Re Florida Ballot Law –
- If you want to read the actual text of the statute, go to the CNN web site.
- To summarize (ALWAYS a dangerous thing when parsing a statute), what is required is that a ballot “substantially” be in the specified form. The meaning of the word “substantially” would be one of the points of contention in any litigation over the Palm Beach ballot.
- The Palm Beach ballot appears to be inconsistent (whether or not “substantially” I express no opinion about here) with the statutory requirements in two respects: (a) the statute specifies that the box to indicate a vote is to be to the RIGHT of the candidate’s name (on the Palm Beach ballot, some were to the right and some were to the left) and (b) the statute shows candidates for a particular office listed in a single column (the Palm Beach ballot listed the candidates for President in two columns, allegedly so that the typeface could be made bigger).
- Florida election law would allow a court to overturn the Palm Beach vote if the court found that there was a substantial likelihood (again, I’m paraphrasing, and again, I emphasize that paraphrasing is very dangerous when construing these things) that a voting irregularity caused the will of the voters to be thwarted. In this case, it seems at least possible from the great number of people claiming they were confused that a court might reach such a conclusion. However, Florida legal precedent is fuzzy about the possible REMEDY if such is found to be the case. In my state, for example (Virginia), in certain circumstances the remedy if there are certain kinds of irregularities in a particular precinct has been to throw out all the votes from that precinct. Obviously this would not be what the persons in Palm Beach claiming to have been disenfranchised have in mind – they want a re-vote – but what kind of remedy a Florida court would impose in these circumstances I have no clue.
Re Nixon and Kennedy and Illinois in 1960 –
Erin, I do not doubt your mother’s perspective. However, the situation with respect to Illinois in the 1960 election is quite well known and has been studied extensively by historians and political scientists, not to mention partisans of the two major political parties. Like most things about which people care passionately, there are many different opinions about what happened and why. Few people seem to contest Erin’s mother’s assertion that voting irregularities occurred in Cook County in 1960 (althought there is quite a lot of disagreement about what those irregularities were and how extensive they were). As you may know, Nixon did not contest the Illinios results. Some people believe that was because he declined to do so for the good of the country. Others believe that he was about to do so when he was read the riot act by then-President Eisenhower, who insisted he not do so for the good of the country (some people believe that Eisenhower made various threats to Nixon to force him to acquiesce, some do not, and even those who think that Eisenhower threatened Nixon do not agree on the nature of any such threats). Still other people believe that Nixon did not challenge the Illinois vote because he knew that there had been substantial voting irregularities in southern Illinios, too, a Republican stronghold, and if he pushed an investigation into alleged unsavory Democratic practices in northern Illinois he risked exposing unsavory Republican practices in southern Illinois, and in any case the effects pretty much got cancelled out. Other people vehemently deny one or more or all of these scenarios. Where does truth lie? Who knows.
My humble take on Florida –
So far nothing is happening that shouldn’t be happening, except of course for the remarkably virulent and arrogant bombast from the two sides. All that is happened SUBSTANTIVELY so far, and all that would be involved if there are further recounts, by hand this time instead of just running the machines again (as has been the case over the past few days), AND (as is required by Florida law) everyone waits until the deadline for receiving absentee ballots (Nov. 17th), is totally consistent with Florida law AND with the simple idea of making as sure as possible how many votes each candidate ACTUALLY received. I see absolutely no problem with being patient for the sake of accuracy. All of that is a totally distinct process from that of challenging election procedures in litigation, in Palm Beach or elsewhere, about which I express no opinion at this time.
Hearsay Anecdote –
I work with an attorney whose elderly parents live in the disputed precinct in Palm Beach County. She reports that they have absolutely no doubt that the ballot was extremely confusing and that many many many people whom they know personally were so confused by it that they voted in error. They also say that the sample ballots distributed before the election did not look like the actual ballot, in that the sample ballot did not show that all the voting boxes for both pages of Presidential candidates would be in a single column down the middle between the two columns of candidates. I am not reporting this as fact, just as what some actual Palm Beach voters are saying to their daughter.
Horses –
I really like them and will limit my further remarks this week on this BB to matters concerning them. smile
