Mrs Harris has also issued an opinion to Palm Beach County that they lack the authority to extend teh hand count to the full county based upon the results of the 3 precint sample. Tha attorney general of Florida (a Democrat) issued a contradictory opinion. So now PBC officials have had to go to court to have tey another contradiction ruled upon, and the hand count is frozen until then.
I do not blame Gore in the least for challenging the discretionary ruling of the SOS in court, I feel this is an abuse of discretion given the statutes allowing for hand recounts.
I do blame Gore for filing wuit in Broward county to override the canvassing board’s decision to not extend the hand recount to that full county. That disccretionary decision is exactly what the sample precints are designed to create.
The State judge has said that the deadline can stand with a few caveats.
The judge ruled that counties may file corrected totals after the deadline, and Sec. of State Harris may consider them if she employs “proper exercise of discretion.” [whatever that means].
I think that they are going to appeal.
Anyway, os a slight hijack. My voter fraud watch has been beeping off the chart after I learned this:
[ul]
It turns out Florida overseas absentee ballots don’t even have to be postmarked by the day of the election!*
[/ul]
Well, the “Democratic” judge has denied the attempt to extend the recount deadline. (At least somebody is capable of impartiality.
Though I am a Democrat myself, I have to agree that he made the correct decision under the language of the statute. At best, the Gore camp could only argue that the Ms. Harris has discretion to extend the deadline. Nothing to stop her from exercising her discretion by refusing to extend the deadline.
The Gore camp could still seek an injunction in Federal court, arguing that the deadline, as enforced, is unconstitutional, since it (arguably) disenfranchises some Palm Beach voters. I don’t think that’s a winning argument either, since the reply would be that no vote count is 100% accurate, and as a result, someone will always be disenfranchised (albeit inadvertently so).
Gore’s best hope now may be to seek a re-vote in Palm Beach County, but I can’t see that maneuver succeeding either. Personally, I wish he wouldn’t pursue that option.
I don’t think they have absolute discretion to do what they want. They test for a significant departure of one count from the other. The four vote discrepancy was judged insignifianct. However, the Gore argument is that in the context of this election, even so small a discrepancy is significant. I think this argument holds some water.
Of course, if the deadline ruling withstands appeal, all this may become irrelevent.
I heard on the radio that this fact might actually help Gore. The law, as I recall, says that you should have your absentee ballot postmarked by election day if possible. The “if possible” takes into account that some Americans might be in countries where it would be difficult to get a postmark because of instability, poor infrastructure, etc.
But, it might also help with Gore supporters in Israel. I heard an attorney in Israel who is advising Americans in Isreal that they can still send in their ballots. The Israeli government has warned people to stay away from congested areas which might be good targets for attacks. The attorney said that since post offices are congested areas it was not possible for Americans in Israel to get a postmark, so their non-postmarked ballots would be accepted if they are received by Nov. 17.
“My feeling is that Mrs Harris simply used her discretion to help Bush in the matter.”
This is definitely troubling. Ironically, the positions of Bush and Gore mirror each other.
I believe (and please correct me if I’m wrong) that the county election officials have discretion to allow or deny the “hand” re-counts that are going on. Certain county election officials exercised that discretion in a way that is helpful to Gore, and Bush files suit, invoking the Constitution.
Then a state official, who is also given discretion, exercises discretion in favor of Bush, and Gore files suit, invoking the Constitution.
To me it’s unsettling that the election could be (in effect) decided by officials exercising their discretion, especially when those officials have party affiliations.
It looks like the judge is still holding the door open, just a tad, as to whether the hand-counted Palm Beach results must be considered. After first holding that Harris can go ahead and certify the results today, he apparently says that Palm Beach can continue its recount and then file the results late. And then, according to the judge’s ruling:
Now let’s say the Palm Beach results show a huge shift in Gore’s favor. Enough to swing the election. And let’s further say that the Palm Beach officials can point to numerous instances of “hanging chads” to explain the difference.
Under the language quoted above, it seems the court is holding open the possibility that if Harris refuses to amend the count under such circumstances, her refusal might be deemed an “abuse of discretion” subject to attack in court.
Ms Harris, the Fla SoS, is the second biggest Bush supporter in the State, ferkrissake. She should clearly recuse herself. In no way could she say she is impartial. I do respect Jeb for recusing himself, altho i have no doubt he is pulling as many strings as he can for his bro.
Katherine Harris just said “Okay guys, put it in writing as to why I should accept your votes late.”
So she’s given Palm Beach, Broward, and Miami-Dade until 2 pm tomorrow to do just that (although Miami-Dade just now decided not to hand recount the whole county). Me personally, I don’t see anything really wrong with what she’s doing, unless making them grovel for more time is wrong.
Bill Daley, on the other hand, just about blew a gasket during his news conference, talking about how these folks are under so much stress, they shouldn’t have to take a break for a minute to ask for more time.
I voted for Gore, but Daley’s performance just a little while ago was really pretty disturbing. I mean, she’s more or less giving them an opportunity to convince her that they need more time. Of course, she could reject their reasoning outright, but hey, she didn’t come right out & say “Nope, we’re done. After the absentees come in, that’s it.” I can see her point, sorta.
No wait–Broward isn’t recounting, either. So it’s down to Palm Beach, and they want to recount the entire county. Hm. Guess that makes it a bit easier for her to say “neener neener neener,” doesn’t it, if it’s just one county?
Is she in fact out of line for requesting this of Palm Beach, as Daley says, or have I just gotten so caught up in this that I’m completely deluding myself in to thinking that she’s trying to be sort of non-partisan for just a second or two?
I’ve been trying to give Ms. Harris the benefit of the doubt, and have assumed (until now) that she was acting in a non-partisan manner, and just following the letter of the law.
However, I can only think of partisan motives for the 2 p.m. deadline. Think about it. Why not just let the counties submit their reasons along with the revised vote counts?
Why not? Because if she can get those written explanations in hand by tomorrow, she can pre-emptively announce that the reasons aren’t good enough, and thereby try to keep the recount from ever taking place.
She knows that if the recount takes place, and if Gore gains votes as expected, it will undercut the legitimacy of her failure to recognize the recount, and by extension, the legitimacy of any Bush Presidency.
I smell partisanship. And an attempt to keep the true results of the Palm Beach County votes from ever being heard.
Spoke, I think you have it exactly right, no question.
This business with the written reasons is so ridiculous. The whole goddamn world knows the reasons at this point, we need formal pleadings?
Ya gotta admire the rhetoric on both sides at this point. I’m just amazed by the way they manage to say what they say without really saying it, yet saying it unmistakably. It’s kinda fun.
I think the rationale is that she needs time to mull over the reasons and arrive at a decision. The deadline should not ostensibly pose any hardship for anyone, because they have already begun their recount, and should already know why they are doing it.
Unlike you, I never gave anyone the benefit of the doubt, and assume everyone is acting in a partisan manner. The real reason Ms. Harris wants the anwers today is likely to give herself time to come up with reasons to reject them. The reason the election boards might find this to be a hardship is because their sole reason for conducting the recount is to win the election for Gore, a reason that just might not pass muster.
**I think this is extremely unlikely to happen. The election boards are going to go ahead in any event, and sue over it later. And Ms. Harris wants to take as much time as she can to decide, in order to show (subsequently in court) that she in not acting arbitrarily.
I predict that if Ms. Harris gets those reasons in hand at 2:00 today, she will then issue a proclamation that the reasons aren’t good enough, and that recount votes will not be considered.
I then predict that a Republican-backed lawsuit will be filed, seeking an injunction to prevent the recount from going forward.
If the Republicans are really clever, the lawsuit will be filed on behalf of named citizens of Palm Beach County, and will make the argument that the recount is moot anyway, and that the recount would therefore be a waste of these poor taxpayers’ money. Of course, these citizens will be straw men for the Republican Party. (Just as the Palm Beach citizens who sued for a re-vote were straw men for the Democratic Party.)
Bottom line, the Republicans will make another determined effort in court to keep the recount from happening.
I think it would be more accurate to say that they are conducting the recount to show that Gore won the election, unless of course you think that they are going to cheat and create votes where none existed. Which doesn’t seem exactly fair…the beef all along is that the Bush camp knows that these are extremely Democratic counties and no one needsto fabricate votes. They are already there, they just haven’t been counted properly.
As for the SoS, she’s a joke. She proposes to stop all the rrecounting in court and basically dissolve all previous rulings, roll it all into the local courts…for what? To drag it out for so long that the public gets restless and demands that Bush be crowned. One minute it’s “now, now now, time is of the essence!!!” the next it’s “Let’s stop everything, wait a few more days, start over at the beginning, and just generally grind it all to a halt for awhile, how does that sound?”
Fortunately, the Gore camp is asking the Supreme Court to rule on the whole dang thing. Which will be interesting.
Wow, I really underestimated Harris’s partisanship. She didn’t even wait until she got the written explanations.
She has now filed suit to stop the recounts. On what grounds, I cannot imagine. She has now abandoned all pretext of impartiality.
If Bush wins, and if he nominates this lady to some federal post, it is going to be one helluva confirmation fight.
Side note: I think the Republicans are playing this very poorly from a PR perspective. Now it looks even more like they are trying to keep the results in Palm Beach from ever coming to light.
They would have done much better to bring citizen lawsuits, as I suggested above. That way, they could have couched their position as “Why waste the taxpayers’ money?”
Your response assumes the Democratic line that manual recounts are inherently more accurate than machine ones. From the perspective of someone who does not accept that, the desire to substitute a manual count for a machine one is not because it is the true and authentic count, but because it gives a desired result. Ms. Harris has already indicated that it is her belief that manual recounts are provided for the possibility of machine failure. (It is on these grounds, spoke-, that she is questioning their use).
This issue seems to be at the heart of the legal disputes surrounding the recounts in Dada and Broward counties. The position adopted by the counties (possibly influenced by Harris) is that a small difference is not grounds for a manual recount, even if that difference could change the results. This is consistent with the thinking that as long the machines were functioning properly their count was to be considerd valid. The Democrats who objected are taking the opposite tack.
Izzy, there was, I believe an 800 vote difference in Palm Beach between machine counts 1 and 2. I consider that a very big difference under these circumstances, and more than sufficient to trigger a handcount.
Also, Florida law specifically addresses situations where it makes a difference.
I think the manual count is unbelieveably obvious and can and will give a result much truer than the machines because people can see the semi-punched chads.
Interestingly, I do NOT support the counting of “pregnant” chads. I think that’s taking it way too far. The damn chad needs to be detached to some degree. Bubbly, bent, bulging, indented…no. Detached at any corner? Yes.
In fact, just this moment on MSNBC, the anchor was going to demonstrate how to completely punch a chad and purely by accident, his punch merely poked a hole in one corner, it did not dislodge the chad completely. Happens all the time. Humans can see this, computers cannot.
That this is even being debated amazes me. Well, not really, because if Republicans didn’t challenge it, the count would go forward and Al Gore would be decalred the winner. But outside partisan concerns, the facts of the whole ballot deal strike me as ridiculously plain, one big “DUH!!”
stoid
Why is it necessary to stop the hand counts before they happen? Why can’t we go ahead and complete the hand counts and then argue about whether they are more or less accurate than machine counts? Could it be that the Bush camp desperately wants to keep the American public from learning the results of the hand count?
And as to which count is more accurate, every election official I’ve seen interviewed on the subject (outside of Florida) has agreed that the hand counts are more accurate.
As I mentioned in another thread, I also posed the question about accuracy of recounts to my cousin, who used to be in charge of elections in a state-which-shall-remain-nameless. His view (and he had no axe to grind) was that hand counts are more accurate. In fact, his state had outlawed punch cards for the very reason that hanging chads had a tendency to cause inaccurate machine counts.