Reply #7: Here are Ney's comments in the US House on 1 6 05 [View All]

[SophieZ]

Ney has blocked the paper trail legislation from getting a committee hearing since Rush Holt introduced it way long ago.

His speech on the day of the contest of the Ohio electors was not nearly as bad as Pryce's, which was horrendous. But, I fail to find seeds of redemption in his speech.

A Ney golf trip with Feeney, who is accused by whistleblower Clint Curtis of asking him to come up with a way to fix elections? Wow, that's rich.


NEY

COUNTING ELECTORAL VOTES--JOINT SESSION OF THE HOUSE AND SENATE HELD PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 1 (HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES--JANUARY 6, 2005) -- (House of Representatives - January 06, 2005)

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?r109:3:./temp/~r109jJ7HNN:e247234:

Mr. NEY. Mr. Speaker, I ask to be recognized for 5 minutes.

The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Ohio is recognized for 5 minutes.

Mr. NEY. Mr. Speaker, this is a sad day. It saddens me that we have to be here today debating this issue. Politics in America can be bitter. Campaigns can divide people and breed resentment. That is a given. It also used to be a given that once a campaign was over the winner claimed victory, the loser accepted defeat, everybody else went on with their lives, and the country moved forward. Now, unfortunately, it seems the bitterness and resentments do not end with the campaign. Instead, the divisions are stoked by individuals who simply do not like the results.

The curious thing about this challenge today is that it is taking place in spite of the fact that the losing candidate has admitted defeat. I have to applaud John Kerry for the gracious and magnanimous speech that he made the day after the election where he acknowledged he had been beaten. He also called for unity. I wish those bringing this challenge had heeded his call.

I know there are some problems obviously with this election. They are not frivolous. These problems were not unique, however, or confined to Ohio. Nor were they limited just to Democratic voters. There is no such thing as a perfect election. There has not been. There never will be a perfect election. The question, then, is not whether or not mistakes were made. Of course they were. The question is did those mistakes affect the outcome of this election? The answer is no. No serious person, no objective observer, could claim that they did today.

Now let us talk a little bit about the so-called evidence that has been presented about what happened in Ohio. Much has been made about the long waits for voters in some precincts. The distribution of voting machines in the State has been criticized, the claim being that minority precincts did not have enough machines while white or suburban precincts had too many. Ken Blackwell, our Secretary of State, has been a frequent target and basically blamed for everything. But, in fact, elections in Ohio are run by and large by the county election boards. If my colleagues are not familiar, these bipartisan boards consist of four members, two Democrats, two Republicans. Decisions about how many machines to have in each precinct are made by those boards, not by the Secretary of State. It is possible they could have miscalculated or underestimated.

In a recent article that appeared in the Columbus Dispatch, and this is important, Franklin County Board of Elections Chairman William A. Anthony, Jr. said long lines were not caused by the allocation of machines, a process controlled by a Democrat supervisor, he added, but by the high voter turnout, the overall lack of voting machines, and a ballot that included more than 100 choices for voters.

For those thinking Mr. Anthony must be a part of this conspiracy, I would point out that in addition to his position on the elections board, Mr. Anthony serves as chairman of the Franklin County Democrat Party. He said that he is offended by accusations from a band of conspiracy theorists. He further added, ``I am a black man. Why would I sit here and disenfranchise voters in my own community? I feel like they're accusing me of suppressing the black vote. I've fought my whole life for people's rights to vote.''

I could go on, Mr. Speaker, but basically what is the point? Those who believe this election was stolen will always believe it. No amount of facts or evidence will convince them otherwise. The bottom line is those bringing this challenge today simply cannot accept the fact that George Bush has been elected President of the United States. It is too painful for them.

We must always be seeking ways to improve the process. We announced weeks ago we are going to have bipartisan hearings to look at these issues, and they are not frivolous. They are important issues. But it would not have changed the outcome of the election.

Mr. Speaker, it does not elevate those who are bringing this challenge. It does not elevate our House. It does not elevate the debate. It debases all of us, and it merits a sad day in the history of this Nation.

Mr. Speaker, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. LaTourette).