The final vote count in Allegheny County for the general election is nearly finished, but there are a handful of ballots to adjudicate.
Allegheny County Common Pleas Judge John T. McVay heard arguments in court Thursday from local Republicans and Democrats on how to address about 1,200 provisional ballots that are contested in the state’s narrow Senate race.
Republican businessman Dave McCormick leads Casey by more than 16,000 votes. McCormick, who was declared the winner by The Associated Press, has 48.8% of the vote to Casey’s 48.6%.
The race is within the margin that a recount was mandated by the state.
About 725,000 total ballots were cast in Allegheny County. Of those, 12,680 were provisional ballots, meaning there were questions about the voter’s eligibility that had to be resolved by the county’s Board of Elections.
Of those 12,680 ballots, about 9,000 have been tabulated into the system. Another 1,192 ballots remain sequestered, awaiting a judge’s decision.
Those sequestered provisional ballots have signature issues that have kept them out of the official count.
Provisional ballot envelopes must be signed by voters in two places, and then signed by the polling place’s judge of elections and the minority inspector. The ballots break down into four groups: Nine lacked any voter signature; 711 lacked one voter signature; 159 lacked signatures from judge of elections and minority inspector; 313 just had one signature from judge of elections of minority inspector.
Thomas King, representing the Pennsylvania Republican Party and the McCormick campaign, said none of the ballots should be counted because the state election code requires signatures for provisional ballots, and recent court cases in other counties have sided with that requirement.
“This is how the integrity of elections are upheld,” he said.
Mike Healey, the lawyer representing the Pennsylvania Democrats and Casey campaign, argued that not counting the ballots amounted to disenfranchisement, since all the voters in question were properly registered and vetted by county election officials to ensure they didn’t vote twice.
Healey was particularly concerned about the provisional ballots that were signed by voters, but unsigned by the judge of elections or minority inspector. He argued that it is unfair to disenfranchise a voter because of an error made by a poll worker.
He said the court has not addressed the constitutionality issue of the state’s election law when it comes to provisional and mail-in ballots that have errors with handwritten signatures.
McVay did not rule Thursday on whether the ballots should be counted. He said he would try to render a ruling “as soon as possible.”