![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
teaotter posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
thisfinecrewJill Stein is fundraising to recount votes in Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania.
According to The Guardian:
UPDATE 11/24: The fund is currently at $3.8m of a current goal of $4.5m. Stein estimates that it will cost $6-7 million all told, including attorney fees.
It's my understanding that recounts can only be requested by a candidate, and that the recount has to be funded by them.I haven't been able to verify that $2.5 million is necessary (or enough; I don't know either way), but the costs had been referred to in other articles as "millions." (I have more cost research below the cut, if you're interested.)
According to Stein:
One caveat: Even the statisticians who are calling for a recount say that the anomalies they've seen are probably not indicative of hacking the machines. (J. Alex Halderman: "Were this year’s deviations from pre-election polls the results of a cyberattack? Probably not. I believe the most likely explanation is that the polls were systematically wrong, rather than that the election was hacked.")
But I still think that filing for a recount is the best option for knowing for sure, either way.
(If, like me, you wonder whether these estimates are way off base, here is my research. I am not an expert! So if you have better data, please let me know.)
-- The filing fees are deposits against the actual costs, not just filing fees. So they aren't necessarily separate from the cost of the recount observers that Stein lists separately.
-- The most expensive recount I've been able to find numbers for was a $1.1 million recount in Washington state that was actually 3 recounts using different methods. So Wisconsin's $1.1 million filing fee is a good estimate of how much the state thinks the recount might cost. Then again, with the tight turnaround, I could see it going higher. They'll be paying a lot of overtime to get this done before the December 13 deadline.
-- The legal fees are... Seriously, I have no idea how to estimate this. In reality, she may need to go to court for two separate pieces: to get an audit of the voting machines, and to get a paper ballot count instead of a machine recount in some counties. Then there's the possibility of other candidates challenging some of the votes, in which case there can be a lot of legal motions in court.
-- Overall, I'd say the least that this recount could cost would be $3.3 million. For the sake of budgets, I'd be willing to double that to $6.6. So I can get to her $6-7 million estimate.
But to be honest, even if she ends up with money left over, the website states that it will be spend on further election integrity and voting system reform efforts. Which I'm happy to support.
*shrugs*
According to The Guardian:
Jill Stein, the Green party’s presidential candidate, is prepared to request recounts of the election result in several key battleground states, her campaign said on Wednesday.
Stein launched an online fundraising page seeking donations toward a $2.5m fund she said was needed to request reviews of the results in Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.
UPDATE 11/24: The fund is currently at $3.8m of a current goal of $4.5m. Stein estimates that it will cost $6-7 million all told, including attorney fees.
It's my understanding that recounts can only be requested by a candidate, and that the recount has to be funded by them.
According to Stein:
Here are the fees and deadlines for each state:
Wisconsin: $1.1 million by Nov 25
Pennsylvania: $.5 million by Nov 28
Michigan: $.6 million by Nov 30
Those are filing fees alone. The costs associated with recounts are a function of state law. Attorney's fees are likely to be another $2-3 million, then there are the costs of the statewide recount observers in all three states. The total cost is likely to be $6-7 million.
One caveat: Even the statisticians who are calling for a recount say that the anomalies they've seen are probably not indicative of hacking the machines. (J. Alex Halderman: "Were this year’s deviations from pre-election polls the results of a cyberattack? Probably not. I believe the most likely explanation is that the polls were systematically wrong, rather than that the election was hacked.")
But I still think that filing for a recount is the best option for knowing for sure, either way.
(If, like me, you wonder whether these estimates are way off base, here is my research. I am not an expert! So if you have better data, please let me know.)
-- The filing fees are deposits against the actual costs, not just filing fees. So they aren't necessarily separate from the cost of the recount observers that Stein lists separately.
-- The most expensive recount I've been able to find numbers for was a $1.1 million recount in Washington state that was actually 3 recounts using different methods. So Wisconsin's $1.1 million filing fee is a good estimate of how much the state thinks the recount might cost. Then again, with the tight turnaround, I could see it going higher. They'll be paying a lot of overtime to get this done before the December 13 deadline.
-- The legal fees are... Seriously, I have no idea how to estimate this. In reality, she may need to go to court for two separate pieces: to get an audit of the voting machines, and to get a paper ballot count instead of a machine recount in some counties. Then there's the possibility of other candidates challenging some of the votes, in which case there can be a lot of legal motions in court.
-- Overall, I'd say the least that this recount could cost would be $3.3 million. For the sake of budgets, I'd be willing to double that to $6.6. So I can get to her $6-7 million estimate.
But to be honest, even if she ends up with money left over, the website states that it will be spend on further election integrity and voting system reform efforts. Which I'm happy to support.
*shrugs*
