×

Is presidential recount worth the effort, expense?

Wisconsin on Thursday started the process of recounting the ballots from the presidential race, one that President-elect Donald Trump appears to have won by about 22,000 votes over Democrat Hillary Clinton.

That margin, while tissue-paper thin, is unlikely to erode significantly in this new tally. Even Jill Stein, the Green Party presidential candidate seeking the recount not just in Wisconsin but Michigan and Pennsylvania, admits that. She is joined in the effort by Independent Rocky Roque De La Fuente, but much of the recount expense is being paid with donations to Stein.

All three states under scrutiny normally swing “blue” in presidential elections but narrowly flipped this time from supporting President Barack Obama four years ago to rejecting his chosen successor in favor of giving Trump a try.

Changing the result is not the point, Stein says. It’s making sure the process of casting a ballot and tabulating the votes was followed properly, so voters can be assured the results are valid.

She has argued, without evidence, that voting irregularities in all three states raised the possibility, admittedly remote, that some voting machines or systems may have been vulnerable to an outside cyberattack.

Does that possibility, however, rise to the level of meriting the expense — an estimated $3.9 million in Wisconsin — to conduct such a recount, given what little new information is expected to be gleaned from such a review?

Granted, Stein will pay for the cost in Wisconsin. She also has given Michigan $973,250 for the recount, though some state officials have claimed the cost could be about $4 million. Trump was certified Monday as the winner in the state by 10,704 votes out of nearly 4.8 million ballots cast.

That recount could begin as early as Friday in the larger Michigan counties.

“A manual recount,” Stein campaign attorney Mark Brewer said, “is the only way to assure people that they can trust the system.”

But this would seem to raise even more doubt about that system, not trust. This doesn’t come across as an exercise in affirmation but more like desperation.

Some Republicans have suggested this effort simply is Stein’s bid to be more relevant in this election, plus build funds for any future campaign.

That might be too cynical a view. But it’s fair to raise the point.

Trump rightly drew criticism for claiming, when it appeared Clinton was cruising toward a comfortable victory, the system was “rigged” and that he only would accept the results if he won. Earlier this week, he tweeted that “millions” of illegal voters kept him from winning the popular vote.

When Trump makes such statements without offering any evidence, he undermines the nation’s election process and rightfully should be called out.

So should Stein, when there seems to be little evidence of either error or fraud to back her claims of a need for a recount.

It remains to be seen whether this effort has the effect Stein claims she seeks — ensuring the integrity of the election — or simply feeds the further perception that our nation’s election system can’t be trusted.

Newsletter

Today's breaking news and more in your inbox

I'm interested in (please check all that apply)
Are you a paying subscriber to the newspaper? *
   

Starting at $4.62/week.

Subscribe Today