Two Republican election officials from the small, rural city of Waynesboro, Virginia, have made headlines after filing a lawsuit against the state over the certification of election results, demanding ballots be counted by hand rather than using machines. This bold move, which they claim stems from concerns about the integrity of the vote, features Curtis Lilly, the chair of the Board of Elections, and Scott Mares, the board's vice chair. The lawsuit threatens to push back the certification process for the upcoming November 5th election.
According to the suit, the officials assert they cannot trust the accuracy of the machine-based vote tallying—a sentiment echoed by many election skeptics across the country. Claiming the machines could be secretly programmed to cheat, their lawsuit characterizes the current vote-counting method as maintaining results “in secret,” which violates Virginia's Constitution. Lilly emphasized, “The board members have taken an oath to uphold the Virginia Constitution, and the Virginia Constitution prohibits the counting of ballots in secret.”
Filed earlier this month, the lawsuit targets Virginia Elections Commissioner Susan Beals and John O'Bannon, the chairman of the State Board of Elections. The board members argue they lack access to the vote-counting programming, which they claim keeps them from verifying if the machines provide accurate results. They point to Article Two, Section Three of Virginia's Constitution, which holds, "the ballot box or voting machine...shall not be opened, nor the ballots canvassed nor the votes counted, in secret.”
Lilly and Mares, who believe they would be failing their constitutional duties if they certified results under the current circumstances, have stated they are prepared to refuse certification without substantial changes to the voting systems. Their mounting fears mirror a larger trend fueled by misinformation surrounding voting practices—a narrative ignited by former President Donald Trump after the 2020 election. Despite these claims, numerous studies have shown hand counting can increase error rates, raise costs, and delay results.
Election officials have routinely emphasized the efficacy of the machine counting process. Waynesboro Registrar Lisa Jeffers defended her city’s voting machines, stating they are secure and insulated from the internet. “They are never ever connected to the Internet,” she assured. Jeffers also pointed out the rigorous logic and accuracy testing procedures local officials implement before elections to confirm the machines operate correctly.
Simultaneously, Jeffers highlighted the logistical challenges of conducting hand counts post-election, which would involve significant costs and manpower to oversee. A hand count entails removing the ballots from secured boxes and opening those boxes, which are sealed after voting, requiring court approval.
Yet, Lilly and Mares remain unswayed by the arguments presented by officials like Jeffers. They contend the machines’ secretive nature raises legitimate concerns. They insist certification without hand counts undermines voter confidence, insisting, “To me, it would give people more of a sense of ‘yeah, I know my vote's being counted correctly’ because we'd have people from both parties observing the counting process.”
Critics of the lawsuit, including fellow Board member Sharon Van Name, stressed the election process’s integrity, asserting, “I think the Virginia election process is extremely secure.” Van Name vehemently opposes the notion promoting hand counts over electronic results, dismissing it as needless skepticism. She believes the lawsuit could be part of a broader Republican strategy to erode public confidence in elections altogether, pointing out the unnecessary division it instigates.
The controversy surrounding the Waynesboro election practices isn't occurring in isolation but instead reflects wider national themes. Various Republican factions across the U.S. are increasingly advocating for manageable solutions to perceived electoral vulnerabilities. Meanwhile, Virginia’s government, led by Republican Governor Glenn Youngkin, has sought to bolster election security through policies aimed at ensuring accurate voter records, but these moves have faced scrutiny from the Justice Department and other watchdog organizations.
The Waynesboro lawsuit coincides with Youngkin’s executive orders emphasizing pre-election testing of voting machines and ensuring they don't connect to the internet. His guidance and the unfortunate fallout concerning the lawsuit question the balance between ensuring public trust and adhering to legal frameworks established to govern the election process.
Overall, the situation highlights the complex interplay between fraud narratives, election methodologies, and voter confidence, raising questions about the future of election law and practices not only within the Shenandoah Valley but across the United States. If the court sides with the Waynesboro officials, it could set precedence for similar lawsuits elsewhere, compelling election boards to grapple with the need for transparency and accuracy at potentially substantial costs and logistical challenges.
With early voting already underway, the upcoming election promises to shine light on existing tensions and the strategies employed to manage election integrity. Observers will be closely monitoring developments as Election Day approaches—resolving whether the city can standardize their processes with both legal rigor and public confidence intact.
