re: #260 ralphieboy

A vote for a write-in candidate, other than a write-in vote for governor and lieutenant governor, shall be counted if the oval is filled in for that candidate and if the name, as it appears on the write-in declaration of candidacy, of the candidate or the last name of the candidate is written in the space provided.

The law says nothing about intent - it says that the name as it appears on the candidacy declaration or the last name. So, while one can argue that intent should matter, the law says something different.

Parsing that statute requires that 1) the oval be filled in; and
2a) the name as it appears on the write-in declaration; or 2b) the last name of the candidate is written in the space provided.

Lisa M. would not be sufficient by the terms of that statute. Intent is not sufficient to overcome the plain meaning of the statute.

Putting down Murkowski is sufficient. L. Murkowski is sufficient. Lisa Murkowski is sufficient. Lisa M. is not.

That isn’t to say that Murkowski’s lawyers wont try to claim that a ballot cast for Lisa M (if it meets the requirement (1) above was a vote for Murkowski, but Miller’s lawyers would point to the plain language of the statute and note that voter’s intent is excluded from the counting of the ballot.