How do we insure that the tally of votes is both complete and accurate? Presumably, it's the job of the Secretary of State to guarantee that through the process of certification. But what if election officials are complicit in electoral fraud? What if they are merely negligent and fail to protect the process from being subverted?
Agreed. The 2004 election was stolen. The problem with the story is
that nobody knows what to do about it. The statutes are not set up to
deal with wholesale fraud. They are set up to deal with individual
voters who might want to vote fraudulently, or even political machines
on a local or even state level. The prospect of rigging a national
election was not anticipated because it wasn't possible until the advent
of electronic equipment that could be programmed centrally.
Moreover, even if it was proved beyond a doubt, what remedy would you
seek. There are no provisions in the law for doing a national election
of presidential electors over. (Keep in mind that the top of the ticket
is not elected by the people. It's selected by electors, individuals
whose term in office is very short and whose responsibility is only
one). Neither the electors nor those who have volunteered to hold the
top offices in the country can plausibly be responsible for the
electoral fraud. And if they are not responsible, they can't be
punished. And once an official has assumed an office, he's presumably
qualified and entitled to hold it, unless there is evidence of
malfeasance in carrying out the responsibilities of that office.
Bush/Cheney can be impeached for failing to uphold the Constitution, but
they cannot be removed because there was fraud in their election.
The only way we can have a transparent and fair election process is by
making fraud impossible and providing a legal basis for ensuring that
the count is accurate BEFORE the candidates are sworn. If electronic
machines are to be used, they have to be able to be audited
immediately--not ten days later or two weeks later. And the audit has
to be automatic and not dependent on judicial intervention. Electoral
fraud has to be dealt with pre-emptively. It's sort of like washing
your hands before you eat. Just to make sure there aren't any germs.
We have to make sure there aren't any glitches in the voting machines.
As to the circus on the ground on election day. That was just a
diversion to distract people from the fact that the machinery was
rigged. Of course, since the equipment wasn't impounded, that's going
to be hard to prove. Privatizing elections was a really bad idea.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
To the previous thoughts, which I penned in response to an email query, I would add that ceding responsibility for elections to private enterprise is really part and parcel of a general trend on the part of public servants to get rid of responsibility for providing services that generate negative interest and controversy. So, in a sense, elections have simply joined solid waste disposal and sewage as something the bureaucracy would rather avoid. Yet, what could be more central to public health and welfare than the proper disposal of waste and the proper conduct of elections?
Posted by Hannah at May 12, 2005 07:43 AM