How
to Steal it Back
by
James Ostrowski
Friday
afternoon, it was unclear whether Son of Daley’s Vote Stealing Operation
would succeed in reaching its goal by the Sunday, 5:00 p.m. deadline.
Even if Gore doesn’t steal the necessary votes by Sunday, he could
still win in a "contest" proceeding. Let’s assume Gore
steals the election. As a service to the republic, the Bush Campaign,
and the liberal media who cannot seem to figure out the legal stuff
even with a staff of law professors larger than the number of lies
in Al Gore’s repertoire, LewRockwell.com graciously offers the following
strategies for stealing it back.
No,
President Bush should not have gone to the Supreme Court. (As this
article was being written, they denied his appeal concerning selective
manual recounts, but granted him permission to appeal concerning
the extension of time to do manual recounts.) Bush has now lost
in federal court three times and suffered in the public relations
war in the process. A loss in the Supreme Court could damage his
hopes of stealing it back. The federal courts have been reluctant
to get involved because the equal protection case law is not favorable
and because Bush lawyers did not ask for a manual recount in Republican
counties. Ted Olson is a fine lawyer, but he's leading Bush down
the primrose path. Bush can try an election "contest," but with
Gore forces in control of the Florida Supreme Court, he is going
to lose that too.
Bush
cannot rely on the Congress to bail him out since the Senate is
50-50 and both houses are needed to reject a slate of electors.
Also, I believe the rejection of the Florida slate would reduce
the "majority" of appointed electors, allowing Gore to
win with his non-Florida majority. I do not believe the State Legislature
can cure the Florida Supreme Court’s decision, since the Court would
come back and say that the law that governs is the law that was
in effect on Election Day. Finally, the Florida Legislature should
decline David Boies' advice and not go to federal court where they
would probably lose. Here's how to win:
Option
"A". If Gore wins the election and is certified, the
State Legislature should nevertheless appoint its own pro-Bush slate.
The rationale? 3 U. S. C. § 5. A careful reading of this
oblique statute could support the conclusion that it bars a state
from resolving a contest over an election based on rules enacted
after the election! Isn’t that what the Democrats are doing
with their extensions of time to recount, restrictions on Bush’s
time to contest and hold evidentiary hearings, and, most importantly,
post hoc changes in rules concerning whether a hand recount can
be held and post hoc changes in rules determining what "votes"
are to be considered in manual recounts? The Gorons are violating
this statute. The obvious remedy is for the State Legislature under
its Constitutional and federal statutory authority to step in and
appoint a Bush slate in response to this violation.
The
Bush slate should vote and send its votes to Congress. On January
6, 2001, there would be two competing slates. The Senate would approve
the Gore slate with Al "no recusal" Gore casting the tie-breaking
vote, while the House would vote for the Bush slate. In that event,
Governor Jeb Bush can certify the Bush slate according to 3 U. S.
C. § 15 and that decision must be accepted by the Congress:
"[I]f
the two Houses shall disagree in respect of the counting of
such votes, then, and in that case, the votes of the electors
whose appointment shall have been certified by the executive
of the State, under the seal thereof, shall be counted."
Jeb
Bush will be viciously attacked for doing this, but what’s a brother
to do? If he refuses to act, Florida’s votes don’t count and Gore
is elected. His only choice is to certify Gore or Bush! And for
the dimwits in the liberal press, he is not required to recuse himself
because he is not a judge!
Caveat.
It has been suggested that the Democrats in the State Senate
could block the appointment of a Bush slate by filibuster. Under
the circumstances, I do not see this as an insurmountable obstacle.
First, I believe it is possible to find two Democrats in marginal
districts who will oppose a filibuster in order to avoid Florida
being totally disenfranchised in the Electoral College (which will
happen if the House rejects the Gore slate). Second, I believe public
pressure against such a filibuster would be enormous. Third, the
presiding officer need only recognize first a Bush supporter who
could then control the debate (See, Senate Rule 8.2 and rent Mr.
Smith Goes to Washington). Fourth, Senate Rule 8.5 puts a thirty
minute limit on an individual Senator’s right to speak. Fifth, the
Senate could change its rules by a majority vote. (This tactic smacks
of unfairness, but it is less unfair than allowing an election to
be stolen.) Finally, the presiding officer could rule, quite rightly,
that the Senate Rules cannot be used to prevent the Legislature
from fulfilling its Constitutional duty to ensure that Florida is
represented in the Electoral College, and that ruling could be sustained
by a majority vote.
Option
"B". The U. S. Code allows the State Legislature to
appoint electors if the state has failed to elect them. 3 U. S.
C. § 2. The Florida Supreme Court will ensure that Gore wins all
court contests. They will also order the Secretary of State and
Elections Canvassing Commission to certify the results of the election
in favor of Gore. Unless the state "fails" to elect a
slate of electors, the Legislature cannot act (but see, Option "A").
The election results must be certified by the Secretary of State
(§ 103.011) and the Elections Canvassing Commission. (§ 102.121).
If no certification is issued, the state has "failed"
to elect. Thus, it is obvious that to trigger the Legislature’s
right to appoint electors pursuant to 3 U. S. C. § 2, there must
be no certification. This can be accomplished in two ways (1) refusal
to act, or, (2) resignation. If the officials refuse to act, they
could be subject to contempt proceedings, however, they would also
be eligible for pardons. However, if these officials were to resign
prior to certification and before the ultimate outcome of the election
is known, a contempt proceeding is highly unlikely.
This
is a roadmap to stealing it back which relies exclusively
on Republican elected officials acting in accordance with the law.
No Democratic hacks, activist judges or liberal editorial writers
need be consulted. Congratulations Mr. President, and tell Al Gore
that you would be glad to meet him on January 20th at
the Inauguration. (But guard the Presidential seal!)
November
25, 2000
James
Ostrowski is an attorney practicing at 984 Ellicott Square, Buffalo,
New York 14203; (716) 854-1440; FAX 853-1303. See his website at
http://jimostrowski.com.
|