policy

PORTLAND, Maine (AP) — Republican Austin Theriault accomplished a recount of his congressional election in Maine on Wednesday and conceded to Democratic U.S. Rep. Jared Golden, ending the closely watched contest a month after Election Day.

Theriault decided to finish the recount before it was accomplished after initial results showed no significant change within the consequence after Golden won the state's ranked-choice voting by 2,706 votes.

“I ran this campaign that was about putting people over politics, and now it’s time to do that,” Theriault announced, calling the competition “an extremely close and hard-fought race.”

Between ranked-choice voting and the recount, the election was a lengthy process.

Golden won essentially the most primary votes, but fell in need of a majority by lower than 49% of the votes forged, as about 12,000 ballots were either blank or contained write-in candidates. This required one other round of voting wherein ballots were delivered to Augusta, entered right into a computer, and reallocated with the second ballots from ballots that were blank or had candidates listed on them.

The Associated Press declared Golden the winner of the 2nd Congressional District after the trial concluded, greater than every week after Election Day. The recount began on Monday.

“I would like to thank the voters for participating in the best democracy the world has ever seen, and all of the staff and volunteers who helped make sure the integrity of the election on Election Day, in the course of the runoff, and throughout this recount ,” he told Golden, who was in Washington when Theriault called for the concession on Wednesday.

This race attracted attention and generated greater than $50 million in spending as each parties battled for control of the House of Representatives.

Golden, a Marine Corps veteran willing to defy his own party, campaigned on his ability to work with each Democrats and Republicans. He also emphasized his commitment to the lobster industry, which is important to the region's economy. But Golden has come under attack for his opposition to assault weapons, which he announced after an Army reservist used an assault rifle to kill 18 people and wound 13 others in Lewiston in October 2023.

Theriault, a former NASCAR driver, had the support of President-elect Donald Trump but additionally portrayed himself as a possible unifier in a time of division. “We need more balance and less extremism in Washington,” Theriault previously said.

It was the third time Golden won in a further round of ranked voting. The system allows voters to rate the candidates on the ballot and allows for added rounds of voting to make sure a majority winner. Ranked-choice voting tables allowed Golden to unseat incumbent Republican Rep. Bruce Poliquin in 2018 and win a rematch in 2022.

policy

Representative Marjorie Decker of Cambridge will retain her seat after a recount requested by her primary challenger confirmed the incumbent's narrow victory on Thursday.

The Cambridge Electoral Commission confirmed the outcomes at around 6pm. Decker received 3,471 votes and Evan MacKay 2,430, GBH News reportedThe results differed by just one vote from the unofficial results released last week.

Decker may have no Republican challenger in November, so the recount all but ensures she is going to remain within the state legislature for a seventh term. The challenge from MacKay is Decker's best election yet. She has never faced a Republican opponent since entering the state legislature in 2012, and her last primary challenge was in 2018. reported.

MacKay, a progressive Harvard University graduate and organizer, initially declared himself the winner on the night of the Democratic primary for Middlesex's twenty fifth District last week. The Cambridge Election Commission initially announced unofficial results on Tuesday that showed MacKay winning with 3,354 votes to Decker's 3,314.

The commission then met to review provisional ballots and hand-count about 250 more ballots. Their latest results showed Decker narrowly ahead with 3,472 votes to MacKay's 3,431.

MacKay then filed a motion for a recount, which was accomplished on Thursday and confirmed Decker's victory.

In an announcement to Boston.com, MacKay admitted defeat and thanked poll staff and volunteers.

“The work we have been able to accomplish together has been incredible,” they said. “I am deeply moved by how our community has come together to advocate for important issues like housing, transportation and climate justice.”

Decker didn’t reply to a request for comment, but GBH said the incumbent thanked his supporters in the course of the recount.

“I just want to say to all of you how grateful I am for your trust in me, for your trust in the work we do together,” she said, in response to GBH. “I look forward to continuing to serve our community. I can't wait to get back to working on the issues we care about.”

policy

A challenger who initially declared victory against state Rep. Marjorie Decker of Cambridge after Tuesday's primary election has filed a motion for a recount.

Evan MacKay, a graduate student and organizer who challenged Decker within the Democratic primary for Middlesex's twenty fifth District, announced Friday that the “close margin” between the candidates warranted a recount, the campaign's statement said.

The Cambridge Electoral Commission said it might recount the votes but didn’t announce a date or location for the recount, which have to be accomplished by September 14. reported.

“A cornerstone of this campaign has always been that democracy takes place in daylight,” MacKay said in an announcement. “With such a close outcome, voters have a right to know the exact result with certainty and that is why I am requesting a recount, which we hope will be over quickly and provide clarity.”

Confusion on election night in Cambridge

MacKay reportedly announced his victory at a celebration in Cambridge on primary night, saying, “Our movement has won this election.” reported.

The Cambridge Electoral Commission initially released results showing MacKay winning by 3,354 votes and Decker winning by 3,314. The commission then met Wednesday afternoon to review provisional ballots and hand-count about 250 more ballots.

According to unofficial Results On Wednesday, Decker was leading with 3,472 votes, ahead of MacKay with 3,431 votes, a lead of 0.58 percent.

In an announcement on Sunday, Decker thanked the Cambridge Electoral Commission and said: “We have confidence in their ability to count votes.”

“A recount is a tool of the democratic process, so we welcome it and look forward to the outcome,” she said.

The ultimate winner can have no Republican challenger in November, so the results of the recount effectively determines the district's representative to the state legislature.

Assemblyman Evan Low, who fought vehemently against a recount during his own congressional campaign within the Bay Area to interrupt a surprising stalemate, suddenly desires to revise California's rules for recounting close elections.

His newfound desire for electoral integrity is difficult to take seriously after two months ago he tried unsuccessfully to undermine that integrity on the grounds that an accurate vote count wouldn’t profit him politically.

However, one a part of a bill he introduced within the state legislature on Tuesday deserves serious discussion if it corrects a glaring error in it. The other part is mere political posturing.

The crux of the issue lies in California's flawed recount law, which usually doesn’t provide public funds for a second count. In 23 other states and Washington, DC, Recounts are initiated mechanically if the outcomes are very close to one another.

But the recounts in California require private money. That's incorrect. Candidates shouldn't must pay for the initial vote count, nor should they must hunt down wealthy donors to cover the prices of constructing sure election officials got it right.

The useful a part of Low's bill would require automatic manual recounts in particularly close elections for the U.S. Senate, House of Representatives, Senate, or State Assembly. The part referring to political posturing calls for stricter disclosure requirements for individuals who fund a recount.

For two months now, Low has been attempting to distract from his undemocratic opposition to a recount in his own congressional campaign by redirecting public attention to the political motion committee that funded the recount.

What he keeps missing, nonetheless, is that if he solves the primary problem—the necessity for personal funding for a recount—he wouldn't must worry concerning the second, which is identifying the committee or wealthy individual forced to bear the prices.

Primary elections on March 5

In Low's race to fill the seat of retiring Assemblywoman Anna Eshoo, vote counts within the March 5 primary election before the recount showed him tied for second place with Santa Clara Mayor Joe Simitian.

Had that remained the case, it will have led to a three-candidate runoff in November between Low, Simitian and first-place finisher Sam Liccardo, the previous mayor of San Jose. There would likely have been a winner who didn’t have majority support, undermining a key reason for a two-candidate runoff.

Low would have preferred a three-way race in November due to the benefits he would have had because the only gay or Asian candidate within the group and because the youngest and most progressive candidate over two older white men who would have divided the more moderate voters. So Low didn’t wish to break the tie.

But that is precisely what happened through the recount. It showed that Low Simitian was ahead by five votes. Now MP Liccardo has to face the challenge.

Low apparently hopes voters will forget that he was the candidate who campaigned against an accurate primary count, so on Tuesday Low gutted an earlier, unrelated bill that had been stuck in committee and replaced it together with his proposed changes to recall elections.

Low's laws

The bill, AB 996In its current form, would require a recount if the election results show that there’s a difference of lower than 25 votes or 0.25% of the votes solid between the candidates (whichever is lower).

Low's spokesman says the bill is modeled on Santa Clara County's similar requirements for local elections – requirements that, mockingly, were introduced at Simitian's urging but don’t apply to congressional elections, where the county has no authority.

Unfortunately, the wording of Low's bill appears to be incorrect as a consequence of a drafting error. To replicate the Santa Clara County standard, the bill would have needed to apply if the margin between the candidates was lower than the greater of 25 votes or 0.25% of the votes solid.

The difference is very important to be certain that the brink for a recount is acceptable in most elections. And from a practical standpoint, it will eliminate the necessity to privately fund a voter-requested recount. After I identified the error, Low's spokesperson said it will be fixed.

If that's the case, passage of this a part of the bill could be a big step forward. Certainly, it will do nothing to deal with the shortage of mandatory recounts in other local or state elections.

Nor wouldn’t it change California's bizarre rules that give the governor the flexibility to demand a recount in very close races for statewide offices – and the secretary of state the identical ability in an in depth race for governor. No one should want their politicians to come to a decision whether to order a recount. That's a recipe for politically manipulating our electoral system.

Wellbeing care

The second a part of Low's bill is driven by his obsession with funding his congressional campaign's recount. Instead of thanking anyone willing to supply money to make sure the votes are counted appropriately, Low is indignant that the general public was unaware on the time of the recount that a number of the funding got here from a political motion committee funded primarily by Liccardo supporter and former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg.

To be clear, evidence so far suggests that recount funders have complied with disclosure requirements under federal election law. All sources of recount funding must be known when federal campaign finance reports are filed in late July.

Yet Low's bill requires almost immediate disclosure of donors who provide $10,000 or more for recounts. One wonders whether Low would feel the identical way if the tables were turned and his Labor supporters had funded a recount that may have benefited him politically.

This a part of Low's bill is a feel-good provision that may speed up transparency but would don’t have any impact on the final result of an election.

Furthermore, it doesn’t solve the larger problem that the integrity of our electoral system is dependent upon wealthy donors. If that were fixed, there could be no need to lift money for recounts.

Reach Opinion Editor Daniel Borenstein at dborenstein@bayareanewsgroup.com.

Former San Jose Mayor Sam Liccardo and the super PAC that funded the Congressional District 16 recount are facing a criticism filed with the Federal Elections Commission by an area attorney who alleges that the recount funders violated the law “in an apparent attempt to conceal who was actually paying for the recount.”

The criticism, filed by Mountain View-based attorney Brian J. O'Grady, comes a day after recent campaign finance reports showed that Neighbors for Results, a pro-Liccardo super PAC, transferred $102,000 to the Count the Vote super PAC that funded the recount. Former New York mayor and billionaire philanthropist Michael Bloomberg is Neighbors for Results' largest donor, having donated $500,000 in February.

The FEC criticism is the newest twist within the contentious congressional race to exchange U.S. Rep. Anna Eshoo. The primary race resulted in a tie between Rep. Evan Low and Santa Clara County Supervisor Joe Simitian, resulting in a voter-requested recount by Jonathan Padilla, a former campaign staffer for Mayor Liccardo and a 2020 and 2024 Biden delegate. Low ultimately emerged victorious by five votes and can face Liccardo in the final election.

O'Grady argues in his criticism that “all political committees are required to list their 'members' when registering with the FEC.”

“Given the funding we now know it received and the clear test the FEC conducted, Count the Vote should have listed Neighbors for Results, the Liccardo PAC, as a member when it registered,” the criticism states. “Perhaps it did not want to do so in order to conceal the ties between Liccardo and the recount, but there was a clear legal obligation and the Commission should promptly investigate this matter and take all appropriate action.”

In the lawsuit, O'Grady also states that Neighbors for Results transferred money to “cover the exact amount needed to make the required recount payments to counties each day.” However, campaign finance records show that Neighbors for Results only transferred $102,000 to Count the Vote. That money, combined with the $12,000 a day demanded by Santa Clara and San Mateo counties, would have funded only a fraction of the two-and-a-half week recount.

Neighbors for Results Treasurer Matthew Alvarez of the law firm Rutan and Tucker previously told The Mercury News that the cash was shifted between PACs so that they could make the initial payments to start out the recount.

“When the decision was made to certify that every legal vote was counted, Neighbors for Results had money available while Count the Vote was just getting started,” Alvarez said previously. “Transferring that money gave Count the Vote time to get started and raise its own money from there.”

The criticism also asks the FEC to analyze “whether there was unlawful coordination between Sam Liccardo, his campaign, and the two PACs funding his recount.” Campaigns are prohibited by federal law from communicating with PACs in any way. O'Grady's criticism provides no evidence that Liccardo coordinated with any of the PACs, and the attorney didn’t immediately reply to a request for comment on the matter.

Following the criticism, Low's campaign sent an email Wednesday afternoon asking Liccardo and Neighbors for Results to “come clean with voters.”

In an announcement, Padilla said: “The entire complaint is based on the outrageous falsehood that the recount effort was coordinated with the Liccardo campaign.”

“This complaint is another blatant, baseless attempt to distract voters from the inconvenient truth that Evan Low attempted to stop this recount and prevent the counting of dozens of legal votes,” Padilla said. “We are confident that the FEC will see these complaints for what they are: an embarrassing and frivolous attempt to weaponize campaign laws to silence an opponent and distract voters from the real problems of homelessness, crime, and high cost of living.”

Liccardo's campaign was not immediately available for comment.

The FEC's criticism is the second of its kind filed against Liccardo in recent months. In April, Max Zarzana, president of the Santa Clara County Government Attorneys Association, filed a criticism alleging that Liccardo tried to evade campaign contributions by working with Count the Vote to fund the recount on his behalf.

Any person may file a criticism with the FEC. The Commission's Office of General Counsel first reviews all complaints to find out whether it meets the standards for a criticism and is addressing a violation throughout the FEC's jurisdiction before starting an investigation.

This is breaking news. Check back for updates.

A brilliant PAC funded primarily by former New York mayor and billionaire philanthropist Michael Bloomberg transferred greater than $100,000 to an excellent PAC that bankrolled the stunning Congressional District 16 race, recent campaign finance filings show.

The two-and-a-half week recount requested by voters within the race to switch U.S. Rep. Anna Eshoo began on April 15. The recount of greater than 182,000 votes resulted in a stalemate between Rep. Evan Low and Santa Clara County Executive Joe Simitian, and Low is now running against former San Jose Mayor Sam Liccardo in the overall election.

But a number of days before the recount began, a pro-Liccardo super PAC called Neighbors for Results began funneling money into Count the Vote: the super PAC that funded the recount.

Between April 12 and April 17, Neighbors for Results donated $102,000 to Count the Vote, in line with its May campaign finance filings. Both super PACs name Matthew Alvarez of Rutan and Tucker as treasurer.

Alvarez couldn’t immediately be reached for comment.

The pro-Liccardo super PAC spent greater than $500,000 in the first in support of the previous mayor and lists just three donors: former NetApp CEO Daniel Warmenhoven, Cypress Semiconductor Thurman founder John Rodgers and Bloomberg.

The former New York mayor and billionaire philanthropist is the super PAC's largest donor, donating $500,000 in February. Warmenhoven donated $50,000 and Rodgers donated $15,000.

Bloomberg and Liccardo have been politically linked for several years. In 2018, Bloomberg Philanthropies included San Jose in a two-year program to assist town meet its climate goals when Liccardo was mayor. A 12 months later, Liccardo supported Bloomberg's presidential bid and served as California co-chair of his campaign.

Spokespeople for Bloomberg and Liccardo weren’t immediately available for comment.

The recount was estimated to cost several hundred thousand dollars, and the remaining donors who helped finance the recount are expected to be disclosed in the following quarterly campaign finance report in July.

This is breaking news. Check back later for updates.

The tie within the Congressional District 16 race has been broken again as more preliminary results are available in for the continued recount – Rep. Evan Low now has another vote than Santa Clara County Supervisor Joe Simitian.

As of April 15, San Mateo and Santa Clara counties have been counting the greater than 182,000 votes forged within the March primary election to exchange U.S. Rep. Anna Eshoo. San Mateo County accomplished its count Wednesday afternoon with no change in votes for Low or Simitian, although quite a lot of contested ballots are still being adjudicated.

Some of the challenged ballots in San Mateo County had illegible or no postmarks in any respect, and Deputy Director of Elections Jim Irizarry said they were waiting for information from the U.S. Postal Service

“We take the time to review any issues and make sure we contact USPS to verify the ballot markings and delivery times and to cross-check and ensure we have all the information before issuing one Make a decision,” Irizarry said Wednesday.

The recount comes on the behest of Jonathan Padilla, a 2020 and 2024 Biden delegate and a former campaign staffer for former San Jose Mayor Liccardo, who finished the first in first place. Low and Simitian placed second with 30,249 votes each. Because California doesn’t have an automatic recount trigger for state or federal races, a recount could only be requested by the election campaigners themselves or a registered voter.

On Thursday afternoon, Santa Clara County added recount results for 3 more counties and Low received a further vote. Low recorded a rise of seven votes, while Simitian gained six votes in comparison with the unique count. Santa Clara County has recounted votes in 187 of 199 precincts.

So it's a draw once more. At least for now.

With the recount within the stunning Congressional District 16 almost complete, the most recent results show Rep. Evan Low and Santa Clara County Supervisor Joe Simitian have the very same variety of votes.

On April 15, Santa Clara and San Mateo counties began recounting the greater than 182,000 votes forged within the March primary to interchange outgoing U.S. Rep. Anna Eshoo. Former San Jose Mayor Sam Liccardo secured the highest spot early, but after nearly a month of vote counting, Low and Simitian led to a tie for second place.

Because state and federal elections in California don’t require automatic recounts, Jonathan Padilla, a 2020 and 2024 Biden delegate and former Liccardo mayoral campaign staffer, requested a recount and paid for it through an excellent PAC called Count the Vote.

The first round of preliminary results from Santa Clara County were released Friday. In 77 of 199 counties recounted, Simitian was ahead by one vote. But on Tuesday afternoon, Low and Simitian found themselves in an all-too-familiar situation: Once again, they found themselves in a dead heat because the county reported data in 175 of the 199 counties. Both candidates gained six votes because of this of the recount.

The results for the remaining 24 precincts in Santa Clara County may very well be announced as early as Wednesday – the county said on its website that it had accomplished the re-verification of ballots in all 199 precincts.

As of Tuesday evening, there have been no changes between the unique count and the recount for Low or Simitian in San Mateo County. Deputy Chief Elections Officer Jim Irizarry couldn’t be reached for comment on the most recent results, but said earlier within the day that the re-verification of ballots was expected to be accomplished by the top of the day on Tuesday or Wednesday morning.

San Mateo County can also be expected to come to a decision Wednesday on plenty of contested ballots and whether or not they might be included within the recount after being excluded from the unique count. Santa Clara County has also challenged ballots yet to be counted that might effectively end the tie.

Rep. Evan Low attempted to stop the recount within the Congressional District 16 race by having his attorneys send a notice to the Santa Clara County registrar of voters asking them to stop the recount just days before it began, based on a letter obtained by the news organization .

Low and Santa Clara County Supervisor Joe Simitian are currently tied for second place within the race to exchange longtime U.S. Rep. Anna Eshoo. The two candidates, together with former San Jose Mayor Sam Liccardo, who finished first, were expected to advance to the November general election after the historic tie – the primary for a congressional election within the state after California moved into the highest two spots was open primary system greater than a decade ago.

But last week, two people in Santa Clara and San Mateo counties, where the district falls, filed paperwork demanding a vote recount.

On April 12, 2020, Biden delegate and former campaign staffer for Liccardo Mayor Jonathan Padilla posted $12,000 bail in Santa Clara County. And on Monday morning, each counties began recounts, pulling ballots from ballot boxes as they prepared to start recounting the 182,135 votes solid.

Low and his campaign were critical of the recount, which could force him or Simitian from November's election if the outcomes change, and criticized Liccardo and his camp, calling it “a page straight from Trump's political playbook.” . In his recount request, Padilla wrote that he requested it on Low's behalf, but noted that he had not communicated or coordinated with Low or any of the opposite campaigns. By law, filers must indicate which candidate they’re filing for, which is usually one among the candidates in an in depth or undecided race.

On the identical day that Padilla made a deposit for the recount, Low's attorneys, Emma Olson Sharkey and Aaron M. Mukerjee of Elias Law Group, sent a letter to Santa Clara County Registrar Shannon Bushey stating that a machine recount “cannot move forward.”

In the letter obtained by The Mercury News, Sharkey and Mukerjee argued that Padilla modified his request on the last minute from a manual recount, which was expected to cost greater than $400,000, to a less expensive machine recount. The lawyers said the deadline to request a recount was April 10, and while Padilla filed his original request for a manual recount on April 9, he asked to amend it on April 12, after the deadline.

Low's lawyers said Padilla must make a deposit for the costly manual recount on or before April 16, and if he fails to accomplish that, the recount can’t be conducted.

“Over the past three days, both Santa Clara and San Mateo counties have spent significant staff time and taxpayer resources preparing for the manual recount requested by Mr. Padilla,” Sharkey and Mukerjee wrote. “Evan Low for Congress also spent time preparing for a manual recount: and members of the public and interested parties also devoted their own resources to it. Under California law, Mr. Padilla is not permitted to simply change his mind and file a new application at this time, on the last business day before the recount begins.”

The Santa Clara County registrar of voters couldn’t be reached for comment Monday evening, but sources accustomed to the matter said the county plans to maneuver forward with the recount.

Low's campaign declined to comment on whether or not they would pursue further legal motion, but a source accustomed to the matter said they didn’t expect the MPs' camp to take further motion at the moment.

This is breaking news. Check back for updates.