About Me

My photo
This blog is the work of an educated civilian, not of an expert in the fields discussed.

Friday, January 07, 2005

A Few More Thoughts On Yesterday



In November, Bush carried the crucial swing state of Ohio by about 118,000 votes, although voters complained of problems in many areas, most of them Democratic-leaning precincts. In Columbus, where some people waited 10 hours to vote, up to 15,000 frustrated would-be voters left without casting ballots. Poorly trained poll workers in Cleveland gave faulty instructions to voters that resulted in thousands of provisional ballots being rejected, and they misdirected several hundred votes to third-party candidates. In Youngstown, 25 electronic machines transferred an unknown number of Kerry votes to Bush, researchers found.

-- Two Lawmakers Raise Objection To Ohio Balloting

The chance to challenge the electoral vote count has some of a certain political leaning nearly wetting their pants, suggesting just how little is needed to excite some people. Seriously, it does show that just a little bit of attention, just a little bit of focus on a problem suggests to many people that their concerns are at least being taken with some degree of respect.

As one litigant said after losing some lawsuit (not sure if this was in a story or in real life), he got his day in court, and was satisfied. Same here, though many will continue to feel (rightly) that problems will remains, and some (a rather small and less right minded group, but worthy of some concern) that some big conspiracy or major breakdown that might (probably) led to the wrong result (not by ignorance, but breakdown in the voting procedure itself).

The other value of the challenge was that the other side looked truly stupid. I'm at times an overly critical person, or so some say, and I think a lot of things are stupid. But, some things said today was truly stupid. The biggest one being that somehow, follow me here, now was the wrong time to make this challenge. Sure ... the day the electoral vote was counted was the wrong day to suggest that the voting that led to such vote had various problems.

Likewise, it was a waste of our precious time with so many other things to do. You know, like pro forma hearings of the Secretary of Education designee. There was a two hour debate limit. I reckon the rote announcement by state of the counting of the electoral votes and so forth did not take much less time than that.

[Some respect should be supplied to Sen. Graham (SC), a manager during the Clinton impeachment, who showed some scorn against Alberto Gonzales during the pro forma Attorney General nomination hearings. He also has a plan out that would recognize that privatization of Social Security would require more money and raising of some taxes. The guy is a conservative whose views on various matters are distasteful, but appears to have some character. When Air America hosts praised the guy, you get the idea that something is there worthy of respect.]

The two hours let the usual suspects address some of the problems that remain in the voting process even in the 21st Century. [Where are the rocket planes? And, isn't Manhattan supposed to be a prison? No, it isn't ... only Rikers Island.] For instance, Sen. Durbin (IL) noted that in his own state, there are different rules regarding counting of provisional ballots, depending on what area you live in. This appears to me to be an equal protection violation, even if you don't want to rely on the "good for this day only" decision of Bush v. Gore.*

Anyway, this sort of talk apparently (in the minds of various Republicans and apparently others as easily confused) was really a criticism of the legitimacy of the election of Bush itself, no matter that the Democrats clearly said otherwise. OTOH, Kerry won Illinois, so logically Sen. Durbin might have been challenging the legitimacy ... well, that would be dumb, wouldn't it?

[At times, I have this bad feeling that people are either ill informed or not honest when they choose a certain point of view or candidate. This can be said to be somewhat vain and sounds a bit off -- calling a large chunk of the voting public ignorant is deemed in bad taste. Still, sometimes one is left with that feeling, and the Republicans yesterday were either ill informed or not really honest. The next four years often will be as tedious as it is disheartening, merde.]

The day the electoral vote is counted should be a day of some note given what occurs. The added value of using it to highlight voting (problems included) overall seems like a good idea. Pointing out Republican stupidity is just a added value. So, cheers to Sen. Boxer and company, since even a small symbolic move is sometimes well worth the effort.

---

* Sen Durbin also noted that in the 1960s voting decisions, there was talk of a right to vote, while in Bush v. Gore there was not. This appeared to him to be contradictory, but this seems to be a matter of confusing things. [I didn't hear all of his remarks, but this confuses others, so let's go with this.] The 1960s decisions discussed a fundamental right to vote in various circumstances, especially the election of members of the House of Representatives (Art. 1 and state law) and state legislatures (state law). "State law" in the first case because Art. 1 determines the right of suffrage in respect to voting for house members by the right to vote for the most populous branch of the state legislature.

Other parts of the Constitution, including the various amendments directly touching upon voting, also factor in. All the same, once upon a time, this was quite limited, though the move toward "universal suffrage" has led many to not realize the provision exists at all. They feel there is some national right to vote expressly in the Constitution, which is not really so. Furthermore, there is no direct right to vote for President.

States have much discretion, leading Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr. to call for an amendment that protects a national right to vote. As with Sen. Durbin, I distrust calls to amend the Constitution, but also see some merit in this idea. Voting should be (and in various ways is) a national right of citizenship and giving states a myriad of ways to water it down in various cases is a bad and at times dangerous idea.