Letters to the Editor
-
How IS Democracy maintained?
Unfortunately, I already posted about this issue to the "Confessions of an Ohio Poll-worker" story (oops -- apologies). But some of these letters beg for a reply:
- No, this is NOT a "Mutually Assured Destruction" type standoff. The problem is this further removes or eliminates citizen control of the election and places it in two 'opposing' elite camps that probably go to the same country club. HINT: If you are an American, you should probably be upset by that. Oh, unless you are saying that every American is a "l33t H4xx0r" or has enough cash to hire a good one for themselves. Bzzzt! MS Windows virus proliferation says no to that.
- Why are there so many people that desperately justify further corrupting elections by citing examples of corruption in the past?! People used to rob banks constantly in the past as well, but my guess is you LIKE your bank to be far more secure that a bag of cash in a broom closet. Get a spine. Most of us in this country are trying to make things better, not worse, and your sand-bagging ain't helping. Let me guess, you the kind of person that says, "Looks like someone has a case of the Mondays!"
- Do not count on the Parties to fix this for you. This is a problem only the ordinary citizens of this country can fix. Yes, the even the Democratic party leadership has reason to stomp all over this issue, so the story gets no traction: 1) No confidence in the voting process will depress voter turnout more for Dems that Repubs (most non-Upper class already think the system is rigged against them), 2) many in the Dem party structure somehow think that they can just play dirty as well, and they don't want to be caught either. If you seriously want to help fix this deadly problem, you will need to step outside of the "Red Team vs. Blue Team" mentality and act as an American citizen first and foremost. That means locking arms with NRA-types, hippies, and preachy Christians alike in the fight to get your country back.
- Why does the election have to be tied in with "sweeps week" TV ratings? We don't need to vote like Canada, Australia, Denmark, or anyone else. Employ enough workers to count within a week or so, and just be patient. The cost is a drop in the bucket compared to how much taxpayer money the e-voting companies like Diebold are hauling in. Or total spent on TV ads by both parties.
- I've always tried to vote absentee as well, but this is a stop-gap measure. Let's not be satisfied with just a workaround (that is also easily corruptible); we should fix the process. There are already plenty of good ideas that have been ready to implement for some time (see the post by futhark re:California). These ideas and people are silenced and shoved aside, because not enough of us are setting aside differences standing up for them.
All hell may break loose if things get out of hand in a few weeks. I honestly hope not, but if things do get bad, lets all remember the goal is to make our country stronger and use a time of transition to achieve it -- not break into Footlocker to steal some Nikes :rolleyes:. This may be your last chance to set things right. The issue is whether your country will bother to save your sorry backside in the next Katrina, or let you and your family rot because your vote simply does not count. If you don't demand respect from the powers that be, you won't get it.
Go to vote, and if you aren't allowed to -- or your vote isn't counted -- raise hell about it. It's not just your right, it is your duty. Yes, you might have to miss a day of work, or break a sweat.
"At least with paper ballots, the ability to fix elections would be more democratic. It encourages fixing at the local level rather than placing the power in the hands of Diebold." -- tothdj
Nice...lol. And sadly true.
-
Clever, Farhad...
...but those who are as intelligent, or more intelligent, than you are still see you as a neo-con apologist.
Your behavior is every bit as despicable as it was in your first screed about the 2004 election.
Robert Kennedy, Jr. will always have more credibility and insight into the problems with our democratic process than you do. And now there is absolutely nothing that you can do to change that.
Congratulations, my friend, you are your own worst enemy. How does it feel to be powerless to change what screams for amendment?
-
"First Principles, Clarice" We All Have E-Voting, Because Two Convicted Felons, Abramoff and Ney Thought It Would Be Such a Good Idea, They Paid Us to Do It
This article could have been subtitled "Requiem for Manjoo". Good job! The only thing I would have added would be a brief history of how the country got into its current mess. Why will 2/3 of us cast our votes on machines so vulnerable to error that deciding an election with a friendly game of rock, paper, scissors might make as much sense?
The voters did not ask for E-Voting. The election boards did not demand it. Soon to be incarcerated Bob Ney and his soon to be incarcerated buddy Jack Abramoff thought it would be a good idea, and they got Congress to go along with it in the form of HAVA, the Help America Vote Act, which I tend to think of as Hack America's Vote Act.
HAVA was supposed to give the nation a uniform voting standard so we would never have to examine a hanging chad again. However, the Republican Party thrives on nonuniform voting standards. Nonuniform voting standards are how you suppress the opposition's vote and augment your own vote. This is why the GOP is all about state's right and local control of elections.
In Bush v. Gore, the court indicated that decision was not meant to be a precedent setting one. The majority was not advocating federal government interference in local election decisions---say, in cases involving routine Voting Rights Act abuses. This is because Bush v. Gore was decided not on the merits of the case but rather on the identity of the parties involved.
HAVA was analogous. It did not indicate a desire on the part of Ney and Abramoff to enforce uniform voting standard across the country. HAVA was about getting a lot of E Voting equipment installed in a lot of polling places quickly, with a minimum of fuss. Now, E-Voting was in its infancy. The machines were still poorly designed. They had not been well tested. So, who was going to want to be the guinea pig? No one. No problem. Just make it illegal not to have the machines and give out FREE federal money to buy them.
I don't know about other people, but when I am staring at the computer screen and I remember that Bob Ney and Jack Abramoff are the reason I am forced to vote on this experimental technology, I do not get a warm fuzzy feeling in the pit of my stomach. I get sort of queasy.