Video: Every Case Tells a Story| Webinar: ACR/CHEST ILD Guidelines in Practice

An official publication of the ACR and the ARP serving rheumatologists and rheumatology professionals

  • Conditions
    • Axial Spondyloarthritis
    • Gout and Crystalline Arthritis
    • Myositis
    • Osteoarthritis and Bone Disorders
    • Pain Syndromes
    • Pediatric Conditions
    • Psoriatic Arthritis
    • Rheumatoid Arthritis
    • Sjögren’s Disease
    • Systemic Lupus Erythematosus
    • Systemic Sclerosis
    • Vasculitis
    • Other Rheumatic Conditions
  • FocusRheum
    • ANCA-Associated Vasculitis
    • Axial Spondyloarthritis
    • Gout
    • Psoriatic Arthritis
    • Rheumatoid Arthritis
    • Systemic Lupus Erythematosus
  • Guidance
    • Clinical Criteria/Guidelines
    • Ethics
    • Legal Updates
    • Legislation & Advocacy
    • Meeting Reports
      • ACR Convergence
      • Other ACR meetings
      • EULAR/Other
    • Research Rheum
  • Drug Updates
    • Analgesics
    • Biologics/DMARDs
  • Practice Support
    • Billing/Coding
    • EMRs
    • Facility
    • Insurance
    • QA/QI
    • Technology
    • Workforce
  • Opinion
    • Patient Perspective
    • Profiles
    • Rheuminations
      • Video
    • Speak Out Rheum
  • Career
    • ACR ExamRheum
    • Awards
    • Career Development
  • ACR
    • ACR Home
    • ACR Convergence
    • ACR Guidelines
    • Journals
      • ACR Open Rheumatology
      • Arthritis & Rheumatology
      • Arthritis Care & Research
    • From the College
    • Events/CME
    • President’s Perspective
  • Search

Every Vote Counts

Philip Seo, MD, MHS  |  Issue: September 2020  |  September 11, 2020

It came down to the toss of a coin.

David Yancey represented the Newport News district in the Virginia House of Delegates beginning in 2011. In 2017, he had a challenger. Shelly Simonds, a member of the local school board, decided to run for the privilege of representing the 94th District. The final tally: 11,608 votes for Simonds, and 11,607 votes for Yancey.1

ad goes here:advert-1
ADVERTISEMENT
SCROLL TO CONTINUE

Ms. Simonds had won. By one vote.

The outcome was not assured by any means. The original vote count was so close, it triggered a recount, which led to the conclusion that Ms. Simonds had won by one vote. According to the original vote count, it was actually Mr. Yancey who had won. By 10 votes.

ad goes here:advert-2
ADVERTISEMENT
SCROLL TO CONTINUE

That’s not where the story ends.

One vote had initially been discarded. The voter had filled in bubbles for both Mr. Yancey and Ms. Simonds, but then put a slash through the bubble for Ms. Simonds. The ballot was brought to a three-judge panel, which determined that the ballot demonstrated clear evidence of intent. By examining how the remainder of the ballot had been completed, the judges had decided that the voter had clearly demonstrated his (or her) desire to vote for Mr. Yancey. Therefore, the vote, which Ms. Simonds had initially lost by 10 votes, and then won by one vote, was actually a tie.2

Hence, the coin toss.

It wasn’t actually a physical coin, per se, that decided the outcome of this election. It was a slip of paper, stuffed into a film canister, drawn randomly out of a bowl. Under Virginia law, the Commonwealth Board of Elections had to break the tie vote through “determination by lot.”3 The vote had to be decided, literally, by drawing a small object or a piece of paper out of a container.

Thus, the representative for the 94th district of the Commonwealth of Virginia was determined.

Kevin Entze could commiserate. Mr. Entze was a police officer in Washington state who ran to be his party’s candidate for the 2002 state house race for the 26th district. More than 11,700 ballots were cast. Mr. Entze lost. By one vote. Worse, he later found out that a colleague had forgotten to mail in his ballot. “He left his ballot on the kitchen counter, and it never got sent out,” Mr. Entze said.4

Close elections are more common than you would think. There’s actually a Wikipedia page, List of Close Election Results, that documents multiple state and local elections decided by only a handful of votes.5 It would also be difficult to forget that George W. Bush was elected president of the United States by a margin of only 537 votes, cast in the state of Florida.6 All of these examples demonstrate the truth to the mantra: Every vote counts.

Page: 1 2 3 4 5 | Single Page
Share: 

Filed under:OpinionRheuminationsSpeak Out Rheum Tagged with:RheumPAC

Related Articles

    Your Career’s Election Day

    November 1, 2011

    Voting for your future

    Ethics Forum: Who Did You Vote For? Is a Discussion of Politics in the Medical Office the Taboo It Once Was?

    January 6, 2021

    Is it taboo to talk about politics during the office visit? My morning routine may sound familiar to many of you: I wake up and get ready for work. Before I step out of my car, I put on my mask. I go inside the office to greet the staff and to get my temperature…

    Signatures to Be Filed for California Drug Price Referendum

    October 30, 2015

    SACRAMENTO, Calif. (Reuters)—Backers of a referendum aimed at reducing the cost of prescription drugs in California said Wednesday that they had gathered more than enough signatures to place their measure on the November 2016 ballot in the most populous U.S. state. The measure by the AIDS Healthcare Foundation would require the state to pay no…

    Republican Bid to Gut Obamacare Fails in Senate

    July 28, 2017

    WASHINGTON (Reuters)—A U.S. Senate led by Donald Trump’s fellow Republicans dealt the president a harsh blow on Friday, failing to move ahead with a major campaign promise to dismantle Obamacare as they fell one vote short of passing healthcare legislation. Three senators—John McCain (R-Az.), Susan Collins (R-ME) and Lisa Murkowski (R-Ala.)—joined Senate Democrats in the…

  • About Us
  • Meet the Editors
  • Issue Archives
  • Contribute
  • Advertise
  • Contact Us
  • Copyright © 2025 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc. All rights reserved, including rights for text and data mining and training of artificial technologies or similar technologies. ISSN 1931-3268 (print). ISSN 1931-3209 (online).
  • DEI Statement
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Use
  • Cookie Preferences