Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: liberallarry
Jefferson, who as Vice-President was also President of the Senate, had the task of counting the electoral votes, and Ackerman demonstrates that he played fast and loose with regard to Georgia's votes, which failed to meet the formal requirements set out by the Constitution.

I don't believe this is entirely correct. The Constitution calls for the President of the Senate to open the ballots, which are then counted, presumably by the entire Senate, not just by its President.

Do you know what the problem with Georgia's vote was? I've read quite a bit about this period and don't recall anything about this.

I would assume there would have been a huge outcry had the President of the Senate arbitrarily rejected the vote of a state because in his sole opinion it failed to meet the Constitution's requirements.

Interestingly, of the 16 states in the Union at the time, 11 chose their electors either partly or entirely by vote of the state legislature.

84 posted on 12/25/2005 8:18:13 AM PST by Restorer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies ]


To: Restorer
Do you know what the problem with Georgia's vote was?

Here's the Wikipedia take. Ackerman appararently thinks Jefferson was a little more devious but I haven't read the book.

In any case, "corrupt" is probably the wrong word to describe the situation.

92 posted on 12/25/2005 9:30:51 AM PST by liberallarry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson