posted on November 16, 2000 07:13:05 AM new
I've been telling my story of a local special election to my friends and wondering to myself if my vote in a local election for a state house is more important than someone else's vote in a federal election. I'm just wondering if we are "better" than the people in FL because we got to have our votes in the special election scrutinized so carefully or if we are "lesser" than the people of Florida in that our votes had to be scrutinized so carefully.
Subj: PA 114th:GOP recount delays swearing-in
In Pennsylvania’s 114th District, we once had a Republican state representative named Frank Serafini. In November 1999, Mr. Serafini was convicted of perjury for his grand jury testimony pertaining to illegal campaign contributions to Bob Dole’s 1996 presidential campaign.
The constitution of our commonwealth required him to step down, but Mr. Serafini tried to hang onto his tenth term in our state house with everything he had. He delayed the inevitable and our legislature started proceedings to have him removed when in January 2000, he announced he would resign effective in February.
If Mr. Serafini had stepped down once convicted, as required by Pennsylvania law, the election for his replacement could have been held during the regular primary election in April. His belated resignation necessitated a special election, which was held on June 20th.
Mr. Wansacz and Mr. Parry were the Democratic and Republican contenders for the post vacated by Mr. Serafini. Our media enjoyed alleging that national money was helping fund the race and this special election was being watched nationwide as a barometer for the November elections.
When the votes were counted, Mr. Wansacz, the Democrat, won. His Republican opponent immediately called for a recount and then an investigation. As this dragged on, the swearing-in ceremony scheduled for not long after the election had to be postponed. We were without a voice in our state capitol for nearly half a year before Mr. Wansacz was finally sworn in on July 19th.
When the Republicans in Florida say this should not continue past such and such date, please remember that Republicans contesting an election here in the anthracite rust belt actually held up a swearing in of an elected official with their ballot challenges.
Before the pundits and spin doctors rightly scream “apples and oranges,” I would like to add that with the so-called “Leader of the Free World” at stake, America herself should be willing to postpone the electoral college’s vote, as well as the swearing in of a new President if required. I’ve cursed a jammed copy machine too many times to put my faith solely in machine counting. I’d rather pay for a quality hand-made item than a shoddy machine-made one. Recount the entire nation…and let our entire nation join together behind whichever candidate was elected.
Thank you for allowing me a forum for my rant on our recent local election.
posted on November 16, 2000 08:36:53 AM new
I better wake up too, then. Because I think a whole new vote from all states would be best also. Popular vote wins.
posted on November 16, 2000 08:50:35 AM newI better wake up too, then. Because I think a whole new vote from all states would be best also. Popular vote wins.
I won't disagree with this. But Satan will be handing out snow shovels in hell before it happens.
posted on November 16, 2000 02:38:07 PM newBecause I think a whole new vote from all states would be best also. Popular vote wins.
Then get going and work for a constitutional amendment providing for this. Meanwhile, sily as it sounds, since we're a nation of laws, the laws stand.
Unless, of course, you belive it's fair to change the rules in the middle of the game (and then do remind me not to play poker with you). In that case, who do you propose gets to do this ad hoc changing? And based on what standards?
