Simplifying future cliffhanger elections

[Dan Robinson]

On 2000-11-30 hiaw...@efn.org said to dan...@efn.org
>Because right now we are dealing with the vaguaries of 50 different
>sets of election laws. Ambiguities in Florida required the
>intervention of the courts to interpret the laws; if the same were
>to happen in Oregon there would be a completely different set of
>contingencies. Having a national standard would make the US
>Supreme Court the sole arbiter of questions of election protocol in
>all states.

Agreed.

>}>But I think the bozos that run for office should have to
>}>chip in a certain proportion of their total campaign spending to
>}>help }>defray the cost of such a contingency.

>}While your about it, why don't you think the corporations into
>}paying the rest? Thinking it is not the same as making it happen.

>What's your point? That we should act without thinking? Or
>that we should do nothing?

The point is these are less likely to happen than was getting
Nader elected. On the other hand, if Gore and Bush were to agree
to decide by flipping a coin, and the loser would agree to back
out, they'd both end up with a better image.

>}>For national elections there should be a standardized national
>}>ballot, and an standardized voting protocol that is the same for
>}>all voters, in all states. The electoral college should be
>}>abolished, and the office of president decided by the outcome of a
>}>direct popular vote. The allowable margin of error in the count
>}>should be fixed constitutionally, and thus be the same for
>}>everyone.

But isn't that like trying to legislate that all dice should come
up sevens? How do you know when you've passed that error margin,
without two recounts to check? What happens if it has, a revote?

>Kind of like you thinking that voting for Nader had any practical
>effect other than to probably give Bush the presidency? ;-)

See above.

>}Meanwhile, what about this time?

>From what available options? I favor a re-vote for president in
>Florida using standardized ballots. Failing that, I favor a
>recount of the whole state under the supervision of a neutral third
>party, if it's possible to define such a thing in this case.
>Failing that, I favor a complete recount of all the votes in the
>disputed counties.

>Failing that, I favor throwing out the Florida vote entirely, and
>deciding the election based on the votes of the remaining states,
>with congress breaking a tie, if necessary. What the hell, we
>already know that thousands of votes weren't counted, why balk at
>millions?

And this would reflect the real "will of the people"? It's not as
though it's going to matter at this point. Still, I doubt that
anyone will want to take responsibility for a final decision of
who will be president. Hold a new election, or flip a coin!

Dan Robinson dan...@efn.org
Eugene OR 97401 www.efn.org/~danrob/

A true believer can be sure without any pertinent facts.
A true scientist can't be sure, even with all the facts,
Because he can't be sure he has all the facts.