(C) Daily Kos This story was originally published by Daily Kos and is unaltered. . . . . . . . . . . NC GOP wants evenly split bipartisan election boards. But what happens in a tie? [1] [] Date: 2023-10 North Carolina Republicans want even partisan splits on election boards — but what happens in a tie? The sponsors of Senate Bill 749 say they hope to foster a spirit of collaboration by not allowing a partisan advantage among the Republicans and Democrats, all of whom would be appointed by legislative leaders rather than the governor. But there’s a possibility that bipartisan boards wouldn’t come to majority decisions on important votes, which the bill only addresses in one scenario. “If you cannot muster a majority, then nothing happens,” said Damon Circosta, former chair of the State Board of Elections. “If nothing happens, the whole election apparatus can’t move forward.” The bill addresses a possible tie in relation to the selection of an executive director or chair of the board. If the board fails to come to a vote within 30 days, the appointment of the leader goes to the General Assembly. But the State Board of Elections and its county-level counterparts have to take many more votes beyond making decisions on appointments. Boards must approve an early voting plan, choose polling places, appoint precinct officials and — most importantly — certify election results. The bill does not specify a remedy for a tie in any of these scenarios. “I don’t want to even think about the situation where there would be a deadlock on something like certifying an election, just because we haven’t seen something like that before,” said Sara LaVere, president of the NC Association of Directors of Elections. Currently, the State Board is structured to have two Republicans, two Democrats and one member from the governor’s party. That means the board has been controlled by Democrats since Gov. Roy Cooper came into office in 2017. The bill would change it to an eight-member board with members nominated by the state chair of each party. The top two legislative leaders of each party would have final say on approving the nominees. If passed, these changes would go into effect before the 2024 presidential election. Democratic leaders have criticized the bill, with Cooper saying in a statement that, “The last thing our democracy needs is for our elections to be run by people who want to rig them for partisan gain.” A similar bill passed in 2016 was later ruled unconstitutional by the state Supreme Court. Senate leader Phil Berger told reporters that if board members tie on election certification, the election result simply would not be certified. Ordering a new election would require five out of eight board members to agree, which would require at least one member to side with another party. If that doesn’t happen, Berger said the issue could go to the courts. “It would be my understanding — just like any other issues that are out there — if they’re unable to reach that sort of an accommodation, then there would be litigation that would follow,” he said. As for early voting, current law states that if a county board can’t agree on a plan, then there will only be one early voting site. A member can appeal to the state board to have it implement a plan with more sites. Under the proposed bill, the state could deadlock on the issue, leaving a county with only one early voting location. Gerry Cohen, a member of the Wake County Board of Elections, has concerns about having only one early voting site in one of the state’s biggest counties. The county of over 1 million residents, for example, averages 3,000 voters per precinct. “We couldn’t handle everyone showing up Election Day,” he said. GOP’s dissatisfaction with the board For Karen Brinson Bell, the current executive director of the state board, the new law could mean she’ll be out of the job. She was reappointed in May to a third two-year term as executive director. The director is appointed every two years, according to state law. Republicans have criticized the board’s decisions under Brinson Bell’s leadership in the past — and in the likely event of a tie on her position, the General Assembly would get to decide whether to replace her. Berger refused to say if he would reappoint Brinson Bell if the matter came to the General Assembly. “I’m not going to prejudge anything as far as that’s concerned,” he said. “If they are unable to reach a decision, then the legislature would determine who the executive director would be. I don’t have anybody in mind, if that’s what you’re getting at.” Republicans scrutinized the elections board during the COVID-19 pandemic, which Berger brought back up on Monday at a press conference to introduce the board restructuring bill. “Their actions back in 2020 showed a willfulness to blatantly ignore state law in favor of pursuing ways to achieve a partisan policy goal,” he said. In 2020, the bipartisan board reached a unanimous settlement that extended the deadline for the state to receive absentee ballots. Due to the coronavirus pandemic, concerns about postal service delays were at an all-time high, and many argued that more time was needed to get all the votes in. Lawmakers were outraged at the decision, as election laws are generally delegated solely to the legislature. Republicans asked the U.S. Supreme Court to intervene, but it declined in a 5-3 decision, leaving the settlement in place. “In my heart, you broke the law,” Republican Sen. Bill Rabon said to Brinson Bell in a 2021 committee hearing on the settlement. Circosta, who served on the board during the settlement, defended Brinson Bell’s leadership. “I think any objective observer will say that Karen Brinson Bell has done a phenomenal job without even a hint of partisanship in it,” he said. “I think that one of the concerns the General Assembly might have is that they didn’t select her. The General Assembly, I believe, made this move because they’re concerned about power politics — not about good governance.” Use of private money in elections A provision in a separate elections bill introduced this month directly addresses another issue Republicans had with the board in 2020. The State Board of Elections received several millions of dollars in private grants to administer the 2020 general election, much of which was used to implement COVID-19 precautions and provide bonuses for poll workers. Republicans criticized the board for accepting the money, which Sen. Paul Newton said “gave rise to the potential and the actual appearance of impropriety.” In 2021, lawmakers attempted to pass a bill banning private money in elections, but Cooper vetoed the bill. Now, with a supermajority in both chambers of the legislature, Republicans have revived the plan within a larger election reform bill, SB 747. In addition to banning private money, SB 747 would shorten the deadline by which absentee ballots can be received and require anyone who votes using same-day registration to cast a provisional ballot. SB 747 and the bill to restructure the state board are both up for committee hearings on Wednesday. This story was originally published June 14, 2023, 6:15 AM. [END] --- [1] Url: https://www.newsobserver.com/news/politics-government/article276371906.html Published and (C) by Daily Kos Content appears here under this condition or license: Site content may be used for any purpose without permission unless otherwise specified. via Magical.Fish Gopher News Feeds: gopher://magical.fish/1/feeds/news/dailykos/