Mer og mer tyder på at historikernes dom til sist vil bli at Bush II "vant"
Florida ved valgfusk eller et de facto kupp, støttet av Høyesteretts
republikanske flertall på een. Kanskje vil de også komme til at dette
markerte et skred i et par avgjørende år hvor demokratiet kom inn i en
skjebnekrise, både i USA og i Europa. Men avhengig av utfallet av denne
krisa er det selvsagt ikke sikkert at vi i framtiden lenger vil ha
historikere verd navnet.
Karsten Johansen
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/americas/newsid_1440000/1440130.stm
Sunday, 15 July, 2001, 17:51 GMT 18:51 UK
New twist in Florida vote dispute
Some types of ballot were more liable to be rejected The New York Times
newspaper says the key Florida vote count that decided the US presidential
election included hundreds of overseas absentee ballots that violated state
election laws.
A six-month investigation showed that Florida election officials - under
intense pressure from Republicans - accepted ballots without postmarks,
ballots postmarked after the election and even ballots from people who voted
twice, the paper said on Sunday.
The paper examined nearly 2,500 envelopes containing votes from Americans
living abroad and found 680 questionable votes.
However, the study found no evidence of vote fraud by Republicans or
Democrats.
'Slim chance of Gore win'
George W Bush's victory margin over his Democrat rival Al Gore in Florida
was 537.
But a Harvard academic expert told the newspaper that there was only a
slight chance that discarding the questionable ballots would have given Mr
Gore victory.
Gary King said his best estimate was that Mr Bush's margin of victory would
have been reduced to 245 votes.
The investigation revealed that the overseas ballots - the only votes that
could legally be received and counted after election day - were judged by
quite different standards, depending on where they were counted.
For example, counties carried by Mr Bush were four times as likely as Gore
counties to count ballots lacking witness signatures and addresses, the
paper says.
Counties carried by Mr Gore counted two in 10 ballots not mailed on or
before 7 November - election day - while counties carried by Mr Bush
accepted six in 10 similar ballots.
The row over the outcome of the Florida vote was resolved in December after
the US Supreme Court rejected manual recounts of votes in selected Florida
counties, requested by Mr Gore.
The New York Times study shows the Republicans' main goal was to count the
maximum number of overseas ballots in counties won by Mr Bush, while seeking
to disqualify overseas ballots in counties won by Mr Gore.
The Democrats were preoccupied mostly with manual recounts in several
heavily Democratic counties.
Investigations
Various investigations into the Florida election have produced contradictory
outcomes.
In February, the Miami Herald concluded that Mr Bush would probably have won
the election even if the US Supreme Court had allowed manual recounts.
After conducting its own review of uncounted ballots in Miami Dade county,
it said Mr Gore would have picked up only 49 extra votes there.
Newspaper analyses in January, based on small samples of disputed ballots,
showed Mr Gore picking up more votes than Mr Bush.
But only one newspaper, the Palm Beach Post, said its investigation showed
that Mr Gore actually won Florida.
Anger over the Florida election procedures was fuelled last month when the
US Commission on Civil Rights reported that 54% of votes that were rejected
came from black voters, who make up only 11% of the state's population.
The report said the procedures were characterised by "injustice, ineptitude
and inefficiency".
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 03-08-01 MET DST