Another case of voter fraud has been filed by the state of Texas in Houston. Voter fraud cannot be accepted at any level, or any number, and must be sought out and destroyed where ever it exists. The very fabric of our Democratic Republic rests on, one person one vote, all votes are equal. If you have watched the news, certainly Houston is not the only place or organization to have voter issues in recent memory. Allowing any person or group to register unqualified persons or ballots so they can be cast, is nothing less than stuffing the ballot box. Of all things sacred in our system of governance, we can never allow our election system to be corrupt. When ever corruption is found it must be stopped and PUNISHED.
But the issue of the voting system integrity does not stop here. There are issue with even how votes are counted, or what constitutes a vote? In large populous election, small issue with either non-eligible voters, or missing, extra, or invalid votes will probably not make the difference, but if the vote is close it certainly can.
 |
| Gary Coleman & Al Franken |
It took until the middle of 2009 for the Minnesota Supreme court finally certified the results of last Novembers Senate Race, with Al Franken being the winner. Well after is said and done only 312 votes in a state of 5.2 million was the difference. Really it sounds like a small deal, but this is just one case were such a small number of votes in a large race was the margin. It was similiar in Washington State in 2004 with the governor, and does anybody remember Florida in 2000?
The issues I bring up with each of these is one very important common factor, NO clear voting guidelines. The laws governing these races where vague enough to allow individuals to see two different meaning in what the law said, instead of a universal set standard without the ability to interpret different. An election should never come down to if one or few individuals "think" the law was followed. Their should be no doubt if the laws were followed, this ensures, 1.) Neither side feels as if the other side "stole" the election 2.) Most importantly, it verifies the integrity of our electorate process.
First lets look at Minnesota. The election was very close the entire campaign, both sides feeling they would win, polls showed a dead heat. At the end of election night the incumbent Norm Coleman had a narrow 200-300 vote lead. A re-count was ordered due to the margin of error. This is all fine and dandy up to this point. But after this, this is where the system starts to disenfranchise voters, where politics gets its nose and should not belong at this point, and poor decisions by the ones meant to ensure the integrity only helped to make it suspect. Problem 1. Standards on what constituted a "Vote" varied from district to district 2. Districts each used different methods of recounting 3. The Minnesota Chief Justice was part of a board recounting the votes. Now having the Chief Justice sounds like a good idea, but in a second you will see the issue. The State did not use a standard method of determining what a actually constituted a vote statewide, instead local districts used their own. It does not take much for one to see that this MAY favor one candidate over another. The same holds true for the lack of Standard in recounting. Now all votes may have ended up being tallied and counted in the same way, but the System does not verify that an individuals vote in one district is held to the same standard as a vote in the adjacent district. Could you imagine voting and being told all is well, but going to the polling place in the next town with the same ballot, and told your vote does not count. Would you still have the same faith in the process. Now with the Chief Justice, good idea to have a judge on the review board, BAD idea to have a Justice who is on the body whom is the final bastion to resolve this dispute, the State Supreme Court. Here you had an individual ruling on his own work, inherintley not a non-partial situation.
The issues I bring up with each of these is one very important common factor, NO clear voting guidelines. The laws governing these races where vague enough to allow individuals to see two different meaning in what the law said, instead of a universal set standard without the ability to interpret different. An election should never come down to if one or few individuals "think" the law was followed. Their should be no doubt if the laws were followed, this ensures, 1.) Neither side feels as if the other side "stole" the election 2.) Most importantly, it verifies the integrity of our electorate process.
First lets look at Minnesota. The election was very close the entire campaign, both sides feeling they would win, polls showed a dead heat. At the end of election night the incumbent Norm Coleman had a narrow 200-300 vote lead. A re-count was ordered due to the margin of error. This is all fine and dandy up to this point. But after this, this is where the system starts to disenfranchise voters, where politics gets its nose and should not belong at this point, and poor decisions by the ones meant to ensure the integrity only helped to make it suspect. Problem 1. Standards on what constituted a "Vote" varied from district to district 2. Districts each used different methods of recounting 3. The Minnesota Chief Justice was part of a board recounting the votes. Now having the Chief Justice sounds like a good idea, but in a second you will see the issue. The State did not use a standard method of determining what a actually constituted a vote statewide, instead local districts used their own. It does not take much for one to see that this MAY favor one candidate over another. The same holds true for the lack of Standard in recounting. Now all votes may have ended up being tallied and counted in the same way, but the System does not verify that an individuals vote in one district is held to the same standard as a vote in the adjacent district. Could you imagine voting and being told all is well, but going to the polling place in the next town with the same ballot, and told your vote does not count. Would you still have the same faith in the process. Now with the Chief Justice, good idea to have a judge on the review board, BAD idea to have a Justice who is on the body whom is the final bastion to resolve this dispute, the State Supreme Court. Here you had an individual ruling on his own work, inherintley not a non-partial situation.
 |
| George Bush vs Al Gore |
Now to Florida in the 2000 Presidential election. Not the same as Minnesota, except in the fact, the system in Florida also was vague enough to allow multiple takes on the same law, and the same standard was not required to be met statewide. Here a local recount was ordered, only in select counties. The state commenced this, but by the time a general recount was asked for Florida Law did not allow for it, since the time to request a recount had expired. Unlike the Minnesota Election, this was a Federal Election and the case made its way to the US Supreme Court, which ruled in Favor of than Governor Bush, that Florida violated the fourteenth amendment of equal protection to all Florida by not recounting all the votes, but selecting which the would be. Because Florida law limits had already passed allowing for recount request, the States Electoral votes were awarded to President Bush. Would the election have ended differently in Florida if the standard had been to recount ALL of the states votes from the start, instead of selecting only some while ignoring others? Who knows
It is time we set a common standard, not at the National level, but at the state level (since their are no truly national elections). It is time that all States define the following, and make it clear that their will be no room for interpretation. 1.) What constitutes a vote. (e,g. if someone crosses out one box, and checks another) 2.) Set a standard method of counting. 3.) When does a recount occur, and who oversees it, who is not involved in the following processes. 4.) All voters must be made aware of what will invalidate a vote or ballot, and that if one of those actions happen, that vote are whole ballot will become invalid and not counted. But we also must ensure that laws are not construed in such a way that may even mimic a poll tax. But this also means, that We the People must also take our part seriously, and take the little extra time to ensure we fill it out correctly, and if we make a mistake, get a new one and start over.
It is time we set a common standard, not at the National level, but at the state level (since their are no truly national elections). It is time that all States define the following, and make it clear that their will be no room for interpretation. 1.) What constitutes a vote. (e,g. if someone crosses out one box, and checks another) 2.) Set a standard method of counting. 3.) When does a recount occur, and who oversees it, who is not involved in the following processes. 4.) All voters must be made aware of what will invalidate a vote or ballot, and that if one of those actions happen, that vote are whole ballot will become invalid and not counted. But we also must ensure that laws are not construed in such a way that may even mimic a poll tax. But this also means, that We the People must also take our part seriously, and take the little extra time to ensure we fill it out correctly, and if we make a mistake, get a new one and start over.
Elections must be decided at the ballot box, by those who can vote, and vote only once. Election must NEVER be decided in the courts, and we cannot allow the possibility of impropriety of favor of one party over another.
All of our votes must count, 1 person 1 vote, all votes are counted equally. Our Government if founded off of our consent, our consent is our vote. We must be able to trust the vote to trust those who are elected, because if we cannot trust those who are elected we cannot trust the Government itself.
No comments :
Post a Comment