"Roger W. Norman" wrote in message
...

Even with the Supreme Court decision that many say "gave" Bush the
election, the idea was that, regardless of the Florida Supreme Court's
decision the questioned votes be recounted, the US Supreme Court
determined, in fairness, that all Florida votes would have to be
recounted and in such a time frame as available, it wouldn't be possible.
Therefore, George Bush became the 43rd President of the United States.
And the decision was based on the hard fast date of December 15th,
which was the timeframe allowed for individual electors to reach the
capitol city by horseback.

But that wasn't the deadline (the Federal one) they were held to, the
deadline they were held to was in Florida's own law. It was *Florida's*
deadline that they had to meet. Then they wanted to change that Florida law
to allow the recounts, and the SC said they couldn't change voting laws in
the middle of an election. It wasn't the Federal law that was the problem,
it was the State law.

Now I'm not whining that Gore isn't President. I'm saying that it's
obvious 200 year old rules and procedures aren't in the best interest
of the populace who are asked to vote for a President and then have
to put up with someone who wasn't THE elected President. It's easy

I don't see that as obvious (let alone true) at all. I think the
electoral college *is* in the best interests of the people it represents.

I now not only foresee additional problems in Florida for this election
cycle, as evidenced by the 2002 interim elections, but the addition of the

Well, no one bothered to change the "offending" laws in Florida, so it
seems evident that the same problem witll occur again.

In other words, we can't be involved with antiquating the manual ballots
that have served for some number of years without negating the antiquated
elements involved with the time constraints implied by 200 year old
processes and procedures. Implementing a new complex system based on
terminology and time constraints from 200 years ago incorporates new
breakdown points within the new complex system. But complex systems is
a discussion for another day.

I'm with you, but I just don't think the federal time limit has ever
been a problem. Regardless of how quickly we *can* collect votes, why jack
with a schedule that has always worked? Who cares why the schedule was
originally implemented, I would rather have extra time between each step
than to shorten the process and end up running over the newly established
deadlines when there's a problem.

ryanm