[Am-info] Re: questions of 'integrity'

[John J. Urbaniak]

Mitch Stone wrote:

> --- From a message sent by Hans Reiser on 11/11/01 4:07 AM ---
>
> >The problem is that there is no run-off system for the presidency, and
> >the Constitution not Nader is to blame.
>
> The electoral college was created to address this potential problem and
> Congress has the Constitutional authority to resolve a deadlock (not the
> best possible system, and the Supreme Court decided they knew better this
> past year). If it were mine to choose, though, I'd go to a direct
> election with a run-off.
>
>

If Gore and the Democrats would have asked for a full state-wide recount
immediately, the US Supreme Court would not have ruled the way they did.

Instead, Gore tried to recount *only* the counties where he thought he had
the advantage.

The Supremes had no choice but to rule against that.

Besides, the US Constitution was on Bush's side two ways:

1.  It gives the Florida legislature (Republican majority) the option to
choose its electors,

2.  As a last resort, it gives the newly-elected US House (Republican
majority) the option to choose the President, however, in that case, it also
gives the Senate the option to choose the VP.  Gore, as current VP (until Jan
20, 2001) would have been able to cast a tie-breaker if the Senate
deadlocked.

So, no matter what, Bush would still be the Pres.  Lieberman might have been
VP.

John