For some reason I cannot get out of my head what Rehnquist, Thomas, and Scalia said about voter error. I have mentioned here recently that these three wrote an opinion in which they stated additional reasons why they felt the fsc decision should have been reversed. Part of that opinion clearly opines that where there is voter error there is not a "legal" vote. I believe this opens up the electoral process to even more chaos than it purports to solve.

For one, it creates a situtation where the US Supreme court dictates electoral policy. They do not have that power under the federal constitution. More importantly, who is the arbiter of what exactly constitutes a voter error? As the justices put in bold letters in their opinion, they believe voter error is those cases where directions were not followed. The problem this creates is determining if said directions are truly clear, and that people of every race can understand the meanings of the words in those directions.

The english language is used imprecisely by most folks I know; including myself at times. I am uncomfortable with a new standard which, in essence, would say "if you do not follow these instructions your vote will not count". Of course one can always say instructions should be written to be clear to a "reasonable" person, but this may not always be the case.

Many states do not have statutes which eliminate ballots on which there is voter error. If the Rehnquist 3 had there way, these states would have to pass new legislation. In fact, in FLorida, many election disputes in the past hinged on not applying hypertechnicalities to ballots-this is why the cases involving absentee ballots in Seminole and Martins county were decided in the way they were decided; there is a long tradition in Florida of not wiping ballots in which some negligible spec was not met.

The path on which the Rehnquist three embark is treacherous, whose end result appears to me to be uniform election laws as approved by the US Supreme Court. One may find this idea appealing, considering what happened this year, but it goes against the very idea of Federalism, and would basically rewrite the federal constitution, which gives each state legislature the right to decide for themself how to elect presidential electors.

I would like your non-partisan thoughts on this, if possible. Better yet, read the opinion of the Rehnquist three at www.findlaw.com.

-- Anonymous, December 20, 2000

Answers

New Count Shows Bush May Have Won Popular Vote

© 2000

Despite the widely accepted claim that Al Gore won the popular vote by some 300,000 votes, a new count of state totals appears to show George Bush was the real winner by nearly 2 million votes. According to respected news analyst Mary Mostert, a report sent to her by reader Don Boyd showed that Gore got a total of 50,753,172 votes nationwide while Bush got 52,685,804 giving him a winning margin of 1,932,632.

Wrote Mostert "While I have not checked all 50 states with the Secretary of State official returns, I have checked all the big states and a number of the smaller states. All the ones I have checked are accurate, or modified very slightly with late absentee ballots, which tilted towards George W. Bush. For those who want to personally check these figures, go to the "Original Source" which has all the election information by state. Nearly all the states now have their OFFICIAL, returns posted.

"These figures were reportedly obtained from the Office of the Secretary of State from each state but haven't been confirmed. Where are Al Gore's cheer leaders known as the news media?”

GORE

Alabama 692,611 Alaska 79,004 Arizona 685,341 Arkansas 422,768 California 5,835,996 Colorado 738,227 Connecticut 816,015 Delaware 180,068 D.C. 171,923 Florida 2,912,253 Georgia 1,116,230 Hawaii 205,286 Idaho 138,637 Illinois 2,589,026 Indiana 901,980 Iowa 638,517 Kansas 399,276 Kentucky 638,923 Louisana 792,344 Maine 319,951 Maryland 1,144,008 Mass 1,616,487 Mich 1,953,139 Minn 1,168,226 Miss 404,614 MO 1,110,776 Montana 137,126 Nebraska 231,776 Nevada 279,978 New Hampshire 266,348 New Jersey 1,788,850 New Mexico 286,783 New York 4,107,697 N. Carolina 1,257,692 N. Dakota 95,284 Ohio 2,183,628 Oklahoma 474,276 Oregon 720,342 PA 2,485,967 RI 249,508 SC 566,039 SD 118,804 TN 981,720 TX 2,433,746 UT 203,053 VM 149,022 VA 1,217,290 WA 1,247,652 WV 295,497 WI 1,242,987 WY 60,481

Totals 50,753,172

BUSH

Alabama 941,173 Alaska 167,398 Arizona 781,652 Arkansas 472,940 California 4,544,136 Colorado 883,748 Connecticut 561,094 Delaware 137,288 D.C. 18,073 Florida 2,912,790 Georgia 1,419,720 Hawaii 137,845 Idaho 336,937 Illinois 2,019,421 Indiana 1,245,836 Iowa 634,373 Kansas 622,332 Kentucky 872,520 Louisana 972,871 Maine 286,616 Maryland 813,827 Mass 878,502 Mich 4,232,501 Minn 1,109,659 Miss 572,844 MO 1,118,504 Montana 240,178 Nebraska 433,850 Nevada 301,575 New Hampshire 273,559 New Jersey 1,284,173 New Mexico 286,417 New York 2,403,374 N. Carolina 1,631,163 N. Dakota 174,852 Ohio 2,350,363 Oklahoma 744,337 Oregon 713,577 PA 2,281,127 RI 130,555 SC 786,892 SD 190,700 TN 1,061,949 TX 3,799,639 UT 515,096 VM 119,775 VA 1,437,490 WA 1,108,864 WV 336,473 WI 1,237,279 WY 147,947

Totals 52,685,804

Bush Wins BY: 1,932,632

-- Anonymous, December 21, 2000

That story has long since been discredited. The Michigan numbers are wildly inaccurate. Even NewsMax dropped it after a couple of hours.

-- Anonymous, December 21, 2000