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 : Al Gore vs George Bush: the moderate's perspective -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (8700)	12/10/2000 2:12:12 PM
From: bosquedog	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 10042

Who would have taken over her duties if she had recused herself? Name, position, and party affiliation if you know. Why does SI not recognize the word recused?

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (8700)	12/10/2000 3:28:03 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10042

The USSC will certainly not get involved in whether or not Ms. Harris properly used her discretion. Her authority is detailed in Florida law and the USSC will not presume to rewrite their laws arbitrarily unless its infringes on Federal law. And since she upheld Florida law, while the FLSC chose to rewrite it by extending deadlines and selectively recounting votes, Ms. Harris certainly has the higher moral ground here. The bottom line here is that the Democrats have been constantly trying to twist the law and squeeze out any possibly advantage that they can through this term "discretion". They are claiming she violated the law by not using her discretion in the manner in which they approved. But of course, the republicans would not have been pleased with her either had she extended the deadline arbitrarily WITHOUT evidence of fraud or mechanical malfunction. I mean, she could have used her "discretion" to grant the canvassing boards until December 11th to complete their recounts. That way they could have taken not only Thanksgiving Day off, but evenings and weekends as well. But then the republicans would have had to sue her, claiming that she had abused her discretion, now wouldn't they have? The fact is that EVERY appointed/elected officer has the ability to use their discretion. The cop who pulls you over for doing 60 in a 55 zone has the discretion to issue a warning instead of a ticket. The judge has the discretion to waive the fine if there were extenuating circumstances beyond your control (like someone tailgating you). BUT THAT DOESN'T MAKE THEM GUILTY OF ILLEGALITY IF THEY CHOOSE NOT TO USE IT. And you have NO LEGAL recourse against them for not utilizing their discretion. And don't forget this IMPORTANT ISSUE... The FLSC, in their latest ruling, is forcing the Dade county canvassing board to violate their own election regulations that state that any manual recount must involve ALL THE BALLOTS, not just the undervotes. Since when does a court have the right to force a canvassing board to ignore their own laws, granted them under the US and Florida constitutions? Regards, Ron