(AmericanPoliticalDaily.com)- Republicans in Georgia sounded the alarm last week over the recount that is set to take place in the state, explaining that it will not include an audit of the ballots cast. It comes after Republican Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel said on Thursday that the recount will not include a review of signatures on each ballot, meaning any ballots already counted that do not have matching signatures will automatically be recounted.
McDaniel asked on Twitter why counties in Georgia were also told to certify the result of the election by 5pm on Friday, before the recount had even been finished.
Why have Georgia counties been told to certify results by 5pm tomorrow (before the recount is finished)?
Why isn’t signature review part of the process?
If the SOS’s stated goal is to “build public confidence,” these issues need to be addressed. https://t.co/FymosDWPFO
— Ronna McDaniel (@GOPChairwoman) November 13, 2020
“Why isn’t signature review part of the process?” she also asked.
The decision by Georgia’s Secretary of State to speed up the certification of the results while also refusing to perform an audit of the vote will not help instil confidence in the public that the results in the state were fair.
Secretary of State for Georgia, Brad Raffensperger, said on Wednesday that there will be a hand recount of the votes cast in the state, which initially gave Republicans confidence that any possible voter fraud will be revealed. It would bypass the use of counting machines, the security of which are also in doubt, and give hand counters the chance to find possible instances of fraud. But that doesn’t appear to be what is happening.
With just 14,000 votes separating Joe Biden and President Donald Trump, an audit of the vote could potentially change the results in the state if the fraud is as widespread as many people believe.
Georgia’s Republican chairman David Shader wrote a letter to Raffensperger, also signed by Republican Georgia Representative Doug Collins, asking why he had walked back his promise of an audit.
“You states yesterday that the process would be an ‘audit, a recount and a recanvass all at once’ and would help ‘build public confidence,’” they wrote. “However, the training and directives issued today do not comport with your stated goals yesterday and do not satisfy our concerns that gave rise to our request for a hand count in the first place.”
Republican officials in the state told him that they appreciate the decision to proceed with a hand count, but also said that they wish to “identify the ways in which the announced process is counter to that intended purpose” of the original promise of an audit.
So why, exactly, wouldn’t state officials want the vote to be audited?