"The (election) board said Sunday that it would consider the ballots with dimple, pregnant chads or otherwise questionable chads," reported the Associated Press about the rule switch. Previously Broward County had counted ballots only where at least two corners of the ballot chad had been dislodged.
Sounds like just like what they would do in Texas.
----------
Message 14843186
Interestingly, the Bush side's position is that a manual recount is unconstitutional. Do you think they would agree that other states whose laws also provide for manual recounts are also unconstitutional? I'm sure you are aware that Texas also provides for manual recounts and that their standards for conducting them are extremely similar to those in Florida. They even include the Republican-ridiculed "light test." I'm sure you are also aware that Bush himself signed a bill in Texas providing that manual recounts are preferable.
The result is that the Bush side is displaying a bit of hypocrisy and their position is disingenuous at best.
And what happened to Bush's statements that he trusted the people? Apparently that trust comes and goes according to his convenience.
capitol.state.tx.us
capitol.state.tx.us
SUBCHAPTER E. PROCESSING RESULTS AT CENTRAL COUNTING STATION
§ 127.130. Manual Counting
(a) Electronic system ballots that are not to be counted automatically and the write-in votes not counted at the polling places shall be counted manually at the central counting station.
(b) If the automatic counting of electronic system ballots becomes impracticable for any reason, the manager may direct that the ballots be counted manually at the central counting station.
(c) The procedure for manual counting is the same as that for regular paper ballots to the extent practicable. The manager is responsible for the manual counting of ballots at the central counting station.
(d) Subject to Subsection (e), in any manual count conducted under this code, a vote on a ballot on which a voter indicates a vote by punching a hole in the ballot may not be counted unless:
(1) at least two corners of the chad are detached;
(2) light is visible through the hole;
(3) an indentation on the chad from the stylus or other object is present and indicates a clearly ascertainable intent of the voter to vote; or
(4) the chad reflects by other means a clearly ascertainable intent of the voter to vote.
(e) Subsection (d) does not supersede any clearly ascertainable intent of the voter.
Acts 1985, 69th Leg., ch. 211, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1986.
Amended by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 728, § 52, eff. Sept. 1, 1993.
capitol.state.tx.us
capitol.state.tx.us |
