If voter disenfranchisement is systemic rather than motivated by

[Pacifist Patriot]

political affiliation, racism or classism does that mean an election should be considered "fair."?

[shraby]

1. Voter disenfranchisement is never fair

therefore, the election wouldn't be considered fair. Until every person has a say who wants to participate, it's an abomination to call it fair.

[Pacifist Patriot]

2. This is what I've been thinking about this evening. Setting aside fraud

through deliberate voter suppression efforts and machine tampering, I fail to see how anyone can assert that either candidate won or lost the contest "fairly."

The following facts are not in dispute.

* Some precincts had little to no waiting for voters while others had excrutiating waits of up to nine hours or so.

* Some people received voter info letters with incorrect polling place information.

* Many different systems with varying error rates were used.

* A system in NC lost thousands of votes, never to be recovered.

* One women in my county received the wrong absentee ballot not once, but twice. The correct ballot arrived on November 3.

I don't care if these problems are due to tax base disparities, incompetence, apathy or some other legal cause. I would imagine the U.S. has never had a "fair" election, but I do not consider that a valid excuse for turning a blind eye to the problem. If we have awareness of a problem and the ability to address it, yet choose not to, than we have failed as a representative democracy.

I think this is what frustrates me the most about those who want to move on and focus on 2006/8. Even with fraud out of the picture, the prospects for fair elections do not look promising.

[SicTransit]

3. yes, election reform is needed. That is something that Democratic

party needs to concetrate on. Unfortunately, if you make this an extremely partisan issue, as it will surely become if Rep. Conyers finds a Senator to stand up with him on the 6th, there is absolutely no chance - zero - that you will get any kind of cooperation from Republicans in Congress on the issue.

Without cooperation from some Republicans on it, no election reform will happen. That's not an opinion. That is a fact. So - if you actually think election reform is important, you better hope the Senators will understand the above. I think they do - that is why not one of them will stand up on the 6th. Not because they are cowards - but because they understand political realities better than the zealots.

[marions ghost]

6. please explain

I don't get how if a senator stands with Conyers how that instantly turns this into a partisan issue.

[SicTransit]

10. You really don't understand?

If there is an objection on the 6th, and a debate and a vote and objection overridden, with Democrats voting one way and Republicans the other - then every time Democrats talk Congressional investigation or election reform, it will be seen by the Republicans, in the light of the happenings on the 6th, as something that undermines the legitimacy of a Republican president, and thus will be dismissed with prejudice, and, since Republicans are a majority both in the House and in the Senate, that means that neither election reform or Congressional investigation will have any chance of ever happening.

I hope this makes it clear.

[marions ghost]

11. thanks for explanation...

1. Wouldn't the risk of going on record and opening the door to investigation be worth it though? There is extreme bipartisanship to contend with anyway.

2. What would be a better route then--for election reform or congressional investigation to happen WITH bi-partisan support? Or are you saying Repubs will never support it anyway no matter what? I think we can all agree that HAVA was disastrously railroaded by Republican special interests. So does that cover it for Republican voting reform efforts?

Sorry if my Q are simplistic. I am honestly trying to understand the options here. Please just leave them unanswered as rhetorical Q if you have no time to reply. Thanks for your help.

[SicTransit]

12. Something that people don't seem to understand -

there is no such thing as a Congressional investigation WITHOUT bi-partisan support. Just ain't no such animal. You cannot have a Congressional committee without any Republicans in it. That's in the rules. What you get when you have only Democrats is Conyers "hearings" - completely toothless, with no subpoena powers, in fact no powers at all, and that can be completely and safely ignored by Blackwell or any other official it attempts to question.

You certainly cannot have any electoral reform pushed through without some Republican support - it is a simple fact. Republicans are the majority in the House and in the Senate. You want to be able to pass any legislation at all - you have to have some Republicans voting for it. It is simple arithmetic.

Election reform is a worthy goal. If you want Congressional hearings on it etc - you will be able to find Republicans willing to participate. It is not an extremely partisan issue - NOW. The fact that our elections are not the most efficient they could be could hardly be disputed by anyone.

If you associate electoral reform in Republican's mindset with the Jan 6th hijinx with the election objections etc. - you will NOT be able to find Republicans to discuss it anymore. That's just a simple fact, it is not a value judgement. Electoral reform discussions will be seen as a Democratic partisan trick aiming to undermine Republican presidency, which no Republican in his right mind will support.

[Silver Gaia]

9. I agree with you totally

and this is a point I stress when talking to people about this. That voters were disenfranchised, particularly in Ohio, is indisputable, IMHO. There is just too much evidence for this to be ignored. Whether the disenfranchisement happened because of outright massive and coordinated fraud, isolated and unconnected incidences of fraud, or just sheer incompetence, it is neither right nor fair. It is UNACCEPTABLE. Period. The point is that it happened, and it needs to be investigated and addressed. Without that, we will never know what happened and cannot possibly hope to correct it. This is basically what I said in my letter to Barbara Boxer (my Senator) about January 6th. I hope someone "gets" it in the Senate.

[EFerrari]

4. Where does the buck stop? It's illegal. n/t

[brindis_desala]

5. The simple fact is the US election system is a

laughingstock to the other Western democracies (ask a German, Australian or Canadian. From the Electoral College, to partisan election officials, to paperless voting machines, to disqualified citizens, most thinking people believe we are hopelessly lazy and apathetic about governemnt. That's the mountain DUers have to try and climb. I just hope it's not too little too late...

[Clark2008]

7. Rush, Hannity and the other right-wing hacks have seen to it

that most Americans ARE apathetic about government.
Government is EVIL and should only exist, in their opinion, to protect our borders and to give them and their cronies kickbacks and jobs.

[marions ghost]

8. true, at least i know Australians friends think that

our election system is strangely antiquated and the "campaigns" are monumental wastes of money.