Jack Kingston

Mr. KINGSTON

Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Chairman, I would say that this is one of the problems, and I would urge the NEA in their own distribution to go out to the rest of the country and make the their presence known. I can say this, we do not get any letters. Yes, let us do something for the NEA back home, because they are invisible. We get lots of art, locally State-funded stuff, privately funded. We have a great symphony. We have a great art museum, a huge fund-raiser and lots of good things going on. But one of the big vision differences here, Mr. Chairman, is that there are those who believe that government has to be the only funder and the only provider of things. Then there are others who think that funding as much as possible whenever possible should be driven by the private sector and locally. I am going to support NEA funding, and I will support the committee mark, as I did at the subcommittee and the full committee level; but I will not support an increase.

Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey).

Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Dicks).

Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Regula), the past chairman of the subcommittee and an active and current member.

Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Murtha).

Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Nethercutt), a member of the committee.

Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Doyle).

Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Stearns) for yielding me this time. Mr. Chairman, I stand in strong support of this. This amendment simply puts the NEA back to the funding level that it should be at, and the funding level that was passed on a bipartisan level by the committee. More importantly than that, it invests the money in energy conservation. Here are some of the things that the NEA does: promotes poetry, promotes puppetry, promotes jazz. All these things are very important. These are things they do in my area; and frankly, my folks can do this without the NEA's help. Given the choice between a puppet show and gas selling at $1.50 a gallon versus $1.20 a gallon, we would rather have gas at $1.20 a gallon, and then we would write our own checks to promote art locally. I believe we need heat for hospitals, light for learning and gas for going places; and that is what the Stearns amendment does. It puts money into energy conservation so there will be more energy, more source of energy for all of us; and I believe that this is a far more needed expenditure than spending additional money on the NEA at this time.

Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Holden).

Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding, and let me just say this. We appreciate the gentlewoman's concern on it, and we will see if there is anything, but it is a question of funding and just a limited bill and lots of choices. But we are early in the process and the gentlewoman is showing a lot of concern, and we will just have to see. I am sorry I cannot be more specific.

Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I might consume. Mr. Chairman, I wanted to say this, again summarizing our bipartisan opposition to this amendment, that PILT is funded at the historically high level in this bill of $200 million. That is $50 million above the budget request. Weatherization programs receive a 70 percent increase in funding above last year. Here we are in an energy crisis, and energy conservation research funding has been restored to last year's historically high level, which is a good increase. But we need to continue that research. We need to keep the commitment. Fossil energy research after deducting the President's clean coal power initiative is below last year's level. Further cuts would be foolhardy. This amendment is bad for our energy security, bad for the consumer who purchases energy, and bad for the economy. We need to continue our research. We need to vote no on this amendment.

Mr. KINGSTON

Mr. KINGSTON. Madam Speaker, anybody that gets frustrated with a utility company, I am completely sympathetic with. But I have to stay, I think it is a little immature of the Governor of California to continuously blame power companies for some of their problems out there. Just think about this: The State of California in the last 10 years had unprecedented prosperity and growth, and during that period of time, they, like any other growing municipality or entity, would add new schools, new roads, new hospitals; but when it came time to approve new power plant construction, oh, no, we cannot do that. We are going to defy the law of supply and demand. What were they thinking? Grow up. They have to add to their infrastructure power. They cannot have a 25 percent increase in demand and only increase the supply 6 percent. It is as if Governor Davis has the key to the power that they need for hospitals, for schools, for learning, for lights, and even the gasoline for going places in one's car. It is like he has the key to it and he is throwing it away so that the lowly working folks, in his opinion, the middle class, cannot function. Madam Speaker, I would say, let the key go and open up the supply, Governor Davis.

Mr. KINGSTON

Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, we all just heard a very interesting discussion, and I am being very generous with that word, on the energy crisis. It seems that there are those who are just content in trying to make political hay out of a problem in California during a period of time when demand for energy went up 25 percent; yet the supply that was allowed through government permit was only allowed to increase 6 percent. Now, who was at the wheel during that period of time? It was generally liberal Democratic Governors and legislators who did not want nuclear power, even though France has nuclear power and has used it safely and efficiently, and about 25 percent of the power in California is nuclear. They do not want to use coal, because, well, you know, we just cannot use coal, so we do not want that. We do not want to use waterpower, because that would keep salmon from swimming upstream and spawning, even though there are ladders that would allow them to do that. Sometimes we have to say yes to something. Energy means hospital beds, energy means schools and senior citizens homes. Helping people stay warm and stay protected, that is what energy is all about. I wish that it would be time for the folks from California to start working with the rest of the Nation for a common-sense middle road.

Mr. KINGSTON

Mr. KINGSTON. Madam Speaker, it is my great pleasure and honor to introduce and ask that the House of Representatives pass H.R. 1183, legislation to name the Post Office in Sylvania, Georgia in Screven County for former Congressman G. Elliot Hagan.

Mr. KINGSTON

Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding time to me. Mr. Speaker, several months ago I was at Johnson High School talking to the seniors, and a little girl named Julie Long sat in the front. I asked her if she had a job, how much she got paid. She had a job, she made $7 an hour. I said, ``Julie, if you work for 2 hours, you take home $14.'' She said, ``No, Mr. Kingston, of course not, I pay taxes, about $4 worth.'' Okay, so on the $14 that she has earned, she was paying $4 in taxes. Now, she understands we need to pay for the military, we need to pay for education, roads and bridges and functions of government. She said, ``Yes, sir.'' I said, ``Julie, what if you found out that I could do all that for $3.50, not $4. What would you want me to do with the other 50 cents?'' She said, ``It is my money, Mr. Kingston. Give it back to me.'' That is what this bill is all about. All it says is that we are going to take care of Social Security, Medicare, normal functions of government, especially education; come on, I say to the gentlemen, it is the President's education package. Then we are going to pay down the debt. With what is left, we are going to return it to the American taxpayers. It is not time for class warfare, to bring out the same arguments we heard on health care reform, Medicare reform, regulatory reform. It is not time for all the fearmongering. Let us just say who this money belongs to, which is the taxpayer, not us in Washington, and let us say it is their money and we are going to return it to them. That is what this bill is all about. I urge my colleagues to support the conference report.

Mr. KINGSTON

Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, liberal extremists in Washington want to adopt the California approach on energy and make it national policy. That is kind of a head-in-the-sand approach. They do not like coal, they do not like oil, they do not like nuclear power. They want everybody to be driving cars that have windmills on top of them or something like that. I am not exactly sure where their reality lands. But the reality is, in California, demand for energy exploded over 30 percent, and yet they would not allow new power plants to be built. As a result, they had the same pollution-causing, outdated power plants now owned by the government. Well, does that not make us feel comfortable? Mr. Speaker, the time is not for partisan sniping. The time is to say, gee whiz, maybe California did make some mistakes. It is probably not good to model national policy after them. Let us be realistic. We do need alternative energy sources. We do need research. We do need conservation. But guess what? We cannot get off of oil tomorrow. We have to keep refineries open. Mr. Speaker, I hope that the Democrats will join the Bush administration in looking for a solution.

Mr. KINGSTON

Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, what the big government liberals in Washington want to do to the working men and women is reach their hand in their pocket, grab the wallet, pull out all of their hard-earned cash, year after year, so that the working people now are paying about 40 percent of their household income in taxes. What the Bush tax plan is saying is, hey, look, we do not need all of that money we have been grabbing out of your wallet. Let us put it back in there. Then, when the working people can control their own money, they get to save it. How, how about an education account for one of your children? How about a new dryer? How about a long, hard-earned vacation? Better still, if you want to, you go out and buy something on the economy, treat yourself. When you do that, businesses respond by increasing their inventory. They have to hire more people because of the new demand, and when they do, there are more jobs in the economy, more people are working, less people are laid off, less people are on welfare and unemployment, and we have more tax revenues coming in. It is a win-win. Why do the Washington liberals not get it, Mr. Speaker? People know how to spend their money far better than Washington does. Let us let them keep more of their own money. Support the Bush plan.

Mr. KINGSTON

Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding time to me, and for bringing this back so quickly to the House floor after a Senate amendment. Mr. Speaker, as we approach Memorial Day, I think there are two things that we can keep in mind. Actually, there are countless things we should keep in mind, but there are two things that I always try to emphasize when I am talking to schoolkids. One is, we should remember in our memorial to our war dead that they were kids themselves. As I look at a group of high school students, and say, ``Think about the graveyards of all the war heroes that we see, and remember, they were closer to your age than the white-haired man in the bleacher who is back here alive today. The people who fought so hard for our freedom and sacrificed their lives, they were yet kids themselves, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22 years old; very, very young people.'' We should also remember that they were hometown. There is not a county or city in America that we cannot go to that did not have people who died in World War II. In most towns, they had somebody who died in Vietnam, North Korea, World War I, or any one of other conflicts that have been fought in the name of freedom around our country. As we do this, keep in mind that they were young, and that they were our neighbors and friends. What we need to do in honoring them is to get this monument built. We have had all kinds of hearings. It has met the approval of the National Environmental Policy Act and the Commemorative Works Act. It has the approval of all the appropriate commissions. It has gone through countless hearings, site and design work has been approved, and the construction permit has already been issued. It is time to move forward. If we think about it in these terms, 16 million people were involved in World War II. Today, only about 5 million are left alive, and we lose about 1,000 a day. It is time to move forward for the honor of these very brave, very historically significant men and women of such worth to our country. The fact that we have not already built a monument, to me, is atrocious. I am glad that Democrats, Republicans, and Independents are united on this. Let us pass this bill and let us break ground by Memorial Day.

Mr. KINGSTON

Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, it is my distinct honor and pleasure to rise today on behalf of a very special person who resides in my district. On Saturday, May 26th, Mrs. Eddie Lee Edwards McPherson will be celebrating her 80th birthday along with her friends and family. I would like to join with the many in congratulating her upon this significant milestone. Eddie Lee was born to the late Samuel P. M. Rhodes and the late Florence Hagins Rhodes in 1921 in Bulloch County, GA; and was united in marriage to the late Joseph Sterling Edwards, Sr. with whom she was blessed with her six children, four daughters and two sons. She is currently married to Leroy McPherson who graced her with four stepchildren, three daughters and one son. Throughout her life, though, the Lord bestowed upon her the love of even more sons and daughters-in- law, numerous grandchildren and great-grandchildren, as well as other embraced children. Mrs. McPherson graduated from Savannah State College with a degree in Elementary Education. Throughout her career, Eddie Lee was given the opportunity to reach many young children at Perry Elementary, Viola Burroughs Elementary, C.B. Greer Elementary and Ballard Elementary. She has also served faithfully in the community and at local churches. This remarkable lady is an encourager, a disciplinarian, a dear friend to many and an indomitable matriarch. Her faith, courage and kindness are an inspiration to all who have been touched by her. God blessed us when he gave us Mrs. Eddie Lee Edwards McPherson. May God bless her on her 80th birthday.

Mr. KINGSTON

Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Louisiana for yielding me this time, and I thank my friend from Florida for bringing up the 1980s. A key element which Paul Harvey may refer to as the rest of the story, who was the majority in Congress in 1981, 1982, 1983, 1984 but liberal, big-spending Democrats? And what do they do when they get your money? They spend it. Why are they opposed to a tax reduction? Because they believe in their heart of hearts, and this is the crux of the whole matter, the big philosophical, empirical difference between the parties is that in their heart of hearts they believe they can spend your money better than you can. They believe the American people are incapable of spending decisions which might benefit society by creating jobs and creating more tax revenues. I was speaking at a high school recently and I asked a young lady on the front row of a class how many of you have a job. She had a job. She made $7 an hour. I said, ``So if you work for 2 hours, you make $14.'' She said, ``No, sir, I only get to bring home about $11 because of the taxes.'' I said, ``I knew that. But let us say you do not really object to paying $3 in taxes or $4 in taxes out of your 2 hours that you work, you pay $4 in taxes and that $4 goes to roads, bridges, education, military, Medicare and you don't have a problem with that, right?'' She said, ``No, sir I don't mind that.'' I said, ``What if you knew that instead of $4, that we could run the government on $3.50 out of your earnings, what would you want with the rest of the money, that extra 50 cents? Would you want to keep it or would you want it to go to Washington so you could feel even more patriotic?'' She said, ``That's my 50 cents. I want to keep it.'' That is all that this is about, is saying to the American people, we could run the government on less money. The only question is, who wants the return? Do you want to send it to the government or do you want to keep it yourself? And when you go out as an American taxpayer and you buy washing machines or tires for your cars or clothes or whatever, you create jobs, you stimulate the economy, the economy grows, and it is good for America. Let the American people spend their own money. Support tax relief.

Mr. KINGSTON

Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Nussle) for yielding the time to me. Mr. Speaker, first of all, I want to say to the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor), my good friend, that I agree that under the Clinton administration in the last 8 years, a lot of these things have in fact been devastated, like military spending and shipbuilding programs and so forth, but we are going to rebuild some of these things through a very smart budget. The way we are going to do this is we are going to first put our priorities on top, Social Security, Medicare, education. Then we are going to take care of the normal functions of government, our obligations for roads and bridges, and for all of the departments, National Parks and Fish and Wildlife. Then what we are going to do is pay down the public debt. This, Mr. Speaker, is the first debt that we have been able to pass, I believe, that actually does pay down the public debt to a zero level, which I think is extremely important. Then we get to that leftover amount. Mr. Speaker, let me explain it to my colleagues this way: In Johnson High School, Savannah, Georgia, a couple months back, I was speaking to a group of seniors, and I asked them, how many of you have a job? Sitting in the front row, a blonde-haired Julie Lawhon said, I have a job. Julie, how much do you make? Seven dollars an hour. Seven dollars an hour? Then if you work for 2 hours, you made $14, right? No, sir. Obviously, you have not had a job; I only get to take home about $11. Oh, where does the rest go, little 17-year-old, Julie? It goes to taxes. Okay, let us talk about that, the $4 that you pay on your $7 an hour in taxes for 2 hours of work, the $4 an hour my friends in Washington take and we pay for education, we pay for roads, we pay for health care. You do not begrudge that, do you? You know those functions are needed. She said, yes. Well, Julie, what if you found out I do not need $4, that my friends and I can do all of this great stuff for $3.75, what would you do with the extra quarter? Seventeen-year-old blonde-haired Julie Lawhon, Savannah, Georgia, says, give it back to me, it is my 25 cents. That is all we are doing. God bless Julie Lawhon, the 17-year-old high school student. God bless the children of the next generation, because they get it. Mr. Speaker, I am on bended knee, begging my colleagues across the aisle to get it as well. It is their money. It does not belong to one single person in here. It belongs to the taxpayers. Let us return the overcharge back to those who earned it.

Mr. KINGSTON

Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor a woman from my district whose hard work and leadership are rivaled by only a few. This woman, Mrs. Jane B. Garrison, has dedicated the past eight years to the Safe Kids of Savannah Coalition and to the prevention of unintentional injury to children, the number one killer of children. Her hard work has, indeed, made my hometown, Savannah, Georgia, a safer place for children. Working as the Coalition's Coordinator, Jane Garrison has made Safe Kids of Savannah a truly successful organization. She has been the driving force behind its many charities and functions. Because of Mrs. Garrison, Safe Kids of Savannah has been given many awards, including the 1994 Outstanding Health Promotion Program from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the 1995 SAFE KIDS of Georgia Coalition of the Year and the 1996 Outstanding Coalition of the National SAFE KIDS Campaign. Mrs. Garrison has quietly been an outstanding supporter of protecting and promoting the welfare of children in Savannah since she moved there in 1985. Her other achievements include: the establishment of Boy Scout Troop #57 on Skidaway Island; Chairman of Lifeline of Children, Inc. (a volunteer group that works with the Chatham County DFCS Department to prevent child abuse and neglect); most recent former Chairperson of the Board of Directors of Chatham County DFCS; and recipient of the Richard A. Schieber, MD Award for 2001 from SAFE KIDS of Georgia, as an outstanding SAFE KIDS Coordinator. I think it is only fitting, Mr. Speaker, to add a prayer for the children in honor of Mrs. Garrison's hard work and the SAFE KIDS of Savannah's 10th Anniversary Celebration. This prayer, taken from the SAFE KIDS of Savannah Coalition's 1999-2000 Annual Report, was adapted from Ina J. Hughes by the Children's Defense Fund. It is entitled, Lest We Forget: A Prayer of Responsibility for Children

Mr. KINGSTON

Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor a great achievement by Boy Scout Troop 76 of Wilmington Island, which is in my district. I believe that the Boy Scouts of America play a wonderful role in the life of many young men throughout our nation. The life lessons and morals taught by this organization should be heralded daily by all of us. What happened at a recent outing of Troop 76 to the Delta Plantation in Hardeeville, South Carolina is proof of this. In late March, Boy Scout Troop 76 went on a weekend camping trip to the Delta Plantation, a privately owned 1600 acre tract of land in Hardeeville, South Carolina just outside of Savannah. The area is completely unspoiled and teeming with wildlife. During the weekend, the owner of the property approached the Scout Troop and informed them that an American Bald Eagle was injured and stuck in the marsh nearby. One of the troop leaders, Will Jarvis, and several of the older Scouts went to help. Upon their arrival at the scene, they found a baby American Bald Eagle in the marsh struggling to escape. Disregarding their own safety, Will and several of the Scouts went into the alligator and snake invested water to help the scared animal. The eagle was wrapped in a blanket and rushed to the only veterinarian who is allowed to treat endangered species. The eagle is currently under the doctor's care where it will be nursed until it can be safely released. I believe that this is a perfect example of what Scouting is all about. If it were not for these Boy Scouts' quick response and disregard for their own personal safety, we would have lost yet another of an already endangered species. I applaud Boy Scout Troop 76 for their bravery and I applaud the Boy Scouts of America for what they teach.

Mr. KINGSTON

Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, there has been much said about the Florida election returns, and we hear over and over again from people that, well, Bush really did not win the election; that he stole it. I would invite Members of the House to pick up a copy of the USA Today newspaper. It says, ``Newspapers' Recount Shows Bush Prevailed in Florida Vote.'' I am going to read the first paragraph, and keep in mind newspapers are not exactly known for being conservative instruments. The first paragraph says, ``George W. Bush would have won a hand count of Florida's disputed ballots if the standard advocated by Al Gore had been used, the first full study of the ballot reveals.'' My, my, my. Where are all the accusers, where are all the finger- pointers to say, well, gee whiz, I was wrong, it looks like Mr. Bush is the legitimate President of the United States? Mr. Speaker, I am going to submit this full article for the Record because I am sure Members in their hurry to get out of town will not have time to read this paper; but out of my concern for these Members, I want this to be in the Congressional Record and maybe they could share it with some of their friends in academia and the unions and the other great liberal institutions throughout the land. [From USA Today, Apr. 4, 2001] Newspapers' Recount Shows Bush Prevailed in Florida Vote (By Dennis Cauchon) George W. Bush would have won a hand count of Florida's disputed ballots if the standard advocated by Al Gore had been used, the first full study of the ballots reveals. Bush would have won by 1,665 votes--more than triple his official 537-vote margin--if every dimple, hanging chad and mark on the ballots had been counted as votes, a USA TODAY/ Maimi Herald/Knight Ridder study shows. The study is the first comprehensive review of the 61,195 ``undervote'' ballots that were at the center of Florida's disputed presidential election. The Florida Supreme Court ordered Dec. 8 that each of these ballots, which registered no presidential vote when run through counting machines, be examined by hand to determine whether a voter's intent could be discerned. On Dec. 9, the U.S. Supreme Court stopped the hand count before it was completed. That gave Bush Florida's 25 electoral votes, one more than he needed to win the presidency. USA TODAY, The Miami Herald and Knight Ridder newspapers hired the national accounting firm BDO Seidman to examine undervote ballots in Florida's 67 counties. The accountants provided a report on what they found on each of the ballots. The newspapers then applied the accounting firm's findings to four standards used in Florida and elsewhere to determine when an undervote ballot becomes a legal vote. By three of the standards, Bush holds the lead. The fourth standard gives Gore a razor-thin win. The results reveal a stunning irony. The way Gore wanted the ballots recounted helped Bush, and the standard that Gore felt offered him the least hope may have given him an extremely narrow victory. The vote totals vary depending on the standard used: Lenient standard. This standard, which was advocated by Gore, would count any alteration in a chad--the small perforated box that is punched to cast a vote--as evidence of a voter's intent. The alteration can range from a mere dimple, or indentation, in a chad to its removal. Contrary to Gore's hopes, the USA TODAY study reveals that this standard favors Bush and gives the Republican his biggest margin: 1,665 votes. Palm Beach standard. Palm Beach County election officials considered dimples as votes only if dimples were found in other races on the same ballot. They reasoned that a voter would demonstrate similar voting patterns on the ballot. This standard--attacked by Republicans as arbitrary--also gives Bush a win, by 884 votes, according to the USA TODAY review. Two-corner standard. Most states with well-defined rules say that a chad with two or more corners removed is a legal vote. Under this standard, Bush wins by 363. Strict standard. This ``clean punch'' standard would only count fully removed chads as legal votes. The USA TODAY study shows that Gore would have won Florida by 3 votes if this standard were applied to undervotes. Because of the possibility of mistakes in the study, a three-vote margin is too small to conclude that Gore might have prevailed in an official count using this standard. But the overall results show that both campaigns had a misperception of what the ballots would show. The prevailing view of both was that minority or less-educated Democratic voters were more likely to undervote because of confusion. Gore's main strategy throughout the post-election dispute was to secure a recount of any kind in the hope of reversing the certified result. Bush's strategy was to stop the recount while he was ahead. But his views on how recounts should be done, in the counties where they were underway, would have been potentially disastrous for him if used statewide. Bush and Gore were informed Tuesday of the new study's results. Both declined comment. But White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said, ``The President believes, just as the American people do, that this election was settled months ago. The voters spoke, and George W. Bush won.'' The newspapers' study took three months to complete and cost more than $500,000. It involved 27 accountants who examined and categorized ballots as they were held up by county election officials. The study has limitations. There is variability in what different observers see on ballots. Election officials, who sorted the undervotes for examination and then handled them for the accountants' inspection, often did not provide exactly the same number of undervotes recorded on election night. Even so, the outcome shows a consistent and decisive pattern: the more lenient the standard, the better Bush does. Because Gore fought for the lenient standard, it may be more difficult now for Democrats to argue that the election was lost in the chambers of the U.S. Supreme Court rather than the voting booths of Florida. The study helps answer the question: What would have happened if the U.S. Supreme Court had not stopped the hand count of undervotes? However, it does not answer all the questions surrounding another set of Florida ballots: the 110,000 ``overvotes,'' which machines recorded as having more than one presidential vote. These ballots were rejected by the machines and were considered invalid. Some Democrats say if all of Florida's overvote ballots were examined by hand to learn voters' intent, Gore would have prevailed. USA TODAY, The Miami Herald and Gannett and Knight Ridder newspapers also are examining Florida's overvotes for a study to be published later this spring. Overvotes contain some valid votes, mostly instances when a voter marked the oval next to a candidate's name and then wrote in the name of the same candidate. No candidate requested a hand count of overvotes and no court--federal or state--ordered one. The U.S. Supreme Court cited the state court's failure to include the overvotes in its recount order as an example of arbitrariness. Immediately after Gore, conceded the election to Bush, The Miami Herald began to evaluate what might have happened if the U.S. Supreme Court had not stopped the recount of undervotes. Florida is one of the few states that permit members of the public to examine ballots after they've been cast. The Miami Herald and the BDO Seidman accounting firm began examining ballots on Dec. 18. USA TODAY joined the project in January. The last undervote ballot was examined March 13. Florida law requires that political parties be notified of ballot inspections. The Republican and Democratic parties took different approaches to the three months of ballot inspections. The Democrats took a hands-off approach. They rarely showed up at election offices during the evaluation. ``We want to see what you find. It's not our role to be at the table with you,'' Tony Welch spokesman for the Florida Democratic Party, said during the newspapers' study. ``If we're spinning and the Republicans are spinning, people won't believe the result.'' He said at the time that the party expected the outcome would show that Gore receive more votes than Bush. By contrast, the Republicans attended every ballot inspection. They devoted hundreds of days of staff and volunteer time. The party delayed cutting its post-election staff of field directors from 12 to 6 so it could staff the ballot inspections. Some Republicans took meticulous notes on the contents of the ballots. Others just watched. The Republican Party of Florida published a daily internal memo called ``Reality Check,'' which critiqued the media efforts to examine ballots. In an interview before the results were released, Mark Wallace, a Republican lawyer assigned to critique the media inspections, said, ``The media appear ready to offer unprecedented liberal standards for judging what is a vote. The appropriate legal standard is what was in place on Election Day: cleanly punched cards only.'' Before this election, almost nothing was known by the public and by political parties about what types of marks appear on undervotes and overvotes, which make up about 2% of ballots cast nationally. The newspapers' study shows both parties predicted incorrectly which of these ballots would help them. Democrats and Republicans noted that voter errors on punch- card voting machines were most frequent in low-income and predominantly minority precincts. Because these voters tend to vote Democratic, the disputed votes were assumed to be a rich trove of support for Gore. Likewise, both parties noted that the 41 Florida counties that used optical-scan ballots, a system similar to standardized school tests, tended to vote Republican. Bush supporters attacked Gore for asking for hand counts in three Democratic-leaning counties. If any hand count occurred, it should include the Republican-leaning optical- scan counties, too, the Bush supporters said. The USA TODAY/Miami Herald/Knight Ridder study shows that the Democratic and Republican assumptions were largely wrong. The under-vote ballots actually break down into two distinct categories: Undervotes in punch-card counties. In the 22 punch-card counties in which BDO Seidman examined undervotes, 56% of the 35,761 ballots had some kind of mark on them. The study found that punch-card undervotes correlated less to race of party affiliation than to machine maintenance and election management. Counties that maintain machines poorly-- not cleaning out chads frequently, for example--have plentiful undervotes. The study shows that when undervotes are had counted, they produce new votes for the candidates in proportions similar to the county's official vote. For example, in Duval County, where Jacksonville is the county seat, Bush defeated Gore 58%-41%. Among the undervotes, Bush defeated Gore 60%-32% under the lenient standard and by similarly comfortable numbers under all standards. Bush picked up a net of 930 votes, including 602 dimples. Likewise, in Miami-Dade, where Gore hoped to score big gains, he received 51% of the marked undervotes, about the same as the 52% that he got in the official count. Undervotes in optical-scan counties. In the 37 optical-scan counties in which BDO Seidman examined undervotes, one third of 5,623 ballots had discernible votes. The most common was when a voter made an X or check mark, rather than filling in the oval properly. Other common errors included circling the candidate's name or using a personal pencil or pen that couldn't be read by the machine. Black ink that contains even a trace of red will not register on many vote-counting machines, even when the mark appears pure black to the human eye. The study shows that these errors were disproportionately common among Democratic voters. For example, in Orange County, home of Orlando, Gore edged Bush 50%-48% in the election. But Gore won the undervotes by 64%-33%, giving him a net gain of 137 votes. That accounted for half of the 261 votes Gore gained in optical-scan counties, which Bush won overall by 53%-44%. The study found that optical-scan counties are the only places where Gore actually picked up more votes than Bush: 1,036 to 775 for Bush. In the punch-card counties, where Gore had placed his hopes, his chances of winning a hand count were washed away. On dimples alone, Bush gained 1,188 votes. When all the possibilities are combined--dimples, hanging chads, clean punches--Bush outdid Gore by 8,302 to 6,559. USA TODAY's analysis is based on accepting Bush's official 537-vote margin. This figure includes hand counts completed in Broward and Volusia counties before the U.S. Supreme Court intervened. The newspaper also accepted hand counts completed in Palm Beach, Manatee, Escambia, Hamilton and Madison counties, plus 139 precincts in Miami-Dade. These hand counts, which were never certified, reduced Bush's lead to 188--the starting point for USA TODAY's analysis. The newspaper excluded these counties from its analysis. However, BDO Seidman collected data in these counties, and they are available on USATODAY.com. In the end, Florida's presidential election remains remarkably close by any standard: 2,912,790 to 2,912,253 in the official count. In an election this close, the winner often depends on the rules and how they are enforced.