immediate, quick, and final ruling on interpretation of state law regarding the conduct of early voting.

Reinhardt states that T.C.A. 2-6-104 is "plain and unambiguous."

2-6-104. Voting machines for early voting.
(a) A county election commission may use voting machines for early voting. The county election commission shall choose one (1) of the following options for its method of early voting.
(1) Place all races on a machine ballot;
(2) Place some of the races on a machine ballot and part of the races on a paper ballot; or
(3) Place all races on a paper ballot.

In early voting, votes in the District 4 race were cast partly by machine ballots and partly by paper ballots (with two paper ballots being cast).

Chancellor Corlew noted the problematic wording of the statute and said that he "recognized that the interpretation of T.C.A. 2-6-104 is a matter on which reasonable minds can differ...."

The Chancellor chose not to throw out the two paper ballots cast during early voting in the Reinhardt-Sexton race, saying that the voters who cast the paper ballots during early voting would have proceeded to vote by machine (had they not been given the paper ballots) and thus the results of the race would have been the same.

Reinhardt maintains that the statute is "plain and unambiguous" and that only one interpretation of the statute---as currently written--- can be reached. As a result, Reinhardt wants the two paper ballots cast in early voting in District 4 to be discarded as "having been illegally cast" and the District 4 election declared either void or a mathematical tie.