Fighting for a Fair Vote

The Nation – June 26 issue – by John Nichols

No one who paid close attention to the last two presidential elections can doubt that, come election time, secretaries of state play pivotal, sometimes defining, roles… after 2000 everyone knew that Secretary of State Katherine Harris was in charge of deciding who voted and whose votes counted in Florida. And after 2004 everyone knew that Secretary of State Ken Blackwell was doing similar duty in Ohio. These two "down ballot" officials served as co-chairs for George W. Bush's campaign in their respective states, but the real "service" they performed for the Republican cause came in what critics have identified as their aggressive manipulation of voting registration standards, unequal distribution of voting machines, intimidation of prospective voters and meddling with recount procedures to favor Bush. ...

Ritchie is not the only prominent figure to make a career change in order to run for a post on a platform that promises to manage voting and elections--a task that in most of the country falls to elected secretaries of state--in a manner that helps rather than hinders democracy. Debra Bowen, a California state senator who as chair of the elections committee led the fight to force firms that produce high-tech voting machines--especially the controversial Diebold Corporation--to guarantee that their equipment is reliable and accurate, just won the Democratic nod for secretary of state. As the progressive San Francisco Bay Guardian observed in its endorsement of Bowen. "She's saying what few in politics want to openly admit: It's possible to rig elections with this gear, and there aren't enough safeguards to prevent fraud." In Ohio, Franklin County Common Pleas Court Judge Jennifer Brunner resigned her position to mount a campaign that pledges to end the politicization of the secretary of state's office that has characterized Blackwell's tenure. Brunner says she'll work to assure that vote counts can be audited and verified, to enforce laws against voter intimidation and to distribute new voting machines equally in order to break the pattern of favoring GOP-leaning suburbs while saddling cities and rural areas with inferior equipment.

What links the new crop of candidates for secretary of state posts is a determination to address rather than exploit the vulnerabilities of electoral systems and a faith that, by replacing predictable partisans with "champions for democracy," to borrow Ritchie's slogan in Minnesota, the oft-neglected office of secretary of state can be transformed into an activist position…

Still, so long as the position is subject to political manipulation either owing to being an elected office or by means of appointment by the majority, we'll still see it being used for anti-Democratic purposes. I don't have an alternative to offer, but just because we have some heroes seeking to win the secretary of state posts doesn't mean the problem is fixed. Heavy regulations to ensure honesty regardless of the Secretaries which overrides their authorities must be developed, made into law and enforced. With the corruption of the courts and partisan state legislatures (not to mention potential partisan effects on law enforcement) such regulations are unlikely--and then there's the problem of the the Federal/Congressional intervention which was a wolf in sheep's clothing, supposed to help reduce corruption while ensuring it was more easily accomplished.

We have serious problems, precious little time and too few people are either fully informed or even believe there is a problem. It doesn't look good.

It is certainly true that having some heroes seeking to win or even winning the secretary of state posts doesn't mean the problem is fixed - for all the reasons that you say. There needs to be a lot of legislation passed in order to prevent such flagrant abuses in the future, as we saw in Florida 2000 and Ohio 2004, and elsewhere.

But this is a good start I think. Having persons with a deep concern about the state of our democracy in these positions should give these issues a good deal of publicity. They can work towards model legislation and policies that may set an example for the rest of the country.

And anyhow, just the fact that they are getting attention and appear to be doing well suggests that our country is beginning to wake up to the problem of election fraud.

can empower honest, objective, good government secretaries of state in California, especially, but also in Massachusetts, Ohio, and other states, then we have a fighting chance to reverse fascist vote counting. As California goes, so goes the nation (as they say). And that's what WAS happening--actually--back in 2003-2004, with our good Calif Sec of State Kevin Shelley, who sued Diebold and de-certified the worst of their election theft machines (the touchscreens) prior to the 2004 election. The lawsuit demanded to see Diebold's source code. Shelley also provided Californians with a paper ballot option, and banned "revolving door" employment in his office. Shelley's high standards for election integrity were influencing other states. Shelley was then 'swiftboated' out of office, on entirely bogus corruption charges (the ugliest political event I have ever seen take place in Calif, and one that was enormously damaging to our country and our democracy), and Schwarz appointed a Repub Sec of State, Bruce McPherson, who has now illegally undone that Diebold de-certification. (Diebold touchscreens were used in the CA-50 election, Bilbray/Busby, and these most insecure and hackable of voting machines were kept at poll workers' homes overnight for days before the election.) Debra Bowen--an advocate of good, old-fashioned TRANSPARENT, VERIFIABLE elections--has come forward to run against Schwarz appointee and Diebold shill McPherson in the fall. (She won big in the Dem primary.)

From what I can see, Democratic Secretaries of State, on the whole, are into open government and good government policies. Republican Secretaries of State, on the whole, are into secrecy, purging poor, black and other Democratic voters, and stealing elections for Bushites. We DO have some corrupt, Diebold-shill, Democratic Secretaries of State and other election officials (Cathy Cox, in Georgia, for instance, and Connie McCormack in Los Angeles), and a HUGE PROBLEM of Democratic Party SILENCE on these election theft machines. But I'm talking about the general picture--how Sec's of State generally behave. There is a partisan divide between good and bad. Dems try to be fair to everybody. Repubs cheat and try to limit the vote.

This article mentions whether or not "the oft-neglected office of secretary of state can be transformed into an activist position…". The Sec of State office IS an activist position, by its very nature, whether for good or for ill. For instance, in Calif, prior to Kevin Shelley, we had Republican Bill Jones for Sec of State--to appearances a quiet, non-activist Sec of State, but, in reality, the official who first authorized this election theft technology for Calif, permitting 'TRADE SECRET," PROPRIETARY vote tabulation programming, controlled by Bushite corporations (circa 2002). He then left public service to go to work for the third big election theft player (after Diebold and ES&S)--Sequoia.

That, to me, is activism. Why is it that rightwing fascist activism--activism for the Corporate Rulers--is not called activism, but is considered "conservative" or non-activist. Bill Jones' authorization of this election theft technology was part one of the Bushite fascist coup in 2004. Shelley inherited that situation and immediately took steps toward openness and accountability, and protection of election integrity. There is rightwing fascist activism and there is NORMAL, NECESSARY, and what one could even call CONSERVATIVE activism for the public good (conserving our democracy, conserving our civic values and ethics, insuring fairness, insuring accountability).

We've really got to watch these "memes." Debra Bowen and John Bonifaz are NOT activists. They are not radicals. They seek a RETURN TO NORMALCY--a RESTORATION of transparent elections, openness and accountability. These are CONSERVATIVE values, that they are seeking to RESTORE, PRESERVE and RETURN TO!

I wonder what chance Debra Bowen has of winning, with Republican control over the voting machinery in CA? I hope that they are taking aggressive steps to prevent major voting theft.

Thanks!

This is an excellent article, everyone concerned about fair elections should read it.

Ironically, about a year ago David Corn wrote an article in the same magazine, The Nation, that disputed the claim that the 2004 election was stolen. I thought that it was a poor article, and I was so upset about it that I wrote The Nation a detailed letter expressing why I felt that he had used sloppy journalism in writing his article. I was also very surprised to see this coming from him, having recently read his excellent book, "The Lies of George W. Bush".

Go figure! I think that there are a lot of people who are very concerned about the state of elections in our country, who are yet in a state of denial when it comes to looking at the evidence that a presidential election was actually stolen. But he may have changed his mind on that by now.

It's great to see a reasonably high profile magazine like The Nation acknowledging the electoral problems that we have. I believe that this represents an improvement from last year (See post # 8)

The main reason I voted for your thread is that it shows people some progress is being made in correcting the Diebold problems. Now we must contribute to local and NATIONAL Democrats, get out and register minority voters, distribute signs and bumper-stickers and, most of all, VOTE!

prevent us from taking all the steps necessary to secure victory -- and I am hopeful that few if any people will let that stop them.

decertifying Diebold:

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/viewtopic.php?topic=45792&forum=9

illegal purging of hundreds of thousands of voters, targeted at Democrats:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=1297&mesg_id=1297

Judiciary Committee provides a detailed accounting of the many highly partisan and illegal activities that Kenneth Blackwell, as Ohio SOS during the 2004 election, used to hand George Bush the presidency. Blackwell refused to comment on any of it, and now he is running for Governor of Ohio. Here is the Conyers report:

http://www.house.gov/judiciary_democrats/ohiostatusrept1505.pdf

http://www.sos.state.ga.us/pressrel/050302.htm

I am not hopeful. :(

That is an isolated case. Most Democratic SOS's aren't like that.