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


To: Windsock who wrote (5452)12/9/2000 12:35:28 PM
From: Ilaine  Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 6710
 
Windsock - the law required Secretary Harris to certify the results, and she acted according to law - the law required Governor Bush to sign the certificate and he acted according to law. I realize that you want Gore to win, and think that in fact, he did win, and in fact, he may well have, it remains to be seen.

That doesn't affect in any way the legal requirement for the Secretary of State to certify the results and Governor Bush to sign the certificate. There was no discretion involved.

Neither Secretary Harris nor Governor Bush took any part in deciding how many votes were cast for either candidate, nor how the votes were counted. That was done by independent bodies who forwarded the information to the Secretary as provided by law.

Persons who hold political office, such as Governors and high ranking officers of the Executive Branch, make decisions with political consequences every day. If it were necessary for them to recuse themselves every time such a decision had a potential benefit or harm to their own party, then no such decision could ever be made. The Governors of all 50 states were elected to that office. Do you really think each of them should recuse him or herself rather than sign the certificate of election?

If Jeb Bush had not been the brother of George W. Bush, do you think his decision would have been any different?