Ninth Circuit court of Appeals Vs. California Democracy

[Albinonewt]

Ninth Circuit

Now, for those of you that don't know, the ninth circuit court of appeals doesn't use the same Constitution that the rest of the country does. They are overturned nearly everytime they even bother to speak. No matter what you think of their decisions there is no denying that they are almost always found to be incorrect by the Supreme Court.

And now they're buying the ACLU's arguement that these machines are so terrible and so antiquated that they literally cannot be used, and that using them will destroy the earth. Funny thing about that is, nobody was complaining about the machines less then a year ago when they elected Davis. But the same machines that were accurate enough to re-elect him are no longer accurate enough to throw him out.

I'm not a big proponent of the recall the way that it was done, but it is part of the California Constitution, so there's no complaining about it's legality. So it should happen, and it should happen in a fair manner (not on the same ballot as the Democratic primary, if Davis supporters can't be bothered to go to the polls then they don't care enough to elect the governor)

I'm curious to see if the Supreme Court gets involved. They didn't for NJ's little problem with Torecelli last election, so I'm wondering if they just let this one fly by them like they did before.

[Jack_Dubious]

All the times ive voted in So. California, theyve always used the voting machine that consisted of a punch card, a tablet that held the card in place and a punch/stylus that you use to select your choice. Im not sure if they use different types of machines in other parts of california....but how the hell can a punch card system become old and defective?!?!

JDub

[Albinonewt]

Another Article about the 9th Court of appeals

[Collegeboy]

Re: Ninth Circuit court of Appeals Vs. California Democracy

Originally posted by Albinonewt
Ninth Circuit

Now, for those of you that don't know, the ninth circuit court of appeals doesn't use the same Constitution that the rest of the country does. They are overturned nearly everytime they even bother to speak. No matter what you think of their decisions there is no denying that they are almost always found to be incorrect by the Supreme Court.

And now they're buying the ACLU's arguement that these machines are so terrible and so antiquated that they literally cannot be used, and that using them will destroy the earth. Funny thing about that is, nobody was complaining about the machines less then a year ago when they elected Davis. But the same machines that were accurate enough to re-elect him are no longer accurate enough to throw him out.

I'm not a big proponent of the recall the way that it was done, but it is part of the California Constitution, so there's no complaining about it's legality. So it should happen, and it should happen in a fair manner (not on the same ballot as the Democratic primary, if Davis supporters can't be bothered to go to the polls then they don't care enough to elect the governor)

I'm curious to see if the Supreme Court gets involved. They didn't for NJ's little problem with Torecelli last election, so I'm wondering if they just let this one fly by them like they did before.

Forgot to say that the machines have been outlawed to be used recently, when they was used before they were legal.

[Albinonewt]

Re: Re: Ninth Circuit court of Appeals Vs. California Democracy

Originally posted by Collegeboy


Forgot to say that the machines have been outlawed to be used recently, when they was used before they were legal.

They weren't outlawed, they were scheduled for upgrade and replacement. They were not declared "illegal". It was decided after the Florida recount to upgrade them. Now, if memory serves Davis was re-elected to the Governorship after the year 2000.

It's utter nonsense. The punch cards are an unconstitutional way to recall a Democrat, but they are a perfectly constitutional way to elect him. The bias of the 9th circuit court shines through as bright as always.

[Collegeboy]

Re: Re: Re: Ninth Circuit court of Appeals Vs. California Democracy

Originally posted by Albinonewt


They weren't outlawed, they were scheduled for upgrade and replacement. They were not declared "illegal". It was decided after the Florida recount to upgrade them. Now, if memory serves Davis was re-elected to the Governorship after the year 2000.

It's utter nonsense. The punch cards are an unconstitutional way to recall a Democrat, but they are a perfectly constitutional way to elect him. The bias of the 9th circuit court shines through as bright as always.

The voting method has been recently said to be illegal and non productive as was stated on the republican news channel (Fox News) last night.

[Albinonewt]

You misinterpreted what they said. The counties are under court order to replace the machines prior to the Democratic primary that will be held there in March. They are scheduled to be replaced in January. They are not illegal now. Now, if the counties tried to use them in the election in March they would be violating a court order, but even then they wouldn't be violating a law.

[1stdeadeye]

Actually the case should have been dismissed out of hand. The ACLU and State of California agreed the system was flawed. They signed an agreement last year that the system would be replaced by 2004. The California Dem and Republican heads on CNN last night both agreed to this FACT . The ACLU lawsuit was counter to the agreement they signed. The ACLU had agreed not to sue before 2004 to give California the chance to fix the system. The agreement predates Davis's re-election. This is a blatent attempt by the ACLU to circumvent democracy.

I am from Jersey and don't care who wins or loses. The ACLU is trying to undermine the process for their candidates gain. ACLU should be ashamed of themselves.

[ZAust]

Originally posted by 1stdeadeye
ACLU should be ashamed of themselves.

damn straight.

Mark Rosenbaum.... said there are "grave federal interests" involving the federal Voting Rights Act and potential discrimination against poor and minority voters who may have difficulty with the punch-card ballots.

does someone want to explain this part to me. how would being poor or a minority have ANY bearing whatsoever on how you operate a voting machine? this lawsuit is absolutely ridiculous. having said that, i dont believe davis should be recalled. he was elected for 4 years, he has commited no crime, let him serve out his term. i do agree that he has done a less than stellar job, but he managed to keep our power on and had to deal with the worst economic downturn since the depression. having said that, if this was a regular election and i was old enough to vote, i would not vote for the man. but give hime his term.. the people of california elected him to do it originally.

[Curly]

Originally posted by ZAust
having said that, i dont believe davis should be recalled. he was elected for 4 years, he has commited no crime, let him serve out his term. i do agree that he has done a less than stellar job, but he managed to keep our power on and had to deal with the worst economic downturn since the depression. having said that, if this was a regular election and i was old enough to vote, i would not vote for the man. but give hime his term.. the people of california elected him to do it originally.

I agree.

[Collegeboy]

Originally posted by 1stdeadeye
Actually the case should have been dismissed out of hand. The ACLU and State of California agreed the system was flawed. They signed an agreement last year that the system would be replaced by 2004. The California Dem and Republican heads on CNN last night both agreed to this FACT . The ACLU lawsuit was counter to the agreement they signed. The ACLU had agreed not to sue before 2004 to give California the chance to fix the system. The agreement predates Davis's re-election. This is a blatent attempt by the ACLU to circumvent democracy.

I am from Jersey and don't care who wins or loses. The ACLU is trying to undermine the process for their candidates gain. ACLU should be ashamed of themselves.

[Albinonewt]

Originally posted by Collegeboy

I'm going to disagree with you again CB. The Bush White House was completely against the recall effort when it started and even went so far to place phone calls to prominent Republicans in California to get them to not support the recall. The White House knows that it is extremely unlikely that California breaks out of it's tailspin in time for election season no matter who the governor of California is. That's why they'd rather have a Democratic Governor that the people HATE come election time. Their hope was that if the citizens of California were having their lives completely ruined by a Domcratic Governor then they might be more inclined to vote for a Republican President.

If a Republican Governor is running California come election time that will sound Bush's Death knell in that State. Unless of course that Republican Governor has some how fixed things, but what are the chances of that?

Especially considreing the state legislatures that you mentioned above. They are corrupt, completely and totally. It will take a couple of years to get enough of them out to accomplish anything. The current California congress is a complete disaster and a collection of the worst kinds of politicians around. Now, maybe somone like Arnold (or McClntlock the unelectable) can stand up to them and make them act like adults, but that will not be a quick process. And frankly, if someone is able to do it and fix the state then maybe the people of California will vote that party's candidate into the office of the President next year. But I doubt it. Look at NYC. They voted for a conservative Mayor two times in a row and Clinton carried the city by something like 40% over Bush and Dole. And Giuliani was popular and doing a good job.

[Albinonewt]

Looks like the entire 9th circuit court will hear the case.

That should be intersting. I can almost guarantee they'll uphold their own decision. I wonder what the Supreme Court will do.

[Albinonewt]

Originally posted by ZAust
does someone want to explain this part to me. how would being poor or a minority have ANY bearing whatsoever on how you operate a voting machine?

Becuase the older machines are in poorer areas of the state. And those poorer areas are predominatly minority areas. So the ACLU is argueing that for minorities to have to use the older machines while white folk get to use the newer machines is disenfranchising to minorities.

[MaChu]

Becuase the older machines are in poorer areas of the state. And those poorer areas are predominatly minority areas. So the ACLU is argueing that for minorities to have to use the older machines while white folk get to use the newer machines is disenfranchising to minorities.

Why does this matter since it is a way to vote?
Voting is voting.

Are minorities considered so stupid that they can't use a punch card?
No, they aren't but sure does seem like the ACLU thinks so.

Does this just seem like a way to stall for time?
It does to me.

Is Texas better than California?
Damn straight. Yeehaw!