SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Neocon who wrote (103684)12/6/2000 6:22:02 PM
From: Zoltan!  Read Replies (5) of 769667
 
Did you see this? Seems the FL judge would be violating Federal law if she agreed to AlGore the Sore Loser's request through proxies to throw out all the absentee ballots.

No Threat

The cases of Seminole and Martin Counties.


By Mark R. Levin, president of Landmark Legal Foundation,
& Arthur F. Fergenson, attorney and former special assistant U.S. attorney


Let's put the supposed legal threat to George W. Bush's presidency posed by the lawsuits in Seminole and Martin Counties to rest. Thousands of absentee ballots were cast in these counties. The computer software used to mark the ballot envelopes with identification numbers failed. Therefore, Republicans hand marked thousands of envelopes with the identification numbers. When the absentee ballots were counted, they were separated from their envelopes by election officials, including those envelopes which had the hand-marked identification numbers.

Al Gore's surrogates, i.e., the plaintiffs, contend that there was something untoward about the hand-marked envelopes. But since they don't know which ballots come from which envelopes, the only remedy is to throw out all of the absentee ballots. They propose this because Seminole and Martin Counties are predominantly Republican counties. But this would be illegal under federal law.

42 U.S.C Sec. 1971(Voting rights statute) provides, in part:

…No person acting under color of law shall…deny the right of any individual to vote in any election because of an error or omission on any record or paper relating to any application, registration, or other act requisite to voting, if such error or omission is not material in determining whether such individual is qualified under State law to vote in such election…

Even if we stipulate that absentee ballots removed from the hand-numbered envelopes have a material error or omission merely because the envelopes they were delivered in were hand numbered (an absurd proposition on its face), it's undisputed that a large number of all the absentee ballots have no errors or omissions at all, i.e., most of the absentee ballots were not delivered in hand-numbered envelopes. Since the absentee ballots were removed from their envelopes in order to count the votes, it's impossible to match ballots with envelopes. It's undisputed that a large number of the absentee ballots cast in Seminole and Martin Counties have no errors or omissions at all. Clearly rejecting all absentee ballots, which is the only remedy available to the plaintiffs, would be illegal. You cannot cancel Arthur's vote because the envelope Mark used to cast his vote was hand marked and, therefore, said to be in error.
nationalreview.com
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext