Court Decides on Hand Recount

* Bravo to Florida’s Supreme Court for protecting that state’s manual recount law from George W. Bush’s partisan desperadoes (Nov. 22). It is sad that such a traditional and reliable concept as the hand-counting of ballots could be brought into question by a campaign that could not even win the nation’s popular vote. By the end of this counting process, Bush will emerge the big loser whether or not he tops the vote.

BOB TEIGAN

Simi Valley

*

History will not treat the seven justices of the Florida Supreme Court kindly. Not only did their confused questions and tortured hypotheticals during oral arguments betray their fundamental lack of understanding of the larger constitutional principles and implications involved in the case, but their decision is a highly irresponsible and unjust arrogation of state legislative and executive powers.

Though the Democratic justices may have scored a short-term political win with their decision, they will surely suffer a defeat at the hands of future historians, who will adjudge their decision an unconstitutional, politically motivated act of judicial legislation.

SUZANNE E. EVANS

Manhattan Beach

*

The Florida Supreme Court has changed the rules in the middle of the game: It is requiring the votes to be counted before a winner is declared. Shocking!

SCOTT J. TEPPER

Hidden Hills

*

The Florida secretary of state doesn’t have the authority granted her in legislation under the law, therefore her Saturday deadline was invalid, but the Florida Supreme Court can impose an arbitrary deadline of its own. Puts a whole new definition to “courting” the vote. This is a sad day for the rule of law.

TIM MESSER

Los Angeles

*

The action taken by the Florida Supreme Court is the right thing to do so that the voices of the citizen will be heard. Similarly, those absentee ballots with difficult-to-read postmarks must be counted. These voters should not be penalized for something over which they had no control.

RAY DE LEON

Aliso Viejo

*

For all his sanctimony in extolling the will of the people and the importance of every single vote, Al Gore is quite willing, even eager, to discount the votes of military personnel who voted properly but will not have their votes counted because a government agency didn’t put a postmark on the ballot. Hypocrisy, thy name is Democrat!

BOB YEEND

Santa Ana

*

It seems that the Republicans must be right about President Clinton destroying the military’s readiness, seeing as how they can’t even postmark their mail correctly. Am I the only one concerned about the precedent of allowing the counting of nonpostmarked ballots? Do you think any servicemen woke up Nov. 8, found out that their vote might decide the election and turned in a late ballot, which the military postal service conveniently “forgot” to postmark?

RUSSELL GECK

Glendale

*

I found a footnote on the table listing the recount totals on Page A16 on Wednesday to be a shock. Broward County has yet to count 38,000 absentee ballots . . . for the first time. Why? Too likely to be Republican? We are going to count dimpled chads when other votes sit uncounted at all? It’s starting to stink.

JEFF McCOMBS

La Palma

*

Having voted with punch-card ballots for 30 years, I would like to suggest a simple standard for interpreting voter intent when encountering the notorious “dimpled chad”: Count it as no vote, a change of mind or abstention, unless and only unless the preponderance of chads for other choices on that ballot are also dimpled. A preponderance of properly punched chads indicates the voter had both the knowledge and strength to properly execute a vote.

MICHAEL LAWLER

Los Angeles

*

There seems to be some confusion about how dimpled chads are created. Most of these dimpled chads are caused because the voting machine is not regularly cleaned. A good comparison is a hole puncher, in that when the hole puncher’s receptacle is full of paper circles, it becomes increasingly difficult to puncture more and more sheets of paper, until the hole puncher is unable to puncture the paper. In fact, the only thing that you are able to do is to cause an indentation (or a dimpled chad).

Gore picked these three counties because they are heavily populated with Democrats, who voted for him in great numbers. Which actually made it harder to vote for him, because underneath his name was probably a mountain of chads. Bush will receive very few dimpled ballots in these counties. However, in Republican counties the results would probably be different. But instead of asking for an accurate hand recount of their votes, the Republicans seem to just want to complain about the legal recounts going on in south Florida.

BEN BLACK

Phoenix, Ariz.

*

You’ve got to hand it to the Republicans for a great spin job. They’re trying to prevent an honest count of all the votes cast in Florida. Yet they raise such a clamor and yell “thief” so often, they’ve convinced many people they’re the victims.

JERRY BUCK

Sherman Oaks

*

Does your vote count? Sure it does! It just depends on the definition of “vote” and what the meaning of “count” is. So, hats off to you, Al Gore! Through you the Clinton legacy continues.

SUE PAROSKI

Santa Paula

*

Bush said that recounts invite human error and mischief. I thought I heard it said during the presidential campaign when he was courting votes that he trusted the American people. Now, he is changing his tune. Why the change?

ROMEO P. TORRES

El Monte

*

Gore has already impeached himself.

CHARLES K. SERGIS

Calabasas

*

Talk about “winning at any cost.” The Bush camp seems to be willing to provoke a constitutional crisis in order to prevent all of the votes from being counted. Bush did not win by a landslide; the vote is still too close to call; let’s tone it down.

NORMAN PALLEY

Culver City

*

If Democrats and liberals think that “the will of the people is of paramount consideration” in Florida, why do they otherwise fight in court to overturn initiatives passed by a majority of voters, why do they protest capital punishment (by every poll more favored than Gore is nationally), and why don’t they put issues such as abortion and gay marriages to the vote?

MEL WOLF

Burbank

*

The divisive, angry tone set by James A. Baker III in his speech following the decision of the Florida Supreme Court (Nov. 21) does not augur well for the spirit of unification once the current saga is over. How amazing that this gentleman respects the “rule of law” on one day and derides it the next; and how equally startling it is that we still attribute the word “statesman” to him.

STEPHEN MAITLAND-LEWIS

Palm Springs

*

Where are Ted Koppel’s nightly reports with the red banner in the corner of the screen: “America Held Hostage--election day, plus 15”?

ROBERT DE VIOLINI

Oxnard