Question To All:
The important issue in front of the US Supreme Court is whether the FLA Supreme Ct. over-reached its authority in changing the deadline date. Dems say they were just interpreting the law and resolving a conflicting statute, which is what courts do all the time. Repubs claim that they had no right to change the deadline and the rules after the game. I have, up till today, agreed with the repub side, and obviously so does the Bush legal team.
I came across a section of the Florida Law dealing with this issue and show it below. Now I know there is probably a greater context that may or may not impinge on the language of the statute shown but it seems to me, and I want to take off my partisan armour for this purpose, that there is a conflicting statute. What I am interested in is this: Anyone please care to present how this very apparent conflict is not a conflict and if not, on what basis.
Here is the statute:
Title IX
ELECTORS AND ELECTIONS Chapter 102
Conducting Elections And Ascertaining The Results View Entire Chapter
102.166 Protest of election returns; procedure.--
. .
(4)(a) Any candidate whose name appeared on the ballot, any political committee that supports or opposes an issue which appeared on the ballot,or any political party whose candidates' names appeared on the ballot may file a written request with the county canvassing board for a manual recount. The written request shall contain a statement of the reason the
manual recount is being requested.
(b) Such request must be filed with the canvassing board prior to the time the canvassing board certifies the results for the office being protested or(Emphasis mine) within 72 hours after midnight of the date the election was
held, whichever occurs later.(Emphasis mine)
(c) The county canvassing board may authorize a manual recount. If a manual recount is authorized, the county canvassing board shall make a reasonable effort to notify each candidate whose race is being recounted
of the time and place of such recount.
(d) The manual recount must include at least three precincts and at least 1 percent of the total votes cast for such candidate or issue. In the event there are less than three precincts involved in the election, all precincts shall be counted. The person who requested the recount shall choose three precincts to be recounted, and, if other precincts are recounted, the county canvassing board shall select the additional precincts.
(5) If the manual recount indicates an error in the vote tabulation which could affect the outcome of the election, the county canvassing board shall:
(a) Correct the error and recount the remaining precincts with the vote tabulation system;
(b) Request the Department of State to verify the tabulation software; or
(c) Manually recount all ballots.
In item 4(b) above, where I have bolded the text, it seems apparent that the request for manual recounts are allowed just prior to the certification, not necessarily 72-hours after the election. If so, isn't it unreasonable to allow someone to make such a request just before certification and then not allow sufficient time to complete it, assuming the request was made the day of the certification?
I would appreciate input, especially from attorneys.
HiTech |
