Among those focusing on the most vulnerable flaws in the 2020 election, Arizona Republican Mark Finkem has emerged as the leader. Finkem is running for Secretary of State in Arizona. September 22nd Debatehe said the case of Arizona’s August 2020 primary illustrates his point.
According to Finkem, Yuma County had many illegal ballot-collecting votes.
ballot collection is not an official legal term, but generally refers to someone collecting and submitting absentee ballots on behalf of another person.
“There are people who have been indicted for the very thing we’re talking about, pleading guilty, and frankly, those votes changed the outcome in Yuma County,” Finchem said in a televised debate. Stated Arizona PBS“How can people who have been disenfranchised by invalidation help them?”
Two women pleaded guilty in Yuma County, but their transgressions do not support Finkem’s claim that “those votes changed the outcome of Yuma County.”
Their crimes involved as many as five votes in the city council elections, far too few to affect the outcome.
Breaking Election Laws in Yuma
Guillermina Fuentes was videotaped at the campaign table outside the community center on August 4, 2020 in the city of San Luis, Yuma County. She processed the absentee ballots, and finally she placed four additional ballots in the required envelopes and brought them to the center where her early ballot drop box was on record. increase.
Fuentes is active in the Democratic Party and is the former mayor of San Luis. The election table was there to support her three candidates for city council.
Another city council candidate was in the car across the street. He videotaped the activity and alerted election officials. When the dropbox was brought to the Yuma County Records Department, officials treated it as potential evidence of a crime. The 38 valid ballots contained therein were counted and saved for fingerprint analysis.
under 2016 Arizona LawIt is illegal for anyone other than an immediate relative or caregiver to deliver another person’s early ballot. Fuentes was charged with violating that law and withdrawing early votes four times.
Girlfriend plead guilty felony of vote abuse. Her friend who was with her that day pleaded guilty to her misdemeanor.
State prosecutors also charged Fuentes with filling out someone else’s ballot and signing the outer envelope.they thought more serious crime I chose not to pursue the ballot than to deliver the ballot incorrectly.
There were allegations that voters were being paid to return ballots or were exchanging political benefits with candidates in exchange for ballots. In the documents submitted to the courtprosecutors said, “A state inquiry was unable to find evidence to support these additional claims.”
These votes made no difference in San Luis
In the city council elections, seats were awarded to the top three vote-getters. His three contenders, backed by Fuentes, won their respective races. Their margin of victory overwhelmed the minority vote in question.
by county official final tally, the three winners had 1,186, 1,163, and 1,076 votes. The votes lost by Fuentes did not affect the result.
During the debate, when pressed to say how these votes changed the outcome, Finchem said he was talking about a different issue – what could voters do if elections were mismanaged? Will I receive such compensation?
I have contacted Finchem but have not heard back.
our ruling
Finchem said ballot collection in Yuma County “changed the outcome” in the August 2020 primary.
The number of ballots in question was less than five, according to court filings. The minimum win rate was 392. These votes could not influence the outcome.
We assess this claim as false.
