Ohio Results will be debated

HURRAY!!!!!

Published on January 6, 2005 By dabe In Politics

Although no one is expecting the elections to be overturned, and that is NOT the purpose of the debate. It's to discuss, and hopefully fix the problems that developed during the elections in Ohio and elsewere. Some of these problems include not enough voting machines in minority districts, faulty machines, improper registrations, and certainly not least, the fact that the person overseeing the Ohio elections was/is the person who headed up the Bush reelection campaign. This, in and of itself, smacks of conflict of interest and lack of objectivity, even if such conficts didn't in fact exist. In other words, you can't have a partisan person overseeing an election, as the perceptions will always be suspect. I'm happy about this debate. I hope it brings to light some of the problems, and of course, seeks to fix them prior to the 2006 elections.

Democrats and liberals are not the party of corruption, as others have protrayed us. We are only looking for a fair and open debate, one that is not shut down by the republican majority. That's all. After all, there is no mandate, and the country is pretty evenly split. The debate must happen.

Senator Boxer has done good. My hat's off to her for her efforts.

Democrats to Force Debate on Ohio Results
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

Published: January 6, 2005

Filed at 9:36 a.m. ET

WASHINGTON (AP) -- A small group of Democrats agreed Thursday to force House and Senate debates on Election Day problems in Ohio before letting Congress certify President Bush's election over Sen. John Kerry in November.

Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., signed a challenge mounted by House Democrats to Ohio's 20 electoral votes, which put Bush over the top. By law, a challenge signed by members of the House and Senate requires both chambers to meet separately for up to two hours to consider it. Lawmakers are allowed to speak for no more than five minutes each.

While Bush's victory is not in jeopardy, the Democratic challenge will force Congress to interrupt tallying the Electoral College vote that was scheduled to begin at 1 p.m. EST Thursday. It would be only the second time since 1877 that the House and Senate were forced into separate meetings to consider electoral votes.

Comments (Page 2)

terpfan1980

on Jan 07, 2005

Dabe - I have to ask you, is what happened in Washington state not something that needs to be addressed? Did the Republican Candidate there get hosed, and were not shennanigans played to turn over the results of that election? Should not a new election be held there to determine the real winner?

In Pennsylvania, especially in the Philadelphia area, where more votes than registered voters were counted (at least back in the 2000 election) (also, btw, a problem that has been found to exist in King County, Washington state), are the problems not worth looking into?

In Baltimore, Maryland, where multiple problems existed in Gubernatorial elections back in the 90's, are the problems with dead people voting not worth resolving?

In all of these cases, there was no crying from Democrats. In fact, just the opposite. There was minor outcry among the Republicans (actually perhaps major out-cry about the Washington State hose job of Dino Rossi), but not a peep out of Democrats as long as they achieved the end goal of win at all costs.

All of these problems should be resolved, but the point is that it's so completely hypocritical and just plain grandstanding for any Democrat to point to Ohio and complain about the system.

And again, in most of these cases, it was Democrats in charge at the local levels that are responsible for the problems that have occured and disenfranchised their constituents.

I'm very much reminded me of the cries among Democrats that Bush was going to bring back the draft -- even though it was people like John Conyers and Charlie Rangell (sp?) that were sponsoring the bills to re-instate the draft -- all prominent Democrats. Not a single supporter among Republicans, and not a single vote in favor by even these under-handed sponsors when the bill was put to a vote (there was at least one yes vote, which I believe did come from a Democrat).

messybuu

on Jan 07, 2005

Messy, you're right. It is the democrats who have been screaming foul, and the conflict is of course present. If the tables were turned, we'd be hearing it from the republicans. But, because the republicans in Congress are content and complacent in their victory, they choose to leave well enough alone. For now. But, I would think that even republicans would have problems with the amounts of voter and election issues that have surfaced since 2000.

Perhaps they would be screaming foul, and perhaps they would be pretending that they're fighting in the interests of the people while they refuse to demand multiple recounts in districts they've won, but that doesn't change the fact that it's the Democrats who are doing it now. If the Democrats are serious about wanting to fix elections and not just bitter about losing, then they will demand recounts and the like in places they've won as well, but I doubt they will and I doubt that any Democrat here wants it either. Hell, I remember posting an article asking if Democrats would demand multiple recounts if Kerry won, but only by a very slight margin a la 2000, and no Democrat said they'd support such a thing.

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!