George,

I think the word "unethical"is a little over the edge in the criticism of Lloyd Snook's decision to indicate his preferences and then recuse himself from any involvement in the vote counting or the election process itself. I feel that removes him from any conflict of interest.

Repeating myself, better he reveal his choices and remove himself, than be in a position to influence the outcome, while, at the same time, knowing in advance who he would prefer to win. That, to me, would be questionable.

I think of Katherine Harris, in Florida, who made no effort to conceal her choice and then went about using every questionable and unethical tactic in her "bag of tricks" to materially effect the outcome of the presidential election in the state. If she had removed herself from any of the processes involved in the attempted recount, I think her credibility would have been greatly enhanced.

As I understand it, Lloyd will simply explain the process and procedure for casting of ballots.

I know Lloyd Snook is a pretty influential guy, but I don't think his powers go to the point of effecting the choices of any independent, thinking Democrat!

Yes, Lloyd Snook made his choices known publicly, but he has also promised to stay out of any process where even a hint of impropriety could be called into question.

I personally would welcome that forthright approach by party chairs everywhere!

Harry Tenney (electronic mail, February 22, 2002).