Question: The South Side Voice used to have a short column listing recent real estate sales. As I recall, it listed the address, the buyer, the seller and the price. That column was consistently the first thing I looked for in the South Side Voice, but I have been unable to find it for quite some time. Can you tell me why you stopped printing that information? And, would you please start

again? — Paul Luppert, Spokane

Answer: We no longer have the staff resources required to collect and enter by hand all of the home-sale listings. The agencies that collect the data and maintain electronic data bases have declined to share the electronic records with us. As a result, we stopped printing home-sale records some months back. We take occasional calls on the subject, but demand for that information seems to be limited. (For the record, the listings provided the name of the seller but not the buyer.) — Steve Smith, editor

Why isn’t a re-vote allowed?

Question: As a resident of Idaho, I probably don’t have any right to ask this question, but I’ll do it anyhow. Why is it that (Democratic gubernatorial candidate) Christine Gregoire was able to have recounts until the results suited her and a re-vote isn’t allowed? I don’t really care, but am wondering. — Lori White, Hayden, Idaho

Answer: The recounting procedures that have been followed to date all are prescribed by state law, including the hand recount that had to be paid for by those who requested it, in this case the state Democratic Party.

While existing law makes no provision for holding a new election for governor, some Republicans in the Legislature have talked about introducing such a bill after the 2005 session opens on Monday and trying to get it into law quickly.

That’s not likely to succeed because both houses of the Legislature have Democratic majorities and the existing governor and lieutenant governor (one of whom conceivably could be in office if a replacement can’t be certified) are both Democrats.

For that matter, the gubernatorial election isn’t formally settled until the Legislature certifies it, but, again, Democrats are in control there.

Last, the law gives any citizen the right to go to court to challenge the validity of the election, and it appears at least two or more people are going to do that. — Doug Floyd, editorial page editor

Swift Boat ads were debunked?

Question: Two (related) aspects of post-election coverage need to be addressed. 1) Since the election, there have been frequent and constant references in numerous media to “… the thoroughly discredited Swift Boat Veteran claims …”, “… the demonstrably false statements made by the Swifties …” as well as other dismissive and pejorative evaluations of the information provided by Sen. Kerry’s fellow Swift Boat crews. 2) Nowhere have I seen or heard of any efforts to objectively examine this body of statements and the sources and legitimacy of the information.

Mere assertion that the statements are false is not evidence that they are. If those who assault and reject the Swift Boat ads take the position that the information was false, they would be glad to provide tangible evidence to support that position. If they cannot provide some tangible and objective basis for their claim, the claim is at best suspect. — Walt Copley, Sagle, Idaho

Answer: I believe this issue was properly dealt with during the campaign. Numerous investigative reports debunked many aspects of the Swift Boat veterans’ campaign. Others put their claims in context.

I still believe the eyewitness accounts of Sen. Kerry’s Vietnam service, fully reported, carry considerable weight. However, with all due respect, with Sen. Kerry’s national ambitions no longer at issue, isn’t it time to focus on other significant issues rather than flaying this fully dead horse? — Steve Smith, editor