The signs advising voters in Florida's 16th district that a vote cast for the disgraced and resigned Rep. Mark Foley will count for his replacement, Republican State Sen. Joe Negron, Vanessa Blum of the South Florida Sun-Sentinel reports:
Elections supervisors in Mark Foley's former district received permission from a Tallahassee appeals court Friday to post notices stating a vote for the disgraced Republican congressman will go to replacement candidate Joe Negron.
The Florida Democratic Party said it would not appeal the decision, ending a two-week court battle.
"Confused voters should not be required to guess as to how their vote will be counted, or be forced to question poll workers and rely on the potentially inconsistent, incomplete, or partial information," the appeals court stated.Writing for a three-judge panel, District Judge James Wolf said Florida law allows poll workers to display informational notices, so long as they are impartial and do not favor a specific candidate.
The entire article is at the link above. Despite the Democrats' best efforts to keep the waters muddied, voters will have the necessary information.
Hat-tip to The Buzz from the St. Petersburg Times for the first lead on the story.
Permalink | Send To A Friend | Linking Blogs | Digg this!
Filed under:
Congressional Races, Florida, Legal action
Comments (11)
Oop's.... (Below threshold)1. Posted by Scrapiron | October 28, 2006 1:41 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Oop's.
1. Posted by Scrapiron | October 28, 2006 1:41 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 28, 2006 01:41
2. Posted by eddie bear | October 28, 2006 1:51 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Has the make up of the FLA Supreme Ct changed since 2000? IB only ask because I feel that's where it may go.
2. Posted by eddie bear | October 28, 2006 1:51 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 28, 2006 01:51
3. Posted by ordi | October 28, 2006 2:14 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
eddie bear,
You must have missed this from the article.
The Florida Democratic Party said it would not appeal the decision, ending a two-week court battle.
3. Posted by ordi | October 28, 2006 2:14 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 28, 2006 02:14
4. Posted by Jim Addison | October 28, 2006 4:13 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
I'm not sure about the FSC, but as noted above, Democrats have stated they won't appeal this decision, so it doesn't matter.
It boiled down to a question of fundamental fairness. Florida doesn't allow poll workers to answer voters' questions about anything but the mechanics of casting their ballots. The reasoning is this is the only way to keep partisanship out of it.
But if a question is clearly going to be commonly asked, and poll workers cannot answer it, a sign stating the bare facts of how votes will be counted under Florida law is entirely appropriate.
4. Posted by Jim Addison | October 28, 2006 4:13 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 28, 2006 04:13
5. Posted by COgirl | October 28, 2006 10:10 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Hmmm. . . Democratic party must have taken a poll and found that people wouldn't think highly of their appealing this.
Then again, could they be strapped for cash?
5. Posted by COgirl | October 28, 2006 10:10 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 28, 2006 10:10
6. Posted by Gary Gross | October 28, 2006 2:02 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Here's my post on the story.
I agree with the poster that said that "Democratic party must have taken a poll and found that people wouldn't think highly of their appealing this."
No, I don't think that they're that cash-strapped.
6. Posted by Gary Gross | October 28, 2006 2:02 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 28, 2006 14:02
7. Posted by Jim Addison | October 28, 2006 3:01 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Gary's correct: it couldn't have been the money.
This close to the election, the appeal would have been expedited and would have had to rely mainly upon the briefs and case work which has already been done, so there would have been limited extra legal fees.
While they may have worried about public reaction, I suspect they simply believed they couldn't win it on the merits - but it is also true that a loss in court hurts less now, in terms of PR, than it would a few days before the election.
7. Posted by Jim Addison | October 28, 2006 3:01 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 28, 2006 15:01
8. Posted by eddie bear | October 28, 2006 4:28 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
I apologize. I was posting after I came home following the World Series Game here is STL. My bad.
8. Posted by eddie bear | October 28, 2006 4:28 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 28, 2006 16:28
9. Posted by engineer | October 28, 2006 6:08 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Better add a sign that says. "A vote for Mahoney is a vote for Mahoney." You know how easily confused Democrats in Florida can be.
9. Posted by engineer | October 28, 2006 6:08 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 28, 2006 18:08
10. Posted by Jim Addison | October 28, 2006 8:05 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Yes, they WILL have those "a vote for Mahoney is a vote for Mahoney" signs, to be fair about the whole thing.
My suggestion of, "A vote for Mahoney is a vote for retreat, defeat, and Sovietsky-style economics" was evidently rejected.
10. Posted by Jim Addison | October 28, 2006 8:05 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 28, 2006 20:05
11. Posted by Scrapiron | October 28, 2006 8:08 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
No problem in Florida this year. They gave them two colored marbles and they put them in the right colored barrel. A color blind democrat will count the votes.
11. Posted by Scrapiron | October 28, 2006 8:08 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 28, 2006 20:08