Florida Election law on deadlines - judge upholds deadline

[Michael]

I asked this question a couple of times, and then decided to go look:

102.112 Deadline for submission of county returns to the Department of State; penalties.--

(1) The county canvassing board or a majority thereof shall file the county returns for the election of a federal or state officer with the Department of State immediately after certification of the election results. Returns must be filed by 5 p.m. on the 7th day following the first primary and general election and by 3 p.m. on the 3rd day following the second primary. If the returns are not received by the department by the time specified, such returns may be ignored and the results on file at that time may be certified by the department.

(2) The department shall fine each board member $200 for each day such returns are late, the fine to be paid only from the board member's personal funds. Such fines shall be deposited into the 1Election Campaign Financing Trust Fund, created by s. 106.32.

(3) Members of the county canvassing board may appeal such fines to the Florida Elections Commission, which shall adopt rules for such appeals.

History.--s. 30, ch. 89-338; s. 7, ch. 99-140.

1Note.--The trust fund expired, effective November 4, 1996, by operation of s. 19(f), Art. III of the State Constitution.

Statute on website

I think the key word here is "may" be ignored. Now to search for who determines the "may".

The deadline is Tuesday, Nov 14th at 5 PM.

Michael

 

[chess9]

Michael:

The Secretary of State is a Republican. You may change "may" to "will". One question is whether the Canvassing Board may certify the results as contested. In other words, not declare any totals. The statute gives the SOS plenty of wiggle room. I don't know how a judge would change that.

Nice job.

 

[chess9]

Also, that statute is in apparent conflict with this statute:
Contest of Election

If a court proceeding is pending, how can the Canvassing Board certify the election to the SOS? This sounds like a question for the Florida Supreme Court. Guess which way they lean?

 

[Michael]

It then seems to fall into the realm of law, which I am not qualified to report on.

Here's the statute that was read last night (that is referenced iin the statute you linked to):

Protest of results / recount regulation

Here's the part that goes over the choices the Canvassing Board has (if they determine there was an error, the definition of which was being argued over last night).

(5) If the manual recount indicates an error in the vote tabulation which could affect the outcome of the election, the county canvassing board shall:

(a) Correct the error and recount the remaining precincts with the vote tabulation system;

(b) Request the Department of State to verify the tabulation software; or

(c) Manually recount all ballots.

I guess it can be argued that they already chose option a) as a complete machine recount has already been done.

It looks like the courts will end up deciding the results, not the votes/voters as both sides are claiming. This is goingt o be even more of a mess.

Michael

ps - I am not a lawyer, I'm only guessing here

 

[chess9]

Michael:

You can be sure the lawyers are also guessing. These are uncharted waters.

 

[MrChicken]

The legal advice given at the canvassing board vote last night went along the lines of the statute states that a "tabulation error" is the requirement for a manual recount can be construed as having to with the machines, and the problems being looked at with the punch cards could be construed as a "voter error", thus invalidating the boards authority to call for the manual recount.

The plea went out that the vote on the manual recount be held until the lawyers could look at the statute closer. The board voted anyway, probably ensuring that this will go to court also.

 

[Michael]

I thought the whole motion and vote seemed weak. I could have sworn that the second was made "for discussion purposes only", so that give the Republican lawyers one avenue of attack. They're also meeting on Monday morning to start planning how to do the count and the deadline is the next day at 5 PM.

From the news reports I read, the criteria of what was and was not a vote changed during the count. It does not appear that there is a standard criteria in the statute. Another avenue for attack in the courts.

I'm sure that an argument will be made that the hand count should only be verifying that the machine correctly counted all votes. The definition of a vote is the ballot having the space completely punched out. They could argue that a ballot not completely punched out, or only partially punched out meant that the voter was undecided and had the intent of not voting. They already left room open for this argument by deciding not to count votes where there was a clear indentation but no corners of the chad was broken.

It is going to get worse and worse if this keeps up..

Michael

ps - I will add that an argument can be made for either candidate to conceed at this point. Bush has a slight edge in that complete recounts have already been performed and he is still ahead pending the absentee votes, but that's not going to be recognized by the Democrats.

 

[jadinolf]

I just discovered that I have a "swinging chad".

No physician can help me.

What do I do now?

 

[Russ]

I heard on CNN radio news, 3:00 PM my time, that suits are being prepared against the Florida Secretary of State to force the deadline to be extended.

Take a wild guess who the plaintiffs are. I'll give you a hint: It's on behalf of Palm County.

Russ, NCNE

 

[ride525]

<< I heard on CNN radio news, 3:00 PM my time, that suits are being prepared against the Florida Secretary of State to force the deadline to be extended.
Take a wild guess who the plaintiffs are. I'll give you a hint: It's on behalf of Palm County.
>>



Looks like this thing may be decided by who files the most court actions and has the most lawyers....

 

[Tripleshot]

The first campaign to take the low ground was the GOP.:Q Who would have thunk it?

Shrubs a loser- Get over It !!

 

[Michael]

Tripleshot - accusations of &quot;taking the low ground&quot; add nothing to the discussion. I politely request that you leave out that type of remark in this thread.

thanks,

Michael

 

[wiin]

Tripleshot

Platinum Member Date Posted: Nov/12/2000 6:55 PM

The first campaign to take the low ground was the GOP. Who would have thunk it?


Tripleshot,
With the things that the Gore team are doing and planning on doing
(legal action by Gore's trolls as well as possible legal action
by Gore) put the Republicans in a damn if you do, damn if you
don't situation. personally, I am glad the Bush camp did what they
did. Of course, now the gore team is whining about how the election
should not be settled by the judicial sytem. What a bunch of
hypocrites. Gore wanted to do the same thing but Bush beat him to
it. Bush wins again. hehehe

 

[Russ]

Michael,

Don't waste your breath. He's wrong, of course, since it was Bore's people who filed the first lawsuit. But, the fact is that some people lack the arsenal to debate on the merits and thus must resort to slurs in order to bolster a weak argument.

Russ, NCNE

 

[Tripleshot]

Micheal,

I think I'll post what I like. If it's OK for Russ to post &quot;Bore lost-Get over it&quot; which is a blatent LIE since the election process isn't final yet,I'll be just as happy to post SHRUBS A POND SCUM SUCKING LOSER !!

To me its far closer to the truth. He is a hypocrite for doing what he did in New Mexico ,his scorched earth policy and the FACT is BAKER filed the suit in Federal court to try and turn over the will of the people in a state election. Gore's staff have not filed one friggin suit. If he has ,show me!

You can't.

Just to support a bit of my contention and where this comes from, do a little reading.
Some in GOP Warn of Peril in Bush Suit

 

[Michael]

Russ and wiin - Who filed the first lawsuit is somewhat moot. Both sides are perfectly capable of name calling, and I'll make the same polite request to you as well. I'm interested in opinions on the legal strategies and possible outcomes because I think that the count itself is now hopeless.

I know that we do have a couple of lawyers who post on the baord occasionally, and their opinion might help.

I'm curious about the lawsuit to extend the deadline. I guess it will get down to past experience. Does anyone know if counties have been late filing before in Florida and what has happened if and when they requested an extension? Has any county had to pay the fine?

That's the type of question I wish the media would ask and seek answers to instead of putting talking heads on who just yell at each other or repeast the party line.

Michael

 

[etech]

I heard somewhere that the Democrats strategy is to try and tie up Florida's electoral votes in court past the 18th of Dec. when the Electoral College meets. Since at last count Gore was ahead in EC votes that would give him the presidency.


Tripleshot, the truth has never stopped you from posting before and I see no reason why it should now.

 

[Michael]

Tripleshot - You can, of course, post anything you like (unless the Mods take exception). Russ' comment is in his sig. If you wanted to put something in your sig, then His first post in this thread was informative as it brought to light the lawsuit being launched to extend the deadline.

Your comment about the moral low ground is still unneccesary and your link shows that same quote going from a Democrat official.

I dug up the link and the info so that the deadline and the legal statutes could be discussed. Chess9 contributed by adding more information. So far you've name called.

Usually when I see someone resort to yelling and name calling, I take it as a sign that they're conceeding that they cannot win by using reason and logic. Sometimes past history is the reason, but I am curious about what chances you think the recounts have to be finished by the deadline and what chance the lawsuit to extend the deadline will have.

etech - right now, the state can certify the election without all the counties being counted. Then, of course, the entire state's vote can be challenged (if I'm reading the statutes right). If the whole state is thrown out, then Gore would have the EC lead, subject to what happens in the other states.

Michael

 

[chess9]

Michael:

With all due respect to your &quot;QUEST&quot;, I think it is hopeless. This is a very difficult set of circumstances and I've seen quite a few lawyers on the talk shows say anything can happen.

We know the suit tomorrow will come to naught, but all these other cases are subject to the whims of the judges. Our fate, like it or not, is in the hands of the judiciary unless one of the candidates decides he doesn't want it badly enough to cause a bigger stink. Frankly, I don't see that happening.

All we can do is guess what might happen and I think we've done that ad nauseum in the dozens of threads dedicated to this election and its aftermath.

 

[AndrewR]

Interesting note: It was reported on NBC tonight that the Gore campaign has stated that if the MANUAL RECOUNT does not give Florida to Gore, they will continue to challenge the result?

Is there any doubt from anyone that they will keep challenging until they win?

 

[Tripleshot]

OK mike,
I think that a deadline extension is 100% possible and there is no argument to warrent not extending it, based on the irregularities that where found in the disputing counties and were brought to light by voting officials in the counties affected. This is simple procedure,that only would be blocked by someone who has more to lose by extending the deadline than allowing the deadline to occur. Common sense tells us the republicans are the losing party in this battle. That can't be difficult for you to understand.

Volutia county thinks they will be finished by Tuesday,but thats academic.They have plans on seeking a court extension tomorrow. The rest of the counties will be covered in the request for an extension.

 

[ride525]

<< Interesting note: It was reported on NBC tonight that the Gore campaign has stated that if the MANUAL RECOUNT does not give Florida to Gore, they will continue to challenge the result?
Is there any doubt from anyone that they will keep challenging until they win? >>


There is no doubt BOTH sides will keep challenging each other, until they run out of challenges, or lawyers....

 

[Tripleshot]

AndrewR

Is there any doubt from anyone that they will keep challenging until they win?

Absolutly no doubt. Just as I have no doubt the Republicans will and are doing the same.RE: New Mexico.

 

[Michael]

Tripleshot - I wonder if the extension is such a slam dunk. Usually the courts try and interpret the law. Since there is the word &quot;may&quot; in the statute, I guess that is one argument that can be used, that there is a choice and why not error on the side of giving more time. On the other hand, it seems like it is clear who gets to decide what the &quot;may&quot; means and warning has been given.

I'm not sure what irregularities you are referring to. It seems that the counting machines were doing their jobs. The issue about the &quot;confusing&quot; ballot is subject to another lawsuit and most of the experts I've watched and read have concluded that the ballot was legal and that lawsuit will fail. Chads not punched through are not &quot;irregularities&quot;. It happens in every single election that uses punchcards and it a fallout from choosing that technology to record votes. I don't see what is &quot;irregular&quot; about this.

The fact that using a subjective criteria, the county board decided that some cards contained votes that were not counted doesn't seem to be an irregularity to me.

I also wonder if it is so sure that the Republican lawsuit is being thrown out, although I wonder why it was filed in Federal court as elections are usually state matters unless there a civil right violations. I don't understand the &quot;due process&quot; argument as it can be strongly argued that denying a manual count is denying due process to whoever requests it as it is an option in the statute.

Everything I've read about NM says that neither party has asked for recounts. The change in the vote was a result of a problem in reconciling votes cast versus votes counted in the certification process and that it has been an administrative process so far. Do you have a link to show this was a request from a campaign?

Michael

 

[Russ]

<< I think that a deadline extension is 100% possible and there is no argument to warrent not extending it >>



Let me get this straight. Bush is taking the low road because his campaign filed a suit that &quot;interferes&quot; with Florida State Law, but when Bore's people do EXACTLY the same thing there is &quot;no argument&quot; against it.

Stunning.

Russ, NCNE