For a faster vote count in California, look to the Supreme Court

Look at Los Angeles.

Saturday’s batch of 58,558 late-counted votes in the mayor’s race broke 40.2% for Nithya Raman, 33% for Karen Bass and a mere 17.6% for Spencer Pratt — no doubt a reflection of late-voting Democrats in a city where only about 16% of voters are registered Republican. 

Pratt’s lead for the second runoff spot has been slashed to just 7,494 votes, with an estimated 150,000 mayoral ballots still outstanding, and potentially more arriving with a June 2 postmark. One more update like this and Pratt sinks to third place.

That is not a theoretical debate about election law.

That is a live campaign being reshaped after Election Day.

That is a live campaign being reshaped after Election Day.

Saturday’s batch of 58,558 late-counted votes in the mayor’s race broke 40.2% for Nithya Raman, 33% for Karen Bass and a mere 17.6% for Spencer Pratt CHRIS TORRES/EPA/Shutterstock

The election was Tuesday. Yet California voters will spend much of the next week — and in some contests longer — waiting for ballots to arrive, be transferred, verified, and counted. It leaves voters confused, campaigns stalled and candidates stuck in limbo when they should be preparing for the next stage of the race.

This has become normal here.

It should not be.

Elections are supposed to have a finish line. California has built a system where Election Day often marks the beginning of the final counting period, not the moment when the public can expect a result.

But California’s endless election calendar may soon collide with federal law.

The US Supreme Court is expected to release more opinions this month as it finishes its term. One pending case could fundamentally alter how California handles vote-by-mail ballots.

California voters will spend much of the next week — and in some contests longer — waiting for ballots to arrive, be transferred, verified, and counted. CHRIS TORRES/EPA/Shutterstock

California law allows vote-by-mail ballots to arrive up to seven days after Election Day and still be counted, as long as they are postmarked on time. 

The state has also built in other delays. A voter can return a ballot in any county in California, no matter where that voter is registered — meaning an Orange County ballot dropped in San Francisco must be forwarded before it can be counted. 

Several days after Californians voted, state officials reported that more than 3.6 million ballots still remained to be processed and counted statewide.

---

Download The California Post App, follow us on social, and subscribe to our newsletters

That is not a system designed to bring contests to a swift conclusion. It is a system designed to maximize flexibility, even at the cost of certainty.

Sacramento calls it access. Many voters call it endless counting.

The case before the Supreme Court is Watson v. Republican National Committee. The question is direct: When Congress established a national Election Day for federal elections, did it mean ballots must be received by Election Day — or merely mailed by Election Day?

During oral arguments in March, Justice Samuel Alito warned that confidence in election outcomes can be seriously undermined when the apparent result on election night is later flipped by a large batch of late-arriving ballots. 

Several days after Californians voted, state officials reported that more than 3.6 million ballots still remained to be processed and counted statewide. Weston Hancock/SOPA Images/Shutterstock

Justice Brett Kavanaugh likewise pressed attorneys on whether history supports requiring ballots to be received by Election Day. Their questioning reflected broad skepticism from the court’s conservative majority.

Sacramento should be paying attention.

Most Americans understand Election Day to mean the deadline. California’s system tells them otherwise. 

When vote totals keep changing for days after the polls close, suspicion naturally grows — because the process looks like it has no real endpoint.

The delays also affect campaigns. Candidates advancing to the general election should be raising money, hiring staff, sharpening their message and preparing for November. Instead, many wait on final results and who their opponent will actually be. Time matters in politics. California routinely wastes it.

If the Supreme Court rules that federal ballots must be received by Election Day, California will face a difficult choice. 

State leaders could bring the entire system into compliance with one deadline — or try to maintain one rule for federal races and another for state and local contests on the same ballot. That would confuse voters, burden county election officials, and invite more litigation.

Sacramento will almost certainly look for ways to preserve as much of the current system as possible. That is what Sacramento does. But federal law may leave them fewer options than they are used to having.

For years, California has treated Election Day less as a deadline than a suggestion.  Carlin Stiehl for CA Post

For years, California has treated Election Day less as a deadline than a suggestion. 

The system increasingly characterizes voting as something that should require almost no effort, no planning, and no firm deadline.

But voting is not just another consumer convenience. It is a civic duty.

A serious right deserves a serious process. Asking voters to return a ballot by Election Day is not voter suppression. It is a basic expectation in a self-governing republic.

If the Supreme Court concludes that Election Day means what the words actually say, California will be forced to rediscover something it has spent years trying to blur:

Elections need deadlines.

And Election Day should be one of them.

Jon Fleischman, a longtime strategist in California politics, writes at SoDoesItMatter.com.