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 : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Qone0 who wrote (112028)	12/12/2000 12:29:06 PM
From: donjuan_demarco	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769670

"I think the USSC court would love to set a standard and recount. The problem is they think that would be rewriting FL law." The USSC does not have jurisdiction to determine whether counting the votes in question (it is not a recount because they were never counted to begin with) is rewriting FL law. It is up to the FSC to determine whether the count would rewrite FL law, and the FSC has determined it does not. Over two hundred years of jurisprudence has made it crystal clear that the USSC lacks jurisdiction over an issue of state law where the issue has been decided by the supreme court of the state in question. If the USSC now determines that it DOES have jurisdiction to interpret state law in a manner contrary to the decision of the state supreme court, the result will be a landslide of new litigation in the USSC, as every single decision by a state supreme court would then be appealable to the US Circuit Court, and through them to the USSC. There can be no denying that a decision in favor of Bush by the USSC will be totally contrary to two hundred years of established law. Only the Florida Supreme Court may decide whether the counting of undervotes constitutes a rewriting of Florida state law. That authority does not lay with the USSC, it does not lay with Congress, and it does no lay with the Florida legislature.

To: Qone0 who wrote (112028)	12/12/2000 12:34:29 PM
From: Ellen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

At the same time I think 7 of them have a real problem with the different standards being used on the punch card ballots. Violating equal protection od U.S. federal law. Here's something I really don't understand. Since Florida laws are set up so that each individual county sets its own procedures, how can that be a violation of equal protection? Unless Florida's state statutes are unconstitutional...? Please don't read into this - a uniform standard is preferable, imo, but Florida law just doesn't currently provide for it.

To: Qone0 who wrote (112028)	12/12/2000 12:40:22 PM
From: Dave Gore	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 769670

Robert, I agree with about 90% of that. Problem is the law and what's fair is creating a dilemma and most people are so partisan they are switching between the two, whichever favors their candidate. I wonder if most people see the inconsistencies here and the difficulty of sometimes reconciling the law with common sense and fairness? That is the struggle. For instance... The military votes technically should not have counted, right? (and didn't) but most on this thread think they should have (myself included!). So here, many think the Law should not be followed. How about the 25,000 absentee votes that were counted that technically could have been thrown out because Republicans altered the ballot registration forms so they qualified? That was actually against the law. But the courts ruled in favor of not throwing out the votes (and I agree with that!). The reason cited wat that it is more important for the votes to be counted. Now, we are faced with a law that may or may not be unconstitutional in Florida regarding non-uniform voting standards. It's been in effect a long time. Most think that the law stinks and there should be a uniform recounting standard. But then many Republicans say that if you create a standard, don't implement it in this election. Well, technically, that makes sense, but if you are trying to satisfy the intent of having as many votes count as possible, then why not make this very important election as legitimate as possible by recounting? It is nothing new and would satisfy most Americans urge for fairness. Plus the new President would at least have an easier go of it, if all doubt were removed as to the proper winner. If people here can strip away partisanship for a minute (which I know is clearly impossible for some), one might think this makes a least a little sense. They would at least see the dilemma between strictly following law and coming up with the fairest solution. They would also see that they have been switching back and forth.