Advertisement - Click to support our sponsors.
Editorials
Wednesday, December 13, 2000Gore’s decision
comes as a relief
to nationThe issue: Al Gore has decided to concede the presidential election.
AL Gore has decided to drop out of the presidential race, according to the Associated Press, and was to announce that decision in an address to the nation tonight. The decision comes after the U.S. Supreme Court dealt a devastating blow to the vice president's chances by barring further recounting of votes in Florida.
Thus ends one of the most remarkable elections in American history -- with George W. Bush emerging as the winner and next president. After the extraordinary developments of the last five weeks, he may have great difficulty in gaining the nation's acceptance as its leader.
Americans will have to put this frustrating experience behind them and close ranks. But they must also correct a system that failed them in a crisis.
In brief, when the election came down to which candidate had won Florida, the system could not provide a definite answer before time ran out. Thousands of ballots were cast in Florida with no vote for president recorded, in many cases apparently the result of a defective punch-card system.
The recount issue became bogged down in the courts, with the U.S. Supreme Court delivering the coup de grace last night while the deadline for choosing electors passed.
All of this could have been avoided if a more reliable voting system had been in place or if the law had been clearer on the question of recounts.
It didn't help that in ruling for Bush the high court divided 5-4 on the case, just as the Florida Supreme Court had previously for Gore. This created the perception that the justices' opinions were politically motivated. It could undermine public respect for the judiciary, which would be most unfortunate.
The justices were reluctant to take on a case with such enormous political ramifications, and it turned out that their reluctance was only too justified. Their division seemed to reflect the nation's division in the election itself.
Having won the popular vote nationally, and having a chance through the recount to win Florida, Gore will go down in history as the candidate who perhaps should have won this election. But some will question the wisdom of carrying his challenge so long beyond Nov. 7 as to jeopardize the nation's unity.
In any case, it is a relief that this bizarre struggle is over at last, even though it ended with such a controversial ruling.
Americans seem to have taken this spectacular failure of the essential mechanism of democracy, the election system, with considerable calm. The attitude seems to have been that the nation will work its way through this somehow and move on. Confidence in the underlying strength of our system in government has not been shaken, although it has been tested over these weeks of indecision. In a way this is a testament to the strength of our democracy.
We offer our congratulations to President-elect Bush and our condolences to Vice President Gore. After all the bickering and delays, the president-elect is going to be hard-pressed to get his administration off to a good start. He needs all the help he can get.
European Union
THE European Union has been evolving since the early post-World War II years, based on the concept that the former enemy nations could prosper in a more stable environment if they banded together. Much has been achieved since, but the latest conference in Nice, France, demonstrated that the governments are still far from creating a United States of Europe.
Leaders of the 15-nation organization did agree to revise the EU's decision-making process, but less thoroughly than had been proposed. They also decided to overhaul the EU treaty to enable it to admit as many as a dozen new members in the coming years, mostly from the former Soviet bloc.
However, lofty dreams of pan-European unity encountered the rude reality of nationalism at Nice. The toughest battle was fought over reallocation of votes in ministerial meetings. Portugal and Belgium led smaller nations fighting to keep their voices from being submerged when the EU admits more members.
The members made a commitment to admit the applicant governments by 2004 if possible, in time to participate in that year's elections for the European Parliament. The accession talks began two years ago, and applicants had been growing restless over the delays. The final agreement reduced the areas that require unanimous approval -- in other words, providing fewer opportunities for a veto.
But Britain, supported by Sweden, Ireland and Luxembourg, refused to give up the veto on tax issues. France insisted on maintaining the veto over cultural trade issues.
A spokesman for the European Commission conceded, "The ambitious agenda that we set for the European Council and for ourselves in going to Nice has not been fully achieved."
The Guardian of London commented that the conference "presented a dismaying prospect to those who favor a stronger, more democratic enlarged community. At every stage of the prolonged negotiation, raw national interest has overshadowed the broader vision." The host, French President Jacques Chirac, was criticized for his "deep, primary attachment to his country's own agenda."
Still, the leaders agreed to create the first pan-European defense force of 60,000 troops and to change the EU voting system to reflect the populations of member states. After Nice, Europe is still a collection of sovereign states but the family has taken a few more steps toward closer cooperation. Perhaps it's better to proceed cautiously.
Published by Liberty Newspapers Limited PartnershipRupert E. Phillips, CEO
John M. Flanagan, Editor & Publisher
Frank Bridgewater, Acting Managing Editor
Diane Yukihiro Chang, Senior Editor & Editorial Page Editor
Michael Rovner, Assistant Managing Editors
A.A. Smyser, Contributing Editor
