Editorial: Wheeling decision marks a step forward for write-in votes
In declaring Joe Vito the winner of the third and final Wheeling Village Board seat on Wednesday, Cook County Circuit Judge Alfred Paul has done two important things.
He has moved Wheeling closer to finality on the long-ago April 7 election. The losing candidate, Mary Papantos, has 30 days to appeal, and we heartily endorse her right to do so. However, the village board can at least tentatively move forward and make decisions without constantly looking over its shoulder.
But beyond the fate of just one candidate, Judge Paul has given Illinois a ruling on write-in votes that should resound around the state - one that many proponents of "voter intent" have been hoping for.
Vito was a write-in candidate for the village board. He initially lost the election because 34 votes for him went uncounted. On 33 of them, voters had written Vito's name on the ballot correctly but had neglected to draw an arrow between his name and the corresponding office.
Without the arrow, the computer had nothing to count. On the subsequent canvass, the Cook County Clerk's office had no choice but to follow the law and dismiss those 33 votes.
What they needed was a court precedent. On Wednesday, they got it.
Paul, in his decision, said the intent of the 33 voters in this case was clear - even though they failed to fill in the corresponding arrow.
With that ruling in their pockets, county clerks who believe clear voter intent should be the deciding factor in counting write-in ballots, got some much-needed support. Enough, possibly, to count votes they believe should be counted, in future elections.
Those decisions can be appealed, of course, and voter intent probably won't always win the day. But it's a start.
Yes, determining voter intent could, at its worst, become a hanging chad kind of horror. Obviously, we face inevitable debates over what constitutes clear voter intent (for the record, the 34th voter wrote "Joe Vogel" on the ballot; Judge Paul did not count it).
But bottom line, where voter intent is clear - and yes, we think writing the candidate's name on a ballot shows clear intent - that vote should be counted.
One ruling does not a revolution make.
However, as we said here in May, we hope that in time, voter intent will become the single most influential factor is deciding whether to count write-in votes. This week, we all took a step forward in that direction.