Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

MT Repugs may have screwed themselves Montana law may forbid Burns recount

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
wakeme2008 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-08-06 04:56 PM
Original message
MT Repugs may have screwed themselves Montana law may forbid Burns recount
http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/Montana_law_may_forbid_Burns_recount_1108.html

Brian Beutler
Published: Wednesday November 8, 2006

Print This Email This

Major media organizations, including AP and CNN declared Democratic candidate Jim Tester the victor in the Montana Senate race against Republican Conrad Burns.

Though Burns has not yet conceded, he'll be unable to request a recount, RAW STORY has learned.

In 2005, Montana state code 13-16-201--the section concerning recounts in close or contested elections--states, "a candidate for a congressional office, a state or district office voted on in more than one county, the legislature, or judge of the district court is defeated by a margin not exceeding 1/4 of 1% of the total votes cast for all candidates for the same position.

..more at link...

IMHO this law was probably passed after 2000 to prevent another Florida.....

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
keithjx Donating Member (758 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-08-06 05:11 PM
Response to Original message
1. As pointed out on the RAWSTORY page,
further in the code is 13-16-211, which lets Burns request a recount if the margin of defeat is greater than 1/4 of 1% but does not exceed 1/2 of 1% . This code was enacted in 1979.....
KJ
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flowomo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-08-06 05:12 PM
Response to Original message
2. That's apparently just for an "automatic" recount.....
I read the code in the Raw link. It says a recount "must" be conducted under those conditions. Not "can only be"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 19th 2024, 04:35 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC