Here on The Most Important Blog... Ever, we've taken up a new, important cause in addition to providing you with the most important information you've ever seen. We're going on a mission to get partisan hacks away from the people who design and count your ballots.
Basically, it is our important belief that the people in charge of running elections in the United States shouldn't be Democrats. They shouldn't be Republicans. They shouldn't be Greens, Libertarians, or members of any other political party. They should be independent from all political parties, because when elections are close, no party can resist using all the dirty tricks they've got to win an election -- including tampering with registrations and ballots.
That happened this year in Ohio. I'm certain of it. It probably happened in Florida, too. And Colorado. There are plenty of less important blogs with plenty of information about how exit polls were way off in states with Republican electoral boards (Ohio, Florida). No outright proof that I've seen yet, but there is certainly room for asking questions.
My simple argument is this: Why leave room for questions? Wouldn't it be better for everyone if we had independent, non-partisan, public electoral boards?
To clarify, I am calling for a change in the law to create new electoral commissions in every state -- non-partisan, independent, public authorities that have as their only charge ensuring that all citizens can vote and have their votes counted. I'm not asking for an already existing independent body to take over American elections -- I'm calling for a change in the law. (This paragraph was added on November 8, 2004.)
I'm not the only one asking for this simple reform. Former President Jimmy Carter, an accomplished diplomat who runs one of the world's most respected institutions for observing elections, agrees. Get political parties out of the business of printing and counting ballots. Period.
How? Simple. Just change the law to require that all electioral boards across the country are chaired and run by people who do not belong to any political party. No more having the chair of one candidate's campaign also in charge of running the election (Katherine Harris, Florida 2000). Let's restore trust in our election system, for crying out loud.
Basically, it is our important belief that the people in charge of running elections in the United States shouldn't be Democrats. They shouldn't be Republicans. They shouldn't be Greens, Libertarians, or members of any other political party. They should be independent from all political parties, because when elections are close, no party can resist using all the dirty tricks they've got to win an election -- including tampering with registrations and ballots.
That happened this year in Ohio. I'm certain of it. It probably happened in Florida, too. And Colorado. There are plenty of less important blogs with plenty of information about how exit polls were way off in states with Republican electoral boards (Ohio, Florida). No outright proof that I've seen yet, but there is certainly room for asking questions.
My simple argument is this: Why leave room for questions? Wouldn't it be better for everyone if we had independent, non-partisan, public electoral boards?
To clarify, I am calling for a change in the law to create new electoral commissions in every state -- non-partisan, independent, public authorities that have as their only charge ensuring that all citizens can vote and have their votes counted. I'm not asking for an already existing independent body to take over American elections -- I'm calling for a change in the law. (This paragraph was added on November 8, 2004.)
I'm not the only one asking for this simple reform. Former President Jimmy Carter, an accomplished diplomat who runs one of the world's most respected institutions for observing elections, agrees. Get political parties out of the business of printing and counting ballots. Period.
How? Simple. Just change the law to require that all electioral boards across the country are chaired and run by people who do not belong to any political party. No more having the chair of one candidate's campaign also in charge of running the election (Katherine Harris, Florida 2000). Let's restore trust in our election system, for crying out loud.
Love, you're full of shit.
Find out why at the MB:
http://manoablogger.blogspot.com/2004/11/crying-wolf-at-erik-love-blog-emphasis.html
I love liberals, which is why I seem to frequent your site. I just find it so fascinating that we could be shown the same video and get two completely opposite views.
While it would be ideal if elections could be run by non-partisans, It is near impossible for that to happen; however, there should be checks and balances in place, and that video seems to show a small portion of them in place. The challengers were there to make sure everything was fair towards there side. Democrats could have just as easily sent challengers out and I believe they did. ( http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A17931-2004Nov2.html )
Where are the democratic challengers in the video? I find it hard to believe they weren’t there. Because where I was we had a poll watchers from both sides.
If the people on the video were denied their right to vote, how do we know it wasn't their own fault. For example, the one guy claims he has registered. If you send your registration close to the deadline to register , it may not be processed before the poll books are complete. So then you get a provisional ballot and it is later decided if your registration was sent in on time.
Also if it really was so crooked at the place the video was shot, then how did it come to be that there is no video shown of this heinous crime being committed.
http://sinistaswoll.blogspot.com/
I await your "impressive list" of ten or more non partisan groups that you would trust to run an election in this country. I note that Carter's group assists in foreign elections, and that should be the extent of that particular group's services. Carter's group may claim impartiality, but I'm sure that an organization named after and run by a democrat and former president would tend to draw its volunteers from one side of the party line.
All of the following are ostensibly non partisan.
- The NRA
- The ACLU
- The Boy Scouts of America
- NOW
- The NAACP
However, all of these organizations clearly lean one way or the other. You have to find a non-partisan organization that is proven to lean neither way in order to truly have what you're looking for. I will be duly impressed if you can name two that people will raise no objection to.
I asked for ten.
Ian
Ian, I'm still working on getting you a list of 10 democracies that have non-partisan electoral commissions. I'll be back with it shortly.
But I think we have a misunderstanding here.
I'm not asking for an existing group to take over American elections.
I AM asking for a fundamental and simple change in American law. Right now, laws in the US allow partisans like Douchebags Katherine Harris and Ken Blackwell to run both one candidate's campaign AND run the election. That's like having one of the candidates for prom queen in charge of counting the ballots on the night of the prom. Ridiculous.
The change in the law that I'm asking for will remove all electoral responsibilities from partisan offices (like secretaries of state) and create a new post in government specifically for running a fair election. Lots of organizations do this already, and so do a lot of democracies around the world. We don't need an existing organization to do this as you seem to suggest -- we'll create one. It'll be simple. And it's absolutely necessary if we want to restore faith in our democracy. Period.
is NAMBLA a nonpartisan group? maybe they can supervise the erecti...i mean elections.
Perhaps Bush could answer the NAMBLA question... Oh, wait... NAMBLA is obviously Dem because their members don't like bush. (The jokes don't get old, they just get experience.)
Realistically, I think the best that can be done is to have a member of every party running in the particular county race to have some oversight in the ballot counting in that county, i.e., each party comes up with a ballot count for the county and they are reconciled. That's the only check that's feasible. It would be a pretty good check.
Who says we need to know the results IMMEDIATELY? For something as important as President, I'd wait a few weeks. Sheesh, a non-incumbent wouldn't take office until January. What's the rush?
Jason, glad to see you on the blog. Wordbooty. I agree completely that instant results are way overhyped. I still think that Kerry should have demanded some action in Ohio to challenge douchebag Ken Blackwell. Instead, Kerry's busy playing Senator.
I don't agree, though, that the best check and balance we can get is having every political party do their own count. Countries around the world, including the UK, have independent, non-partisian, effective electoral commissions. So can we. It's a crying shame that we don't live up to our own electoral standards.
Check back tomorrow morning for my latest post with more on this, and for the long awaited list of 10 non-partisan groups to meet Ian's challenge...