Weather | Sports | Forums | Comics | Classifieds | Calendar | Movies
© St. Petersburg Times, published December 8, 2000
Weekday mornings at the Butler household begin at 6 a.m. The routine is similar to that of many families in Pinellas County: a shower, getting dressed, a quick breakfast with the family followed by a mad dash on U.S. 19 to drop my teenage daughter off at school before driving on to work.
My daughter and I had long ago agreed to a compromise on listening to the radio on the way to school each morning. I was "allowed" to listen to the news on National Public Radio from 7 a.m. until 7:07 a.m.
This ritual was faithfully followed for almost two years until Nov. 8, the day after the presidential election. While listening to results of the election in the car, my daughter asked me why no one had been declared a winner in the presidential race. Unsure of the answer, I suggested that we listen to the analysis on the radio. Oddly, she did not change the radio station until 7:09 a.m.
Over the next several weeks, a remarkable transformation occurred in our daily ritual and in our relationship. Instead of changing the radio station at the designated time, my daughter would engage me in a dialogue about various emerging issues in the fight for the presidency. I learned much about my daughter's political ideology and was surprised at the depth of her convictions. Together, we struggled to understand the complexities of the American political process and anxiously awaited the latest news in the roller coaster race to the White House.
Historians will probably regard the presidential election of 2000 as a very close race between two lackluster candidates, but this experience has provided the opportunity to enhance my relationship with my daughter and bear witness to her "political awakening."
-- Kevin Butler, Tarpon Springs
Re: Don't be fooled by Democratic rhetoric, letter, Dec. 7.
The letter writer charges that readers would be wrong to think that Sen. Bob Graham's column of Dec. 2 was reasonable and fair-minded. He portrays Graham's article as only seeming to be thoughtful while really being a "well-concealed attempt" to hide the Democratic agenda. To prove his point, the writer offers a series of assertions that sounds to me more like the "increasingly shrill and hysterical rhetoric" he asserts the Democrats are using.
The writer claims to speak for "we, the people." (How easy it is for rhetoricians to presume their personal views represent the views of others.) He hints that even if Gore wins the majority vote in Florida, the nation would not anoint him president. (What's he mean? How does he know that we, the people, don't respect majority rule or won't abide by law?) The writer insists that the will of the people would be supplanted by the will of those with the money to hire lawyers. (Does he not trust the legal system of our nation? Is he unaware of or trying to conceal the fact that the Republican Party hires lawyers and brings suits to advance its purposes?)
It seems to me that this letter is a not-so-subtle, not-so-well-concealed attempt to advance the Republican agenda. Or am I putting thoughts into the writer's head and motives in his heart that he does not share?
Perhaps I am doing to the letter writer what he attempted to do to Sen. Bob Graham by discounting Graham's thoughtful column with wild allegations and unfounded rhetoric.
-- James S. Clinefelter, Sun City Center
Re: Black voters vent frustration, Dec. 7.
So a black woman in Duval County went to vote and found her polling place wasn't in the same location as it was the year before? Does she think George W. Bush personally moved the location as a deliberate act of prejudice against her?
I am a white Republican male and I've had the same thing happen to me in years past. Whose fault was that? Mine, because I hadn't taken the time to check it out and make sure I was to vote in the same place.
Then the woman tried to vote at another location, and she wasn't allowed to. Well, if that wasn't her precinct, that would be perfectly normal, wouldn't it? By the time she finally located the place she was supposed to go to in the first place, it was too late.
So, where's the crime? Where are the federal marshals? This event was nothing more than an unfortunate coincidence that could have been avoided if the woman had double-checked the location of her precinct's polling place before she left. But I suppose it's too much these days to expect someone to be responsible for their own actions.
If a black person, or anyone else for that matter, was actually kept from voting, that is a federal crime and should be dealt with swiftly and severely. But if some black people are using a few unfortunate coincidences to try to say they were denied the right to vote, that's equally bad. And if the Times just lets those charges float around creating unease, then the Times is also guilty -- of lame reporting and bias.
-- J.R. Carrel, Safety Harbor
Dimples and chads took on a new meaning while listening to the proceedings the other day in a Leon County courtroom. One witness read the "instructions to voters" on the voting machines used in South Florida. One of the last lines went something like this: "When you remove your ballot, be sure to look and see if it has been punched all the way through -- and if there is a hanging chip remove it."
In other words, it is the responsibility of the voter to see that his ballot is done right. So why are some people trying to blame the machines or the ballots? If the voters all followed this simple instruction, we would not have the mess we have today -- and no ballot counter would have to determine the "intent" of a voter. That simple line of instruction shows where the fault lies (on each individual voter).
A dimpled ballot should not be counted because simple instructions were not followed. I know this sounds too simple -- but it is still true (like it or not).
-- Arthur Olsen, Clearwater
An alarming and disturbing notion that the United States is a democracy has emerged and re-emerged in the postelection ramblings of nearly all willing to speak. Elected officials from both parties and copious numbers of people who just ought to know better talk about our form of government as if it were one person, one vote. It has never been thus.
The framers of our nation were wise enough to bequeath to us a representative democratic republic. That is, we choose people to vote for us. Individual votes are abstracted into voting blocks entrusted to persons not bound to vote the will of the people. Members of Congress need not poll their constituents before deciding their position on an issue to satisfy the law.
In fact, the framers of our Constitution had not meant for Senate members to be chosen by direct popular vote at all, instead entrusting the higher house in Congress to the discretion of the states' legislatures.
It is reckless and dangerous for elected representatives of the people, lawyers, editors, reporters and the vocal members of our society to perpetuate this misconception of our federal system. It encourages unjust and unkindly sentiments to be fostered by the public at large and only serves to generate discontent and misunderstanding.
Our system is not perfect, it is a work in progress. But it could be worse. It could be a democracy.
-- Jason Olmsted, Clearwater
This election has been a circus, but it has served to alert the voters to the fact that our system is corrupt and outdated.
I voted Libertarian and I hate to think that my ballot could have been invalidated, either purposely or inadvertently, by some precinct worker.
Elections are a basic function of our government. If our leaders cannot budget to provide for simple, honest elections, how can they afford to squander revenues on foreign aid and other unconstitutional expenditures.
I would like to cast my vote in an ATM system and be able to call later to verify it, just the way I can call my bank to verify a deposit. Voting hours could be extended and the need for precinct workers would be eliminated. Think of the convenience.
As for the Electoral College, it is unrealistic to think that the less populous states would vote to ratify an amendment eliminating it. But I do think Florida could avoid future election bickering by ending the "winner-take-all" policy. Divide the electoral votes according to the vote totals, and it is settled.
We are told that our leaders are some of the best minds. Right! If that were true, it would be scary, indeed.
-- Grace Payton, Temple Terrace
No matter who is finally selected to be president, his term will forever be known to be tainted. Note that I said "selected," as we will never know who really was elected due to the errors, omissions and deletions across the nation.
Without a mandate from the people and with a split Senate and House, it will be in the interest of the selectee to realize that his platform has been rejected by at least half of the voters.
Let us hope then, that he and our representatives in Congress and our senators will keep any grandiose changes at bay during the next four years and try to work together to pass legislation that most voters agree upon.
As a registered Independent, I would also like to see both the Democratic and Republican parties own up to the fact that voters also rejected them for their partisan actions over the past four years. Perhaps 2004 will offer the chance to truly elect a deserving president, an intelligent man or woman with more integrity than we have seen in either of the two candidates that just ran.
-- Gloria Morsch, Largo
I am inclined to believe that George W. Bush, his brother Jeb and many of their supporters have been using "the color of law" to obstruct justice. I didn't know what that meant until I watched the history of the civil rights movement as it was chronicled in the video series entitled Eyes on the Prize. The series showed actual newsreel footage of police officers arresting citizens for all types of reasons (as excuses) to keep them from engaging in peaceful demonstrations.
The shifting and shuffling that the Florida Republican leadership has been engaging in (so as to keep Al Gore from pursuing his legal rights and also the rights of the American citizens) sure seem to be reminiscent of the abuses of power that were rampant during the civil rights movement and that were documented in the Eyes on the Prize series.
-- Daniel P. Quinn, St. Petersburg
On a lighter side, does it really matter who will be president? Shouldn't we be more concerned about cancer, HIV, hungry people and our environment?
Put up some Christmas lights, feel the magic and enjoy!
-- Bill Padgett, Largo
We invite readers to write to us. Letters for publication should be addressed to Letters to the Editor, P.O. Box 1121, St. Petersburg, FL 33731.
They can be sent by e-mail to letters@sptimes.com or by fax to (727) 893-8675.
They should be brief and must include the writer's name, address and phone number. Please include a handwritten signature when possible.
Letters may be edited for clarity, taste and length. We regret that not all letters can be published.