look at florida from bush v gore in 2000, they were a joke. they were not even running their election badly the same way in different parts of the state. they said about over the course of years on a bipartisan basis to clean up those elections and come 2020 when there were complaints, there are no complaint in florida. they counted quickly, smoothly, both sides perceive it to have been accurate. we can do this better and the states as laboratories of democracy have proven they can do a good job when they put their mind to it. host: is there a plan or template as far as changing the way voting is done, particularly at the national level considering this is being considered in congress as well? guest: so there is a two level approach. one for all 230 years plus since the constitution was put in place, states have run elections. the constitution references this in article one, but it also gives congress the authority to play a role as well. congress has never done that on a broad scope. they have done things like pass the 14th and 15th amendment

you look at florida from bush v. gore in 2000. they were a joke, they were a laughingstock, they weren't even running their election badly the same way in different parts of the state. what do they do? they set about over the course of years on a bipartisan basis to clean up those election. and come 2020 when there are complaints all over the place, there are no complaints in florida. if he counted quickly, smoothly, both sides perceive it to have been accurate and fair. so we can do this better. and the states, as laboratories of democracy have proven they can do a good job when they put their mind to it. >> so is there then a plan or a template as far as changing the way voting is done, particularly not only on the state-by-state level, but on the national level considering this is being considered in congress as well with their legislation? >> so there is a two-level approach. all for 230 years plus since the constitution was put in place, states have run elections. the constitution references this in article i, but it also giv

let's look at bush versus gore -- bush v. gore. the decision in the year 2000. it is debatable if that decision decided the presidents of the u.s., but many americans thought it did. at the very least, it was a highly important one, potentially affecting vast numbers of american. the court was divided 5-4. i did not agree with the majority, i wrote a dissenting opinion. and a democrat who also thought it was wrong said the most remarkable feature of the decision could have been a feature upon which few were marked. despite the importance of the decision, despite the belief held by half the country that it was misguided, the nation follow the decision without violence. why? without throwing stones in the street. the losing candidate, al gore, told his supporters, do not trash the supreme court. these facts suggest obedience to the court's decisions, respecting those decisions, even when they are wrong, has become close to habitual in this country. americans have founded a normal attitude. they find it normal to the point where they rarely realize it is simply a c

in terms of a highly expedited procedure of the type, some of the witnesses referred to bush v gore and "new york times" v sullivan. certainly the supreme court could do that but there is only a limited number of times in a given year you could do that. having intense 18 hour days, seven days a week putting all of your attention on one case. you could do that periodically, but that can't be part of standard operating procedure. that can't be i would suggest a monthly occurrence. >> so it would by fair to think every litigant thinks it should be the exception but not every litigant will be pleased. >> that is probably, true, congressman. >> lastly i want to ask one of the questions that won't happen overnight. using the fed circuit as historic for patents and trademarks, patents specifically, and now looking at some of these cases, could each of you opine on what cases could be either forced to be moved to the district, in other words compelled to be brought in the district of columbia and taken through that process, or ones in which the appellate could be to a court of specific jurisdic

look at florida from bush v gore in 2000, they were a joke.y were not even running their election badly the same way in different parts of the state. they said about over the course of years on a bipartisan basis to clean up those elections and come 2020 when there were complaints, there are no complaint in florida. they counted quickly, smoothly, both sides perceive it to have been accurate. we can do this better and the states as laboratories of democracy have proven they can do a good job when they put their mind to it. host: is there a plan or template as far as changing the way voting is done, particularly at the national level considering this is being considered in congress as well? guest: so there is a two level approach. one for all 230 years plus since the constitution was put in place, states have run elections. the constitution references this in article one, but it also gives congress the authority to play a role as well. congress has never done that on a broad scope. they have done things like pass the 14th and 15th amendment, ch