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: willcousa who wrote (123210)	1/22/2001 6:00:31 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

That was the standard by Florida election law as it stood on Election Day. It was a decentralized system. It had other sections which described the protest and contest phases for disputing elections, but since you and the Supreme Court don't like their standard, all those sections are probably unconstitutional now. At least if any court choses to be consistent.

To: willcousa who wrote (123210)	1/22/2001 7:07:59 PM
From: mst2000	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769667

Artful wording? "Clear intent of the voter" is precisely the standard (and the ONLY standard) that exists in Florida statutes. It was the Florida legislature which said in the statue that any ballot which reflects "the clear intent of the voter" must be counted without offering up a more specific standard. The USSC then specifically cautioned the FSC, in the Harris case, not to take any action that would to deviate from the pre-existing statute given the wording of the safe harbor in Title 3 of the US Code. So it put the FSC in a Catch-22: If you create a more specific standard, we will strike down the recount as a "change in the law as it existed on Election Day" but if you don't, we will strike down the recount as a violation of equal protection. Which in effect says that the Florida statutory standard (which is substantially identical to the standard now in existence in over 30 states) is unconstitutional, which means that the election laws in over 30 states are unconsitutional. Which is absurd overreaching by the USSC conservatives.