[Vision2020] FW: seattletimes.com: Let's hope court's on voters'side

Wed Dec 22 12:41:21 PST 2004

Carl,

As your favorite conservative, I do agree that if the roles were
reversed the republican party would be pulling out just as many stops as
the democrats.  That's what politicians do.  What I don't dig is the
fact that it costs each of the counties money to do the recounts, and
belts are tight enough as it is.  Whatever happened to being a gracious
loser?  

I'd be saying the same thing if the swing was the other way.

DC

-----Original Message-----
From: vision2020-bounces at moscow.com
[mailto:vision2020-bounces at moscow.com] On Behalf Of Carl Westberg
Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2004 12:19 PM
To: vision2020 at moscow.com
Subject: [Vision2020] FW: seattletimes.com: Let's hope court's on
voters'side

Does anyone really believe that, if the circumstances were reversed, the

Republican party in our neighboring state would not have pulled out all
the 
stops to ensure a valid count?  From this morning's Seattle Times.

                                     Carl Westberg Jr.

>Let's hope court's on voters' side
>Full story:
>http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2002127117_danny22.html
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Seven weeks after Election Day, we have arrived at our Florida moment.
>
>As precarious as the race for governor has been so far, today it could
>truly veer off a cliff — potentially becoming a travesty that tops even
the 
>2000 presidential fiasco in Florida.
>
>Our state Supreme Court will hear arguments  on whether King County can
>count up to 735 ballots that were rejected seven weeks ago in a 
>bureaucratic screw-up.
>
>What was so jolting about the 2000 presidential election is that it 
>ended
>when a court stepped in and declared: No, you cannot recount the votes.
You 
>cannot try to get a better sense of who really won.
>
>In a clearly partisan 5-to-4 ruling, the court decided the presidency. 
>It
>was a shocking low point in American democracy. The court said: Voters 
>don't have the final say, we do.
>
>Today, in Olympia,  the legal details are different, the stakes 
>smaller.
>But the overarching principle is the same: Do we count all the legally
cast 
>votes? Or is the will of the voters going to be obscured by judges?
>
>Let's be clear about these 735 ballots, as all manner of partisan hacks
>have cast aspersions on them. There is zero evidence they are
fraudulent. 
>They were never "missing" and suddenly found by scheming elections 
>officials.
>
>They are absentee ballots still in their original envelopes, still 
>sealed,
>with the voters' signatures on the outside.
>
>All are either postmarked or dated Nov. 2 or earlier. Nobody has broken

>the
>seals to look at the ballots inside (they might all be write-ins for
Ron 
>Sims, for all we know).
>
>They were rejected because county employees thought they did not have
>signatures for those voters, but they failed to check the original
paper 
>registration forms.
>
>If the signatures match those of voters on valid registration forms, 
>then
>how could we not open the envelopes and count the votes?
>
>Republicans argue that in a recount you can tally only those votes that
>were counted the first time.
>
>State law isn't clear on this point. In one section it says a recount 
>is a
>"retabulation." In another it says a county can revisit any votes to 
>correct "any error that it finds."
>
>For as long as anyone can remember, counties finding legal, uncounted 
>votes
>during a recount have made the blindingly obvious choice to count them.
Six 
>counties have done so just in the past few weeks.
>
>A major advantage we have over Florida is our state elections chief,
>Republican Sam Reed, cares more about voters than partisan politics. He

>says if the court bars King County from counting its votes, then
logically 
>these other counties must uncount hundreds of votes they have already 
>tallied.
>
>That's retroactive disenfranchisement. Even Florida didn't try that.
>
>So far our election has been marred only by mistakes. Officials across 
>the
>state have ignored the shrill, irresponsible claims from both parties, 
>instead serving their true masters: the voters.
>
>The state Supreme Court ought to do the same. Or else we'll all be 
>heading
>down an election rabbit hole that goes deeper than Florida.
>
>Danny Westneat's column appears Wednesday and Friday. Reach him at
>206-464-2086 or dwestneat at seattletimes.com.
>
>
>
>
>
>======================================================================
>
>TO SUBSCRIBE TO THE SEATTLE TIMES PRINT EDITION
>Call (206) 464-2121 or 1-800-542-0820, or go to 
>https://read.nwsource.com/subscribe/times/
>
>HOW TO ADVERTISE WITH THE SEATTLE TIMES COMPANY ONLINE
>For information on advertising in this e-mail newsletter,
>or other online marketing platforms with The Seattle Times Company, 
>call (206) 464-2361 or e-mail websales at seattletimes.com
>
>TO ADVERTISE IN THE SEATTLE TIMES PRINT EDITION
>Please go to http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/contactus/adsales
>for information.
>
>======================================================================
>For news updates throughout the day, visit http://www.seattletimes.com 
>======================================================================
>
>             Copyright (c) 2004 The Seattle Times Company
>
>                         www.seattletimes.com
>                        Your Life. Your Times.

_____________________________________________________
 List services made available by First Step Internet, 
 serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.   
               http://www.fsr.net                       
          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯