Getting questions about Georgia’s elections? Here are some answers.
Timelines and Vulnerabilities for GA’s Post-Vote Period
In 2020, Georgia was the epicenter of the election denial movement. In-state and nationally, bad faith actors spread false claims about election processes and the outcomes. They claimed voting machine hacks. They ranted about fake ballots. They invented issues with voting equipment. And they even coined a new false term — “ballot mules” — leading to a crackdown on drop boxes.
The alarming trends we saw in 2020 have only intensified since. While some states have further solidified their election administration law to improve transparency and increase confidence in elections, Georgia has done the opposite, with rogue officials determined to add uncertainty into its process just weeks before votes are to be cast. Election denial conspirators have pushed for unnecessary changes in the law that are creating monumental shifts in how elections are conducted — many of which conflict with existing statutes and are being challenged in court.
There’s no reason to expect Georgia’s election results will reflect anything but the will of the voters — the state has many protections in place to safeguard its election processes, including a statute that makes the certification process non-discretionary. But recent changes to the laws and rules governing the administration of elections have offered more levers for bad actors in official positions to disrupt or delay elections than were available to them in 2020. Most concerning among these changes is the Georgia State Election Board's vote to change the definition of “certification” on August 6, despite objective and overwhelming explanations that the change would violate Georgia law.
Georgia’s elections should be monitored and election-denying officials will need to be closely watched to ensure that 2024’s elections are run freely and fairly, and decided by the voters.
To that end, our report provides information on:
Each process step in the post-vote period, from tabulation through recounts and contests, to certification. This includes a timeline for each of these steps, as well as if a run-off election occurs.
The offices and officials who oversee the post-vote period, including the boards, administrators, and the court.
A critical analysis of potential vulnerabilities in Georgia.
As a public resource, we hope that you’ll take a moment to share this with colleagues or partners who might find these resources valuable:
For a summary of this report, please see our Key Findings one-pager.
If you're a reporter with questions about the upcoming elections in Georgia or want to schedule a briefing with your newsroom, please email Ryan Thomas at ryan@zpstrategies.com.
Georgia 2024 Vote Counting and Certification Report: Highlights
Post-Vote Timeline
One of the best ways to help prevent bad actors from disrupting or delaying election results in Georgia is to understand what should happen during the post-vote period.
Our report includes a timeline for all the steps in the post-vote period, including:
Curing of Absentee Ballots
Certification Deadlines
Contest Deadlines
Audit Deadlines
Run-Off Timelines
And more…
Note: We will do our best to keep this timeline up to date throughout the election period, but we recommend verifying all dates in this calendar with official sources.
Potential Vulnerabilities in Georgia
As noted above, Georgia’s voting systems and election protections are robust. But based on anti-democracy actors’ past efforts to sabotage Georgia’s post-election processes and subvert the will of voters, we expect efforts to undermine elections in Georgia to continue and escalate from 2020.
Below are the main concerns we have identified in conducting a thorough review of the processes and personnel involved in administering the state’s elections include:
Changes To Election Administration: Election conspiracy theories have led to a push for unnecessary changes in the law that are creating monumental shifts in how elections are conducted. Since 2020, changes have included:
Prohibiting counties from receiving additional funding to comply with new requirements enacted by the Georgia General Assembly
Introducing discretion and ambiguity in the counting and certification of votes
Restructuring the State Election Board, which is now made up of an election-denying majority.
Despite what supporters of these changes say, these new rules deviate from long-standing processes, and are in fact what is creating the “crisis of confidence in our elections.” Many of these are being challenged in court.Certification: Georgia law is unequivocal that certification is ministerial. Nonetheless, election deniers on County Boards of Election have already voted against certification in past elections, attempting to justify their decisions by arguing that they have discretion over their review of the canvass and vote on certification and because their requests for documents irrelevant to election certification have not been satisfied.
Further efforts to undermine the ministerial aspect of certification are underway in two forms: 1) Through litigation; and 2) Through action by the State Election Board – itself composed of a majority of election deniers. These challenges to Georgia’s certification processes are ongoing; if successful, and certification is ruled discretionary, the post-election process will likely be significantly impacted.Election Superintendent Powers: Because of these new rules and election laws passed by the Legislature, Election Superintendents have gained greater discretion over some parts of the vote-counting process.
Election Deniers and Delays: We expect to see subversion efforts attempted in 2020 to continue. Areas of particular concern include delays to certification, contests and recounts, and the creation and weaponization of conspiracy theories.
We provide an in-depth discussion of all of these vulnerabilities and more in our analysis, which you can find here.
We’re available for questions about this research and eager for your feedback, both on the research findings as well as presentation. Don’t hesitate to reach out.
Thank you,
The Informing Democracy Team