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


To: Hawkmoon who wrote (8842)12/13/2000 2:40:59 PM
From: Lane3  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 10042
 
But let me spell it out again... Yes, it is UNCONSTITUTIONAL, AND A VIOLATION
OF THE EQUAL PROTECTION PROVISIONS OF THE CONSTITUTION for votes
to be arbitrarily deemed to be "legal votes" when reasonable doubt exists as to the actual
choice of the voter.


Excuse me for butting in here. I'm sure Nadine can ask her own questions, but I'd like to hear your answer, too. It sounds to me that you're saying that it IS ok to do manual recounts as long as the standard for the recount is hanging, rather than dimpled, chad. Obviously, there would be no point in your emphasis on the degree of punch out of the chad if manual recounts weren't to be allowed at all. Right?

Karen



To: Hawkmoon who wrote (8842)12/13/2000 2:46:21 PM
From: Nadine Carroll  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 10042
 
Ok, Ron, I think I understand you; the state of Florida election law was unconstitutional due to its lack of assuring equal protection under the law.

This is different, btw, from saying that the particular behavior of the Broward County canvassing board was unconstitutional, that they abused their discretion.

Concluding that Florida law was unconsitutional, which I think is a not unreasonable conclusion to draw from the USSC's decision, has some mind-boggling ramifications. I think the election procedures in half the states have been implicitly declared unconstitutional.