The allegedly confusing ballot
lesl at UDEL.EDU
Sat Nov 11 12:15:56 PST 2000
The ballot itself was made of paper. it was marked elctro-mchanically
(punched) and read electronically. The complaint says paper ballot
rules shoudl apply. But also, every other county found it practicable
to conform more closely to the rules.
"John C. Eastman" wrote:
> "Chambers Jr, Henry L." wrote:
> > 2)I have heard (insert disclaimer) that Florida law requires that
> > there be a
> > place to the right of the candidate's name that is clearly available
> > for a
> > voter to choose the candidate. If that law is in place to prevent
> > confusion
> > as to who one is voting for, it seems that the ballot itself may
> > violate
> > Florida law.
> The Florida law upon which Hank Chambers' concern of illegality is
> based does not apply to machine ballots. Fla. Stat. sec.
> 101.151(3)(a) does indeed require the following words on paper
> ballots: "To vote for a candidate whose name is printed on the
> ballot, place a cross (X) mark in the blank space at the right of the
> name of the candidate for whom you desire to vote." But those rules
> only apply "In counties in which voting machines are not used." Fla.
> Stat. sec. 101.151. Machine ballots are covered by Fla. Stat. sec.
> 101.27(3), which provides merely that "The order in which the voting
> machine ballot is arranged shall as nearly as practicable conform to
> the requirements of the form of the paper ballot for that election."
> (Emphasis added). As reported in news accounts, the Democrat election
> supervisor in the county determined that it was not practical to have
> all Presidential candidates listed on the left page of the ballor;
> such would require a small font that would be hard to read, especially
> for the many elderly citizens in the county. No one contested that
> discretionary determination prior to the election.
> So let's put to rest the claim that the West Palm Beach ballots were
> "illegal." They were not.
> John Eastman
More information about the Conlawprof