You are nothing, Sally, if not kind and diplomatic. We must look
stark-raving mad to most of the rest of the developed world and
strangely familiar to most of the not-as-developed world. I'm just
sorry it's Florida that is under scrutiny.


Date sent:              Wed, 15 Nov 2000 14:25:58 -0500
Send reply to:          "Academy of Legal Studies in Business (ALSB) Talk"
                <[log in to unmask]>
From:                   SALLY GUNZ <[log in to unmask]>
Organization:           University of Waterloo
Subject:                Re: question
To:                     [log in to unmask]

There are, of course, degrees of lack of bias. I agree, no one is
neutral. However, the system in the US is certainly very different
from that in many other countries (not necessarily better, just
different) where non-elected civil servants would make many of these
calls. They administer the electoral process.. So, while there may
still be at least perceptions of bias (and bias in fact), this is more
arms length than having a political appointment or an elected official
make the determination.

I have no doubt that when you are brought up with the Florida system
it seems eminently sensible, and it no doubt works very well for
almost all ocaisions. But, like any system, it can look odd to those
outside looking in (and undoubtedly the Canadian system, for
example,
looks equally odd to those in Florida).

Sally

"John R. Allison" wrote:

>  As usual, Ginny is right on target.  It is idealism run amok to
>  think
> that a completely impartial person can be found to make these
> decisions.  Such a person would not be in office, and would have no
> firm opinion on anything relevant.  We just have to hope that legal
> processes are in place that curb actions resulting from mental bias
> as much as possible.  But no process can remove all bias from any
> decision maker, much less a political one.  When declining to recuse
> himself from a case years ago, then-Associate Justice Rehnquist
> observed that, even on the Supreme Court, we neither can have nor
> should want a decision maker whose mind is tabula rasa.
>
> John
>
> At 01:50 PM 11/15/2000 -0500, you wrote:
> >Virtually every high ranking political office holder in the state
> >is committed and thick with either the Bush or Gore campaign.
> >That's what goes with holding high ranking political office in the
> >state.
> Yes,
> >the secretary of state has more than an affiliation -- she holds a
> >political job that effectively requires her to support the party
> >and
> its
> >ticket-leader. My point is that every elected official in this
> >state
> does,
> >democrat or republican, as well as many appointed officials, from
> >the governor on down pretty far into the elected and appointed part
> >of the state bureaucracy. If the elected officials all recuse
> >themselves, it isn't clear who would be left to make a decision.
> >
> >Or, ultimately, politics is political; that's all there is; we
> >expect
> politics
> >to be accountable to law, but it is still political. Hard for me to
> come
> >to terms with that, but the light dawns that, to paraphrase Pogo (I
> >think) "we have met the enemy and he is us."
> >
> >Finally, I can hear Bruce Fisher making observations about
> >positivism.
> >
> >Over and out.
> >
> >Ginny
> >Date sent:              Wed, 15 Nov 2000 13:37:58 -0500
> >Send reply to:          "Academy of Legal Studies in Business
> >(ALSB)
> Talk"
> >                <[log in to unmask]>
> >From:                   Marsha Hass <[log in to unmask]>
> >Subject:                Re: question
> >To:                     [log in to unmask]
> >
> >Come on Ginny, Co-Chair of Bush's  Fla campaign is a little more
> >than a political affiliation!   :-)
> >
> >Marsha
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Virginia Maurer (MAN)" <[log in to unmask]>
> >To: <[log in to unmask]>
> >Sent: Wednesday, November 15, 2000 1:31 PM
> >Subject: Re: question
> >
> >
> >Practically everybody involved in the decision process has a
> >conflict
>
> >of interest (assuming that a political preference creates a
> >conflict of interest) -- the governor, the secretary of state, the
> >attorney general (chair of Gore's campaign). It's a political
> >state. Virtually
>
> >every office holder is either a democrat or a republican, and every
> >high ranking democrat or republican *has* to line up with the
> >party's
>
> >ticket-leader.
> >
> >Ginny
> >
> >
> >Date sent:              Wed, 15 Nov 2000 10:33:50 -0500
> >Send reply to:          "Academy of Legal Studies in Business
> >(ALSB) Talk"
> >                <[log in to unmask]>
> >From:                   Norman Hawker <[log in to unmask]>
> >Subject:                Re: question To:
> >[log in to unmask]
> >
> >At 10:23 AM -0500 11/15/00, Marsha Hass wrote:
> >
> >>Does anyone else think it odd that the FLA Sec. of State is
> >>co-chair
>
> >>of the Bush Campaign and has NOT recused herself from this
> >>debacle?
> >
> >A great many of us are concerned about her conflict of interest.
> >
> >>And am I wrong, but wasn't Jeb the Bush son who claimed not to
> >>know what a conflict of interest was when deposed in the S & L
> >>mess?
> >
> >
> >No, that was Neil.
> >
> >
> >--
> >
> >Norman Hawker
> >Associate Professor
> >Haworth College of Business
> >Western Michigan University
> >1903 West Michigan Avenue
> >Kalamazoo, Michigan 49008-5120