""Constititional crisis"? Could there be fighting in the street between fanatical "partisans" of the Democrats and Republicans, a la that between the Guelphs and Ghibellines in medieval Europe -- or the Left and Right in '20s (pre-Hitler) Germany? Could the state of Florida, in this legal battle between states' rights and the federal government, try to secede from the Union? [It's already an annex, half of Israel and half of Cuba ...] Would such an act inspire other Republican-majority states to follow suit as a new "Confederacy" inimical to the "Marxist" Democrats in Washington DC? Could Florida's decision to appoint new electors loyal to Bush result in the decision in the US Congress (likewise split fifty-fifty into partisans) that, still lacking a majority, it too is unable to decide in time the true winner of the presidential election? Would Congress therefore APPOINT some "fiigurehead" President "pro tempore," lacking any true executive power that could restrain the ambitions of federal legislators? Might the US Supreme Court be appealed to, but (also being partisan in its majority view) reply with a controversial ruling, to which partisan Democrats in Congress react by attempting to de-legitimize the authority of the third branch of the federal government? Could future Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Hillary Clinton, having heard the cheers over her call for the abolition of the Electoral College, go on to propose greater legislative and executive checks and balances against the Supreme Court's power? Might not the reborn"Confederacy" boldly step into that breach, no longer constrained by a FEDERAL government, thanks to its partisan infighting, present in every institution? Could some charismatic public figure highly respected in Pentagon circles --a Colin Powell type, perhaps--- finally step forward to lead a military coup d'etat, arguing that martial law ('only temporary") is the ONLY way to end this Mexican standoff, given such irreconcilable differences between POLITICAL power-mongers of the Left and Right? So far, the "worst case" scenario is the one that's been accurate, every time ... If the 20-year cycle of Presidential deaths in office is still valid, it shouldn't be long before the rabid partisanship, everywhere in evidence today, results in FATALITIES ... TALLAHASSEE, Fla. (AP) - ... In its 4-3 ruling, Florida's high court said that ``in close elections the necessity for counting all legal votes becomes critical.'' But Chief Justice Charles T. Wells, in one of two dissenting opinions accompanying the majority ruling, predicted a ``constitutional crisis'' might result. Wells said. "I believe that the majority's decision cannot withstand the scrutiny which will certainly immediately follow under the United States Constitution." The decision to recount "undervotes" has no foundation in the law of Florida "as it existed on Nov. 7, 2000, or at any time until the issuance of this opinion." By by ordering the recount, he predicted, the four justices who did so created ``imponderable problems.". He said it was uncertain whether the Florida courts had the power to resolve presidential election conflicts, noting questions asked by the U.S. Supreme Court when it set aside a previous Florida Supreme Court decision this week. Wells argued that Sauls' decision should have been upheld and that Gore was not entitled to a manual recount. He also said the majority of the court had ignored "the magnitude of their decision." Wells expressed ``a deep and abiding concern that the prolonging of judicial process in this counting contest propels this country and this state into an unprecedented and unnecessary constitutional crisis.'' He added, ``I have to conclude that there is a real and present likelihood that this constitutional crisis will do substantial damage to our country, our state and to this court as an institution.'' WASHINGTON (AP) - Floridians who believe they were denied their right to vote because of discrimination, fraud or other illegal practices will get a chance to testify next year before the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights. The panel voted unanimously Friday to convene hearings in Florida and possibly other states on whether voters' rights were violated, though the hearings will come too late to affect the presidential race between George W. Bush and Al Gore. The decision came after the group's general counsel, Edward Hailes, told the seven commissioners about a variety of complaints from Florida voters, including allegations that blacks were turned away from the polls and that voting machinery used in minority areas was old, outmoded and defective as compared with equipment used elsewhere. ``There can be no faith in the democratic process if there is not some reasonable sense of fairness and equity in the election process,'' said Commissioner Russell G. Redenbaugh. The panel can hold hearings and subpoena witnesses, but has no enforcement power. The number of hearings that will take place, and a timetable, have yet to be determined, but they must begin sometime after Congress meets to count votes from the Electoral College on Jan. 6. Commission Chairwoman Mary Frances Berry must also determine whether there is a need for hearings in other states, based on a staff report outlining voters' complaints from around the country. ``Although we can have no impact on any particular outcome of the election, we can have a tremendous impact on the process in the future,'' Redenbaugh said Friday. The commission is an independent, bipartisan fact-finding agency. Established under the Civil Rights Act of 1957, it investigates complaints of voters alleging they are being deprived of their rights because of race, color, religion, sex, age, disability, national origin or because of fraud. If it finds laws were broken, it refers evidence to the Justice Department, which can prosecute. Justice Department representatives are already in Florida to gather information about alleged voting irregularities, though a formal investigation has not begun. The Rev. Jesse Jackson has criticized the Justice Department for what he sees as a ``wait-and-see'' approach. Civil Rights Commissioner Christopher Edley Jr., echoed those feelings Friday. ``I've been very, very disheartened by what has struck me as an extraordinarily slow pace by the Justice Department,'' Edley said. In response, Berry explained that in recent discussions with Attorney General Janet Reno she had gotten the impression that the department was proceeding cautiously because the situation is so ``fraught with political tension.'' Nevertheless, Commissioner Victoria Wilson said she was ``slightly dismayed that we seem to be the only governmental institution that is undertaking this.'' Among the allegations discussed by the commission: Elderly citizens were made to stand on long lines and then improperly turned away from the polls. Voters were told they couldn't vote because they were convicted felons but, in fact, were not. Some people had been improperly expunged from the voter rolls. Some Haitian-American voters didn't receive needed language assistance. A large police presence in certain neighborhoods may have deterred some people from voting. The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People says it gathered 486 complaints and took more than 300 pages of sworn testimony from people who say they were blocked from voting in Florida. That organization plans to sue the state and several counties, alleging voter intimidation and other violations. The Rev. Jesse Jackson's Rainbow/PUSH Coalition, and several black Florida officials have filed a lawsuit against Duval County, Bush and Richard Cheney, claiming the county intentionally used a confusing ballot and turned away blacks from the polls. ``There is something afoot in Florida that does not pass the smell test,'' Jackson said Friday after the state Supreme Court ordered a hand count of all undervote ballots. ``This could go down as one of the most corrupt campaigns of recent history." US Stock Futures Fall on Florida Court Verdict: After-Hours New York, Dec. 8 (Bloomberg) -- U.S. stock index futures fell in extended trading after the Florida Supreme Court ordered the immediate recounting of thousands of ballots, giving new life to Al Gore's challenge to the state's presidential election tally. March Futures on the Standard & Poor's 500 Index dropped 40 points to 1355.00 after the court handed down its decision shortly after the 4 p.m. New York close of the stock exchanges. Nasdaq 100 Index futures dropped 142.50 to 2807.50. The court's verdict preserves the vice president's hopes and casts uncertainty over financial markets that had all but assumed that Texas Governor George W. Bush will be sworn in as the 42nd U.S. president, said Louis Navellier, who manages about $7 billion for Navellier & Associates in Reno, Nevada. ``Wall Street doesn't like uncertainty and they expected that George Bush would become the next president,'' Navellier said from his home in Palm Beach, Florida. ``Bush also didn't attack any companies, such as the [tobacco] and pharmaceutical companies, like Gore did ....'' If the U.S. sneezes, will Britain [and Europe] catch cold? By Ashley Seager LONDON, Dec 8 (Reuters) - With the U.S. economy showing almost daily signs of slowing down, analysts are asking to what extent will the British economy suffer a similar fate. In the past couple of weeks, many British economists have revised their forecasts of the next interest rate move to a cut from a rise and many have started to look at the risks to world growth posed by the spluttering U.S. economy and some wobbling emerging markets. The figure most focused upon is the slowdown in annualised U.S. economic growth to 2.7 percent in the third quarter from a whopping, and unsustainable, 5.6 percent in the second quarter. That provoked Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan to comment this week that the U.S. economy had slowed "appreciably" and that the Fed must be alert to the risk of an "excessive softening" in U.S. demand. Though that slowdown was desirable, the speed with which it has apparently happened has worried analysts, as well as Greenspan. With high technology stock prices tumbling and the strength of oil prices, some have started to wonder if the U.S. economy is heading for a so-called "hard landing." "With our U.S. economists noting the possibility of a stock market earnings shock from a squeeze in profit margins, the potential damage an imported 'wealth effect' could inflict on the UK consumer cannot be ignored," said Morgan Stanley's Miller. So does all of this mean the British economy is heading off a cliff? The answer is no one really knows, but it is clear that the outlook has become distinctly less rosy. Oswald, who has long said that the tripling of world oil prices over the last two years constituted a shock to the global economy, is quite clear. "In my view, the consequences of the fourth oil shock have arrived right on schedule. As I have said before, the world economy has never in history survived a big spike in oil prices without a major downturn. "It is easy to forget the speed of this slowdown. If this is a soft landing I will eat my parachute," he said.
