Opinion: Counting all votes is vital to democracy

The individual's right to vote is the very essence of our republic. Accurately counting all those votes is no less important than is the right to vote. Having said this, I fail to understand how any patriotic American, especially a candidate for president of the United States, can honestly oppose the counting of the votes as was approved Friday by the Florida Supreme Court.

How can anyone say that counting these votes is wrong and still believe in our democracy? How can any American in whom we would trust the highest office in the land oppose such a hand recount? On what basis might a presidential candidate oppose the recounts? That he might lose if all the votes are counted is hardly an acceptable reason from one aspiring to be the leader of this nation. And while that is not the reason stated, one must reasonably conclude this to be the reality behind the objection.

Just because such a person has led in several machine counts or recounts is no reason for him to pretend to be the winner when there are still thousands of votes out there that the machines were unable to count for one reason or another.

I think any American running for president would to want to make every effort to be absolutely certain that all the votes are counted, even if by doing so he were to lose the election. He should want to do this if for no other reason than to preserve the validity of this essential American ideal that all Americans should vote and all votes should be counted.
-- Merrill Friend, Tampa

Precious time is slipping away

After the Florida Supreme Court devised a plan that seemed to be fair to all sides -- manual recounting the undervotes from all Florida counties -- the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled in record time to stop the process, with the result being that the precious time needed will be all but gone if and when our land's highest court reaches a verdict prior to the national certification deadline.

Talk about judicial activism. There's no reason the counts couldn't have continued and then been reviewed later for validity -- except that it wouldn't be in the Republicans' interest to have the public reading headlines such as "Gore takes the lead."

We may not know before the Inauguration who truly had more votes in Florida. But when these ballots are counted down the road -- and they will be counted -- heaven help the Bush administration and our country if Gore is found to be the real winner.
-- Joe Palmer, Clearwater

What should the standards be?

Re: Deeply divided, Dec. 11.

The editorial page is supposed to enlighten. Your statement that there should be a "full statewide recount under uniform standards" is a cop-out and a reflection of your bias in that it parrots Gore's "just count all the ballots" line.

If you have any ideas about uniform standards, let's hear them. For starters, if a ballot has no vote for either Al Gore or George Bush but is otherwise a straight party-line vote on every other question, what is the voter's intent? Did he forget to vote for a presidential candidate, or is it that he didn't like either one?

How deep does a dimple have to be before you think it is an intended vote, rather than reflecting a last minute change of mind?

Come down out of your ivory tower and answer the tough questions rather than sanctimoniously preaching to the canvassing boards.
-- Don Goodall, Dunedin

The fear of counting votes

Why is George W. Bush so afraid to have the votes counted in Florida? Why is it a fair and true election when all of the votes haven't been counted?

If Bush wasn't so afraid that a full count would show his defeat, he wouldn't have spent so much time and money running to the courts to keep the votes from being counted. And why should the courts in this country allow Bush to stop the counting? I didn't see it written anywhere that George W. has a divine right to be president of the United States in spite of the will of the voters of Florida.
-- June Einboden, St. Petersburg

Stop this nonsense

I am a regular voter and as such have no problems with our current punch ballots, unlike our South Florida friends.

Nonetheless, I was feeling a mite peckish on Nov. 7, and the fear has entered my mind that I perhaps was less forceful than normal in punching in my vote. This may make my vote one of the dreaded "undervotes."

Do I want some harassed counter endeavoring to interpret my intent? Not on your life! Stop the recount, indeed! Stop this nonsense and give us the president we elected in the first place.
-- Joan Galvin, Clearwater

Turning to T-shirts

In light of the Republicans' campaign to not count all Florida ballots, perhaps we should start printing souvenir T-shirts: "FLORIDA 2000 -- Where Democracy took a vacation."
-- Jim Santamour, St. Petersburg

Looking on the bright side

Am I the only one who thinks this election struggle is exciting? Consider all the good that may come from this:

Supervisors of elections everywhere will be able to recommend contemporary voting systems, ensuring improved vote recording and tabulation.

We are going to have a president, but he will not have "won," he will be eeked as in "Eek, that was close." I hope he approaches the job with appropriate humility and a resolve to be an activist moderate working for the overall good.

We got a close look at how one supervisor of elections may have treated her political party differently. There's a good chance that won't happen as often in the future. It may be time to have citizen review committees of the supervisor of elections offices. No pay. Coffee? Maybe.

Some of us found we can live with a lot less TV.

I, for one, enjoyed the detailed coverage by the print media where I am free to read (or not) when and where I choose.

I look forward to our moving ahead with a balanced Congress and an eeked president.
-- Gordon Hill, St. Petersburg

The value of "none of the above'

Our recent election fiasco will likely bring many changes to our election procedures. Hopefully they will be positive ones. With this in mind, I would propose the addition of: "None of the above" for each elected position on the ballot. While many may perceive this as a joke, it does serve two important purposes on the ballot.

First, it expresses the voters' dissatisfaction with the choices presented. Marking "None of the above" does, however, record a vote for that particular office, and that record cannot be changed or misread as a vote for another candidate. The current problem of dimples and chads disappears. Any misinterpretation is extremely difficult to overrule. A choice was registered by the voter and it needs to be counted.

Secondly, as votes are tabulated, the "none of the above" votes are also counted to ensure election integrity. "None of the above" acts as a numerical statistic. For example: If 3,125 persons voted in a precinct and the results were: Bush 1,310, Gore 1,290, Nader 205, Buchanan 120 and "None of the above" 200; then these votes total: 3,125 which is the exact number of persons who voted. No more, no less. It's something to be considered by those who can create beneficial changes in our election process.
-- Jacob Kazimer, Inverness

Poll workers should be tested

As a Pinellas County resident and poll worker working in previous elections as an inspector and as a deputy, I offer a recommendation to the office of elections supervisor.

My recommendation is that a qualifications examination be prepared and then administered to all poll workers, clerks, inspectors and deputies.

My recommendation is based on my observation of the sample of workers with whom I served. A very few -- fortunately, only a few -- were really unable to perform the minimum tasks required of their positions. Realizing how important accurate voting is to our freedoms, it behooves the supervisor to recruit only the very best of qualified workers available.

This necessity is borne out in view of the errors and inaccuracies uncovered during the counting and recounting of votes in the presidential election. Many of the problems surfacing may have been avoided with more capable, qualified, tested workers.

To become a licensed driver, one must pass an examination to become qualified. Certainly, poll workers' responsibilities are of equal or greater importance. This responsibility then requires that the supervisors of elections recruit the very best to perform at top, accurate efficiency. A voting citizen of this wonderful country deserves no less.
-- Harold Zallis, Palm Harbor

Dick Cheney's priorities

Re: Nasty and nice presidential twosome, Dec. 8.

Mary McGrory's column was very enlightening, especially Dick Cheney's comment that he "had other priorities in the '60s than military service." I wonder how many of the 57,000 Vietnam casualties would have loved to have "had other priorities" rather than taking a bullet for their country.
Russ Arney, Homosassa

Journalists aren't above the rest of us

Re: A tough call by Ch. 8, Dec. 5.

"But journalists aren't ordinary citizens." Actually, they are. This one sentence from your article on a WFLA-TV reporter's role in the FDLE investigation of Harry Lee Coe tells why the media are losing credibility in the public's eye. It is not because they are becoming "agents of the police," but because journalists are often arrogant, have a "holier-than-thou" attitude and put themselves on a pedestal that doesn't exist.

The response we usually hear is that "our job is to report the news, not become involved in it." And this doesn't even get into factual errors that get into print (bad editing), talking heads who don't have a clue, or the liberal bias that colors news articles that should be unbiased.

The story should not have been about whether Steve Andrews was right to inform FDLE of possible wrongdoing in Coe's office, but rather why reporters sometimes feel they don't have to. The First Amendment ensures certain rights but doesn't give anyone a blank check.
-- Ernest Lane, New Port Richey

A matter of accountability

However devastating to family and friends, Harry Lee Coe allegedly broke the very laws he had sworn to uphold.

Freedom of the press, as personified by Ch. 8's Steve Andrews, is our last bastion in holding public officials accountable.
-- Harry Harper, Clearwater

An argument for term limits

The fiasco of the saga of Harry Lee Coe as a judge and as a state attorney makes a very strong argument for the value of term limits for the protection of the public offices.

One has to wonder about the full extent of the activities that have not come to light or are being withheld from the media.
-- S.W. Sayles, St. Pete Beach

Share your opinions

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. Letters may be edited for clarity, taste and length.

We regret that not all letters can be published.

Back to Opinion

Contact the Times | Privacy Policy
Standard of Accuracy | Terms, Conditions & Copyright

From the Times
Opinion page