Blogs » Paradigm Shifter » Election Recount vs Rule of Law

Subscribe



I wasn't able to find this document in the story under "See For Yourself", so here it is.

Alvarez Objection Letter & Rangel Recount Petition


I think Texas Election Code is clear on the timing of this matter. We know the 5-day petition deadline has expired, and considering another 5 days has passed since that expiration, we know the 48-hour approval window has lapsed as well. Since we know a "notice of defect" wasn't presented to Rangel by Armstrong during the 48-hour window, considerations allowing amendments to defective petitions can't be employed (Sections 212.029, 212.030, 212.085). And I've yet to find where the Recount Supervisor has any power over the clearly-stated time constraints which makes this whole thing a sham. If Mr. Alzarez intends to file a lawsuit or pursue criminal charges, it appears he has a great case, and he certainly has standing. We're about to see an unfurling of arbitrary rule that's become typical of the center seat.

It appears the only option is to determine if the petition is valid enough to authorize a recount using the original flawed parameters, which would make for a recount with a very limited scope. What can't get lost in this battle is the fact we have a certified election result, and any challenges to the will of the voters must meet strict criteria in order to initiate a process that could reverse the result. Rangel is not being disenfranchised because her right to petition for recount was perfectly spelled out, and she failed to meet the straightforward requirements.

In full disclosure, I supported Alvarez over Rangel, but if the tables were turned and Alvarez botched his petition, I'd have to shake my head in disappointment over his folly and concede. I'd have to wonder if I was supporting the right person due to such critical oversights.