Florida court to hear Gore appeal today for vote hand counts

The Florida Supreme Court today hears Vice President Al Gore's appeal against a lower court's refusal to grant him hand recounts…

The Florida Supreme Court today hears Vice President Al Gore's appeal against a lower court's refusal to grant him hand recounts of 14,000 ballots which he believes would show he was elected president.

The Florida legislature will hold a special session today to choose a list of electors favouring Governor George Bush in case he loses the appeal. If Florida is not able to approve its representatives to the Electoral College next Tuesday because of ongoing recounts, Mr Gore could win the presidency as he is now leading in electoral votes.

But if Mr Gore's appeal fails, most political observers believe that he will have to concede victory to Mr Bush who has been certified the official winner in Florida by 537 votes out of about six million cast. The winner in Florida will win the longdrawn-out presidential election because of the state's 25 Electoral College votes.

An NBC News opinion poll shows that 59 per cent of respondents think Mr Gore should concede now. A CNN/Gallup poll found 58 per cent say he should concede.

READ MORE

But Mr Gore has indicated that his fate could also depend on the outcome of two separate Florida court actions which got under way in Tallahassee yesterday. These concern lawsuits by Gore supporters, but not by Mr Gore himself, that 25,000 absentee ballots cast in Seminole and Martin counties may have to be thrown out because of alleged illegal actions by Republican officials affecting several thousand ballots. But as these cannot now be identified, all absentee votes might have to be annulled.

If all absentee ballots were annulled, Mr Gore would be the net gainer by several thousand votes and easily wipe out Mr Bush's slender lead in Florida.

While Mr Gore's supporters are willing to allow him to await the result of the Florida Supreme Court appeal, there would be widespread concern if he lost his appeal for recounts and then decided to wait out the absentee ballot cases and likely appeals. The New York Times, which has been strongly behind Mr Gore's court actions up to now, yesterday admonished him in an editorial for "a failure in statesmanship", in not distancing himself from actions which could deprive legitimate voters of their votes.

Mr Gore, speaking to reporters at the White House on Tuesday, predicted that the absentee ballots cases "will end up in the Florida Supreme Court". He also referred to complaints that African-Americans were obstructed by election officials in some cases from voting.

In the main case, the Gore legal team is asking for a recount of 14,000 ballots in Miami-Dade and Palm Beach counties which did not record a vote for president when counted by machines. Mr Gore believes that hand counts would show that he had enough votes to win in Florida but Judge Sanders Sauls ruled in a circuit court last Monday that there was no justification for recounts and no evidence of fraud or abuse by election officials.

Mr Bush, meanwhile, is going ahead planning the transition to the presidency but has asked not to be described "president-elect" until the legal situation in Florida is clearer. Asked yesterday for his reaction to Mr Gore saying that he was still "optimistic" of winning the election, Mr Bush said "I've always felt I've a good chance of winning the election. I won it three times and I'm hoping to win it the fourth."

The two absentee ballot court actions led to bizarre scenes in the Leon County courthouse yesterday as the same lawyers involved in both cases rushed from one courtroom to another. The Martin County case began at 7 a.m. and after several hours adjourned to allow the Seminole case to begin. Both were continuing late into the night.

In the Seminole case, a Democratic activist, Mr Harry Richards, who has contributed heavily to Mr Gore's campaign, alleges that the elections supervisor, Mr Sandy Goard, allowed Republican officials to add information to 2,130 applications for absentee ballots which did not have voter registration numbers on them as required by a law to prevent fraud.

Mr Bush's lawyers defending the action do not contest the facts but argue that there is no evidence that the ballots themselves were illegally cast.

The Florida Supreme Court today hears Vice-President Al Gore's appeal against a lower court's refusal to grant him hand recounts of 14,000 ballots. which These, he believes, would show he was elected president.

If Mr Gore's appeal fails, most political observers believe that he will have to concede victory to Governor George W. Bush. Mr Bush who has been certified the official winner in Florida by 537 votes out of about six million cast. The winner in Florida will win the long-drawn-out presidential election because of the state's 25 Electoral College votes.

An NBC News opinion poll shows that 59 per cent of respondents think Mr Gore should concede now. A CNN/Gallup poll found 58 per cent saying he should concede.

But Mr Gore has indicated that his fate could also depend on the outcome of two separate Florida court actions which got under way in Tallahassee yesterday. These concern lawsuits by Gore supporters, but not by Mr Gore himself. The suits contend that 25,000 absentee ballots cast in Seminole and Martin counties may have to be thrown out because of alleged illegal actions by Republican officials. affecting several thousand ballots. But As the affected ballots cannot now be identified, all absentee votes might have to be annulled. If all absentee ballots were annulled, Mr Gore would be the net gainer by several thousand votes and easily wipe out Mr Bush's slender lead in Florida.

While Mr Gore's supporters are willing to allow him to await the result of the Florida Supreme Court appeal, there would be widespread concern if he lost his appeal for recounts and then decided to wait out the absentee ballot cases and likely appeals.

The New York Times, which has been strongly behind Mr Gore's court actions up to now, yesterday admonished him in an editorial for "a failure in statesmanship" in not distancing himself from actions which could deprive legitimate voters of their votes.

Mr Gore, speaking to reporters at the White House on Tuesday, predicted that the absentee ballots cases "will end up in the Florida Supreme Court". He also referred to complaints that African-Americans were obstructed by election officials in some cases from voting.

In the main case, the Gore legal team is asking for a recount of 14,000 ballots in Miami-Dade and Palm Beach counties which did not record a vote for president when counted by machines.

Mr Gore believes that hand counts would show that he had enough votes to win in Florida but Judge Sanders Sauls ruled in a circuit court last Monday that there was no justification for recounts and no evidence of fraud or abuse by election officials.

Mr Bush, meanwhile, is going ahead planning the transition to the presidency but has asked not to be described as "president-elect" until the legal situation in Florida is clearer. Asked yesterday for his reaction to Mr Gore's assertion saying that he was still "optimistic" of winning the election, Mr Bush said: "I've always felt I've a good chance of winning the election. I won it three times and I'm hoping to win it the fourth."

The two absentee ballot court actions led to bizarre scenes in the Leon County courthouse yesterday as the same lawyers involved in both cases rushed from one courtroom to another. The Martin County case began at 7 a.m. and after several hours adjourned to allow the Seminole case to begin. Both were expected to go late into the night.

In the Seminole case, a Democratic activist, Mr Harry Richards, who has contributed heavily to Mr Gore's campaign, alleges that the elections supervisor, Mr Sandy Goard, allowed Republican officials to add information to 2,130 applications for absentee ballots which did not have voter registration numbers on them as required by law. law to prevent fraud.

Mr Bush's lawyers defending the action do not contest the facts but argue that there is no evidence that the ballots themselves were illegally cast.