Of all the numerous and valid opinions regarding the election fiasco swirling around our nation, one in particular appalls and angers me: the argument that Palm Beach County should be allowed to re-vote. I can understand the meticulous and ridiculous re-counts, I can understand the anger over an arguably confusing ballot, and I can understand how Al Gore supporters feel cheated.
But I don't see how, under any circumstance, a re-vote is the fair solution. I don't see how a re-vote could possibly right the wrong done to Al Gore. A re-vote does not simply fix the screw-ups of Nov. 7; it opens up the election to wholly novel influences that were not supposed to play a role in the election. It allows for votes to change, and it ironically impinges on the very democratic process it is attempting to uphold.
A re-vote is not a re-vote, because it could turn into a different vote. It technically allows all Palm Beach residents to change their minds and literally pick the president on their own. This should scare you, even if it probably won't happen.
You simply cannot re-create the conditions of Tuesday, Nov. 7, no matter how hard you try. The next president of the United States is supposed to be the president who captures the most number of states on Election Day. Intent very much plays a part in this, but it's intent on Election Day. Some people say that George Bush will be the president that was not intended to be president. That, I admit, is a shame. But if you let Palm Beach County re-vote and, subsequently, Al Gore wins, that result still doesn't accurately capture the voters' intent on Nov. 7. Everyone in the county will have had an extra week in which to re-evaluate his or her vote. This could prove disastrous to our democracy. I am not opposed to looking through the current ballots to determine original intent - but to allow a re-vote would be to create opportunity for that original intent to change. Here's what could happen:
Votes could change. Nader supporters will surely turn Gore. Fake Buchanan voters will turn Gore. Real Buchanan voters may turn Bush. People on the edge who have had a whole week to think and watch shenanigans on both sides could very well change their minds. Gore supporters turned off by legal threats may vote Bush. Bush supporters turned off by legal threats may vote Gore. Everyone, not just those who mistakenly voted for Buchanan, would get another chance. And all of these people would vote under new and unintended influences that skew Election Day intent.
In light of the possibility of changed votes, what you'd have is one county deciding the election. The media is telling you that Florida decided the election, but that's only true to an extent. Florida's already cast votes decided the election, a Florida that was not conscious of its essential role and voted accordingly. Florida did not decide the election, every state did. But if you allow Florida voters to do it all over again - voters whose intent may very well be altered - then that one state is literally picking the president. You might as well fill a big auditorium with Palm Beach residents and ask for a show of hands to decide the presidency. It's simply preposterous.
You'd have to let the whole nation re-vote, because if all Floridians, regardless of whether they were confused on Election Day, are given a chance to change their minds, then everyone else should be given a chance to change their minds. Otherwise, one state is deciding the election. The wonderful thing about this controversy is that is has shown how, especially with the Electoral College system, your vote "really does count." But to do a re-vote in one county or one state would do non-Floridians a huge disservice. It would severely undermine our democratic system of elections. A national re-vote would be a lot fairer, though it will still not reflect Election Day intent.
"This time it matters," people are saying about ballots that have always been screwed up and thrown out. Ballot standards are being thrown around like they are meaningless, applied at certain times but not at others, in certain places but not in others. Now some will have you believe that a ballot, which was used four years ago in the presidential election, is so confusing that people in that county should have the right to vote again.
Be careful in supporting this initiative. Be careful because you'd give one state, maybe even one county, the right to choose the president, a right you thought you exercised last week.
Russell Capone is a junior majoring in political science. He is a sports editor at the Daily.
