Why not? You have completely failed to address the argument that the law is unconstitutional. Do you hope that if you ignore it long enough it will go away?
But that’s not what we’re talking about. We’re talking about forms that were filled out properly by the voters. Care to join the larger discussion, or are you going to just keep prattling on about irrelevant issues?
So, let me see if I have this right:
The Bush campaign wants the overseas absentee military ballots that are properly signed, dated, and witnessed but don’t have postmarks counted, because they are valid.
The Gore campaign wants them counted also, because they are valid. (As stated by Joe Lieberman on the Sunday morning news-talk shows.)
Secretary of State Harris (Republican), the chief officer for elections in the state of Florida, says the ballots are legal and wants them counted.
Attorney General Butterworth (Democrat), the chief law enforcement officer of the state of Florida, says they’re legal under both state and federal law and wants them counted.
But they shouldn’t be counted.
OK, I think I’m clear now.
Except the ballots were reviewed and approved by both parties, published in local newspapers, distributed to voters, and instructions placed on the walls at the polling stations on both how to vote and what to do if you have trouble or are confused.
Other than that, you’re right. Nothing was done.
Your sarcasm is well placed, milo. The Gore campaign certainly does not want these ballots to be counted. That would probably show more votes for Bush, and that would be bad. As pantom indicated, the Gore campaign knows that they can say all the nice, concilitory things they want at this point, and still the ballots won’t be counted. How they think the public can’t see through this, I’m not sure.
Milo, I’ve heard reports (and I’m looking for the article) that said that the ballot published in the newspaper was not the same one that was used. Aparrantly the ballot wasn’t in butterfly format until on election day. I’m going to try to investigate this further.
Ok, one at a time.
** The Ryan** (and no need to be snide, please): My statement was that the ballots were not countable under applicable State law. I specifically mentioned that the Federal laws in question were also conflicting and that the final ruling on them would and should prevail (or did you miss my statement: “we don’t know at this point how the court rulings about federal vs. state laws will come out, so it’s not part of my comparison”? ). So, how do you come up with the claim that I’m not allowing for constitutional challenges on the law?
I spoke, in passing about the ballots where the people hadn’t filled them out correctly because it was part of the whole picture, I had compared the two situations, Milo claimed there were no similarities, I showed where there were.
Milo You misunderstood completely about the PBC ballots - I say that post election, it’s clear that the ballots confused the voters, in significant numbers. I say that the time to have fixed that situation was ** before** the election, since they failed to fix it, the ballots shouldn’t be counted. This seems to be what you are also saying, so quoting me and trying to “refute” my arguments when we’re in agreement, well, I’m not sure why you’d want to spend time doing that.
You keep repeating the same thing (“the military votes w/o postmarks are valid”), repeating it doesn’t make it so. Pointing out party lines and different folk’s opinions also doesn’t make it so. All they are saying is that the ballots should be counted-fine… They ** may** be re-validated at a later point, subject to a review of applicable Federal law, but my statement that currently, they are invalid under Florida State law is correct. At some later point, the courts may step in and re-validate them, but argueing a point that hasn’t happened yet, well, Milo I’m willing to talk about what MIGHT happen, should happen etc. But arguing that something is so, because you assume that a later court is going to agree with you (and, yes, they might), isn’t a debate, it’s a forecast.
Now, I’m posting this after the FSC decision to allow for recounts. Let me say again, for the record: I think that after all the recounts are done, Bush will win. I think that crowing about individual court decisions is rude.
Are you premising on dimpled chads not being counted? The outcome, at this point, is completely dependent on this issue.
Izzy I don’t know what will happen with the dimpled ballots. I’ve said all along that they shouldn’t be counted, but it isn’t up to me. I’ve also said the FSC rulings should be the final challenge (and said this before the ruling). But, that, too, isn’t up to me.
hard to say which way the vote would go with the dimpled chads, I think it’s certain that without them Gore would lose. With them, I suspect he would still loose. Can’t be certain. But, I’m trying at least to be consistent. ( 
)
On a semi-related note, a columnist in my state made the statement that MI would have been more prepared than FL for this mess. The certification of votes, for instance is NOT done by the elected SoS, it is done by a BiPartisan four memeber board of canvassers, the election bureau is run by civil servants, not by elected or appointed persons.
In addition, we also already have state law that requires precint workers to remove “hanging and swinging chads” prior to the count (hanging chads are defined as being those with only one corner attached, swinging has two corners) and that those that are dimpled or have only one corner detached are non votes. It’s there and in the law. I feel better, now, tho’ knowing this - I’d voted using those punchcards for 18 or so years, and never checked chadding. So, probably my votes counted all those times.
I suspect that every state legislature, come January will become well versed in the republic of chad as it were.
Don’t bet on it. At the present rate, Gore is on a pace to pick up over 700 votes in Dade alone. This despite the fact that he beat Bush in this county by only about 6% (40,000 votes). Secret: they are “considering” dimpled ballots. If Broward and PB do likewise, it’s Gore by a landslide.
I believe that my exact statement was that you had not “addressed” possible constitutional challenges, and that you were “ignoring” them. Seeing as how you specifically stated that they were not “part of [your] comparison”, my statements seem accurate. As far as I’m concerned, saying “Well, this issue exists, but it’s not important enough to address” is basically ignoring it.
When you sue somebody in the civil courts, you are asking for a remedy. For instance, if someone smashed your car, you either get a new car or they give you money for a new car. Sometimes it’s specific performance – forcing a contractor to finish a job you paid him to do, for instance.
And then there are the instances when there is no equitable remedy. And the Palm Beach ballots are one such animal. Any solution that has been proposed will cause as much damage as it will repair. Because there is absolutely no way to identify WHICH voters cast a ballot for a guy they didn’t intend to vote for. And when you can’t identify who was wronged, you can’t offer a solution. Secondly, you can’t guarantee that the people who originally voted for Nader will STILL vote for Nader. And each voter should only get one vote.
Besides, even if you COULD identify the confused voters and allow a re-vote then you’d open up a whole can of worms for voters nationwide who suddenly remembered that they too were confused. And they want a remedy, too!!
The only remedy I see for this problem, and it’s not much of one for the people in PBC, is to work on designing a better ballot for future elections.
Federal law supercedes state law. The Florida legislature can pass a law allowing 15 year old kids to vote if they wanted. It wouldn’t matter, however, because the federal law says 18.
And speaking of remedies, the military voters were disenfranchised through no fault of their own. There IS a remedy for this because the ballots have been kept separate. The equitable solution for this is to simply count these votes even if they don’t have a date stamp. Because that’s the (federal) law and incidentally, it’s the right thing to do.
Sigh. Really, it isn’t that difficult. I said there were simliarities between the PBC situation and the military ballots. Milo said my comparison was “flawed” I repeated my comparison (of the situation as it stands now re military ballots, and the PBC ones). to keep on getting into areas that haven’t been adjudicated yet is (IMHO) more fortune telling.
Is there a possability that the courts will decide on the military ballots? you bet. But there’s also a possability that the courts will decide on the PBC ones as well. I don’t find it at all interesting or appropriate to argue based on what we believe will happen in the future. You might want to, that’s up to you.
Here are the relevent laws concerning military absentee ballots. Florida law (1S-2.013 Absentee Ballots to Overseas Electors) states
There are two ballots involved as well. The State of Florida provides for its absentee ballot to be sent to military overseas, but there also exists a Federal write-in ballot that Florida does accept in the case that the Florida ballot did not reach the service member in time. Both ballots have spaces for signatures and dates.
As for why the military mail did not have postmarks, it’s not a question of “some don’t” but that absentee ballots specifically do not need them. According to US Code Title 39 Section 2406
So, being mailed free of charge, no postmark is required. During service in the Gulf War, we simply put “free mail” on the envelopes and they were delivered without postmarks. It would also be an undue burden to expect the military mail handlers to be aware of Florida law that expects a postmark and segregate Florida ballots for postmarks, especially since, (I have heard, no source) that Florida has already been sued for requiring postmarks and changed the law to allow signature and date as an alternative. It also seems inconsistant to state both that Palm Beach voters should be excused for not figuring out the ballot directly in front of them, with help available, but military members should be aware of a detail in Florida law.
pinqy