An Act To Amend Title 14 And Title 15 Of The Delaware Code Relating To Recounts Of Ballots In Elections.
Summary
HB86 revises Delaware’s recount laws for elections in Title 14 and Title 15 by creating a more uniform recount standard based primarily on a 1% vote margin. For primary elections, statewide general elections, and certain local elections, the bill changes when a recount is required or may be ordered, replacing several existing thresholds that used a mix of fixed vote counts and percentage-based triggers. It also removes the need in some cases for a candidate to request a recount or for a group of 25 voters to petition for a school election recompilation, instead directing the Department of Elections or the Court to conduct recounts when the statutory margin is met.
The bill applies to school district elections, primary elections, statewide general elections, State Senator and State Representative races, county offices, and the City of Wilmington. It also updates procedures for how recounts are carried out, including recounting ballots at state expense, reviewing machine tapes and absentee vote records, and certifying or recertifying results. The synopsis indicates that the measure also makes technical corrections to align the code with current election administration practices and drafting standards.
Impact
HB86 would amend election recount procedures in Delaware law by lowering or standardizing the recount trigger in several election categories to 1% or less of votes cast, which would likely expand the number of elections eligible for recounts, especially statewide offices and some countywide contests. It shifts responsibility more directly to the Department of Elections or the Court to conduct recounts once the threshold is met, and it eliminates some existing petition requirements. The bill would affect candidates, election administrators, school election voters, and courts handling election contests, while requiring recounts to be paid for by the state.
Sentiment
The available voting history suggests the bill was generally well received in the House, passing third reading 37-3. No committee transcript excerpts were provided, so there is no recorded debate to indicate broader discussion themes beyond the bill text itself. The strong vote margin suggests substantial support for the idea of a clearer, more uniform recount standard, though the small number of dissenting votes indicates some opposition remained.
Contention
The main point of contention appears to be the policy choice to replace narrower recount triggers with a broader 1% standard, which could make recounts more available in statewide and some county elections. Opponents may have been concerned about the cost of more state-funded recounts, the administrative burden on election officials and courts, or the possibility of more frequent recounts in close races. The bill also changes who can initiate recounts in some contexts, eliminating voter petitions for school elections and candidate requests in certain general elections, which may have raised concerns about reducing local or candidate control over the process.