AWER President-Elect Chris Hempfling lead the AWER meeting and introduced AWER member Mark Newman who presented Mr. Al Pearson, Esq., a constitutional law expert and member of Georgia Lawyers for the Rule of Law. Al presented a comprehensive overview of election law and administration in Georgia, focused on the integrity of Georgia's election system. Al provided detailed insights into how elections are conducted, the checks and balances in place to ensure accuracy, and the legal framework governing electoral processes. The discussion addressed widespread concerns about election fraud while emphasizing the robust safeguards that have been built into Georgia's voting system.

Many Georgians do not trust the elections, especially the 2020 presidential elections: many claim “widespread voting fraud”. Legal challenges have been frequent for the last six years. But none of these challenges has presented evidence to support fraud allegations. Further, the accuracy of the official results, including three separate recounts of all ballots cast: an initial count, a hand recount audit, and a machine recount), all producing results within a tight range and well below the margin of victory.

Al pointed Georgia poll workers operate under oath and are subject Georgia law which puts election administrators somewhat at a disadvantage because they cannot participate freely in public debate despite accusations against the veracity of their work, because to do so might cause them to face litigation, and their statements could be used against them in court. Meanwhile, critics can make any claims they want and change theories week to week without consequence or response from poll workers. This creates an imbalanced debate where those administering elections must remain somewhat wary to debate, but their attackers have unlimited freedom to make allegations.

So-called “stuffing the ballot box – is impossible. Al Pearson explained: Each precinct has a list of all registered voters. If that list aggregates to 600 voters, that number is the maximum number of votes that can be cast, and no name not listed can receive a ballot. After elections, Georgia conducts 30-day reconciliation reports for every precinct, documenting any discrepancies and their causes. In 2020, Georgia also conducted a risk-limiting audit, which was expanded to a full statewide hand count, followed by a complete machine recount. All three counts produced results within a tight range and well below the margin of victory. No precinct can present a number of ballots cast that is larger than the number of registered voters, nor have a name of a voter that is not on the precinct’s official list of registered voters prior to election day.

AWER member asked Marilyn Jackson: Where did those machines come from? I heard they came from Russia? Al Pearson said: “No, Dominion [an American company] is the manufacturer of those machines. They were designed by Dominion to solve a problem that many states had regarding voter verification. The issue about Russian origin has never come up in anything I've worked on, and I haven't seen evidence supporting that claim.”

Al Pearson also emphasized that the concern about non-citizen voting is also misplaced, according to Pearson. Rather than focusing on voter registration, anyone concerned about non-citizens voting can examine the publicly available list of people who actually voted and independently verify citizenship using available databases. This would provide concrete evidence if the problem exists, but such verification efforts have not produced evidence of widespread non-citizen voting.

Several proposed changes to Georgia election law are under consideration, most of which would restrict access to voting without improving accuracy. These include requirements for hand-marked ballots, additional documentation for voter registration, and measures targeting alleged non-citizen voting. Pearson noted that U.S. House of Representatives Speaker Mike Johnson was caught on camera saying that the SAVE Act would reduce the size of the electorate, which would benefit the Republican Party—essentially admitting what proponents think but usually don't say publicly.