Can Spelling Make or Break Elections?

Can correct spelling of a candidate’s name make or break election results? Maybe so. This year’s Alaska senate race may tell us for sure.

Earlier this year, Republican incumbent Lisa Murkowski lost her primary to a challenger. Undeterred, she decided to run as a write-in candidate. It’s taking a while to count the 90,000+ write-in ballots, but so far the numbers appear to favor Murkowski.

While Murkowski deserves kudos for this ballsy maneuver, it hasn’t been smooth sailing. Her campaign ran ads to instruct voters on how to spell her name, but even Murkowski’s campaign misspelled her name in one ad. Now, spelling problems continue to plague Murkowski, who, a week and a half after the election, is still waiting to find out whether she will keep her job in the Senate.

The New York Times has an excellent write-up of the situation here.

The Letter of the Law

So far, the Alaska Division of Elections has been counting misspelled write-in votes as long as the voter’s intent is clear. For example, if a voter wrote “Murkowsky” instead of “Murkowski,” then the vote still counts. Legal precedent in Alaska has emphasized the importance of voter intent in ballot disputes.

But now Murkowski’s opponent, Joe Miller, has filed a federal lawsuit claiming that the state is violating Alaska law by counting misspelled votes for Murkowski. The law states that a vote for a write-in candidate must be written “as it appears” on the candidate’s registration form.

Is Intent More Important than Accuracy?

You think editors are anal about spelling? Nobody is more anal about spelling than lawyers. Lawyers know that one misspelled name or misplaced comma can change the entire meaning of a contract.

Is intent more important than accuracy? In legal contracts, the answer would appear to be no. Laws exist to protect us. If contracts are not as accurate as possible, then they do us a disservice.

But does your vote constitute a legal contract? There certainly are enough rules involved to make it seem like a contract. Proving your U.S. citizenship, registering by a certain date prior to an election, voting only during certain hours at a specific location, etc.

Even if voting is akin to a contract, being a bad speller should not nullify your right to vote. Or should it? Do voters have a responsibility to spell a write-in candidate’s name correctly? If you think you can’t remember the spelling of your candidate’s name, is it so much to ask that you write the candidate’s name across the palm of your hand or on a cheat sheet to bring to the polls with you?

I don’t know the answers to these questions, but I’ll be watching the outcome of Miller’s lawsuit with interest.

What’s It Really About?

Ultimately, this case may say more about spelling than about politics. It may even set a precedent for communications. If intent is more important than accuracy, then why should any of us care about correct spelling or grammar? Would a loss for Miller equal one more nail in the coffin of the English language? Or should voting and communications be held to different standards? What do you think?