Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 : Electoral College 2000 - Ahead of the Curve -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: jttmab who wrote (3010)	11/22/2000 11:36:12 AM
From: TraderGreg	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 6710

jt--The legislature passed two laws...one with the 7 day deadline, one permitting a manual recount. The court placed the vote of the people first and foremost. They then looked at the impact of overturning each of the laws in this decision. IF you overturn the 7day deadline and change it to say Dec 11 or in this case, NOv 26, do you impact on the meeting of electors on Dec 12? Call me crazy, but I(and the 7-0 Court agreed) don't think you adversely impact anything. IF you overturn the manual recount law, what happens? People's votes don't get counted. This was not some Solomonic decision...this was an easy call. In fact, if it had been a conflict of laws WITHOUT political partisanship involved, it would have been accepted by an overwhelming majority of the public. TG

To: jttmab who wrote (3010)	11/22/2000 11:53:05 AM
From: Windsock	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 6710

JTT -Re"There were other aspects of the decision and I believe that included the reading of dimpled ballots." The FL Supreme Court did have something to say on chad, including what the media are calling dimpled chad. The Court cited the words of the Illinois Supreme Court concerning the good practice of using manual recounts as "particularly apt", see page 34. The Illinois Supreme Court citation first discusses the need to ascertain the intent of the voter with reasonable certainty and goes on to state "These voters should not be disenfranchised where their intent may be ascertained with reasonable certainty, simply because the chad they punched did not completely dislodge from the ballot." See page 35. The citation of this language by the FL Supreme Court as "particulary apt" in fact operates to set a standard for the Florida recount. The Illinois standard is virtually the same standard for hand counts that has been used for 15 years in Texas and was signed into law by Bush Jr in 1997.