Don’t count on recounts to reverse the U.S. election this fall — that rarely happens

Because the U.S. electorate is so evenly divided, the November election will be so close that officials will have to count the votes again. Just don’t expect these recounts to change the winner. This is rarely the case, even if the margins are tiny.

“The (original) count is pretty accurate because the machines work — they work very well,” said Tammy Patrick, a former election official in Arizona who now works at the National Association of Election Officials. “We have recounts and audits to make sure we did everything right.”

Since America’s most famous recount in 2000, there have been 36 recounts in national general elections. This year, Republican George W. Bush maintained his lead over Democrat Al Gore in Florida – and won the presidency – after a recount was stopped by the Supreme Court.

Since then, only three of those statewide recounts have produced new winners, and all three have been decided by hundreds of votes, not thousands. That’s according to an Associated Press review of statewide recounts based on AP vote count data, state election offices and research from FairVote, a nonpartisan organization that researches elections and advocates for changes in the way they are conducted.

Most states allow recounts if the results are within a certain range; the most common value is 0.5 percentage points. But there is no precedent for a recount to change the winner in a race decided by several thousand votes, at least not since Congress made sweeping changes to U.S. voting law in 2002.

Race in Minnesota

The last statewide race to be overturned by a recount was in Minnesota in 2008. Republican Sen. Norm Coleman led Democrat Al Franken by 215 votes in the first count out of more than 2.9 million votes cast. After a manual recount, Franken won by 225 votes, a shift of 0.02 percentage points.

In the 36 statewide recounts since 2000, the average change in the margin of victory, whether it increased or decreased, was 0.03 percentage points. The largest shift was 0.11 percentage points in a relatively low-turnout race for auditor in Vermont in 2006. In that race, incumbent Republican Randy Brock led Democrat Thomas Salmon by 137 votes after the first count. A recount turned the race and Salmon won by 102 votes.

Recounts are not limited to general elections. They also appear in primaries.

Earlier this year, Washington state’s primary election for public lands commissioner went into a recount after the first count saw Democrat Dave Upthegrove leading Republican Sue Kuehl Pederson by 51 votes out of more than 1.9 million votes counted and they vied for second place.

After the recount, Upthegrove’s lead narrowed to just two votes. In Washington’s primary system, the two leading candidates advance to the general election regardless of their political party.

There are even more recounts in downballot contests, which are sometimes decided by a handful of votes. But even in these low-turnout elections, recounts rarely change winners.

“Recounts change a very small number of votes,” said Deb Otis, director of research and policy at FairVote. “We will see recounts in 2024 that will not change the outcome.”

Different laws

States have a variety of laws governing when and how recounts are conducted. Some states allow candidates to request a recount but require them to pay for it — unless the winner changes.

In Alaska, Montana, South Dakota and Texas, the recount will only be carried out if there is an exact tie. However, candidates in these states can request a recount. South Carolina has automatic recounts when the gap between the two leading candidates is 1% or less of the total votes cast in the race.

The AP may declare a winner in a race eligible for a recount if the AP determines that the margin is too large for a recount or legal challenge to change the result.

In the Washington public lands primary, which was ultimately decided by 49 votes, the AP waited until after the recount to announce the winner because the margin was so narrow. But in cases where the number of votes separating the leading candidates is greater — for example, in a statewide race where the candidates are separated by thousands or tens of thousands of votes — the AP may decide that a recount is not possible is to undo the result.

In statewide recounts, the result almost always changes by a few votes.

Patrick said that’s usually due to human error – either by a poll worker or voters. For example, paper ballots are often rejected because voters did not fill them out correctly, but they can later be included in the count after verification.

“Very interesting things”

Paper ballots typically require voters to fill out small bubbles next to their chosen candidate, just like students taking standardized tests. Tabulation machines count votes by looking for a mark in a very specific area of ​​the ballot, Patrick said. If voters indicate their preference in other ways, such as by circling their chosen candidate, the machines will not count the vote.

In some states, nonpartisan panels review rejected ballots to see if they can determine the voter’s intent. Some states conduct these reviews regardless of whether there is a recount or not. Other states only do it if there is a recount. Still others never perform these checks and the ballots are simply rejected.

Patrick said she saw ballots marked in many different ways that were not captured by the tabulation machines, such as voters using crayons or marking their choice with a highlighter.

In the Minnesota recount, a voter filled in the point for Franken but also wrote “Lizard People” in the write-in vote box. The ballot was rejected.

“Voters do a lot of very interesting things with their ballots,” Patrick said.