The Tennessean By Joe Irrera August 30, 2006
Shortly before the 2004 presidential election, a great hope of mine was dashed. After the Florida debacle of 2000, when five unelected Supreme Court justices overruled 51 million voters, I like many others had lost faith in our electoral system and felt only impartial, international observers could restore my confidence that next time every vote really would be counted.
The Carter Center, world recognized for impartially monitoring some 50 international elections, had decided however, they could not act as observers of America's election. Former President Jimmy Carter explained that the foundation's reluctant decision was because our system lacks four universal standards essential for transparent, honest elections.
First: The candidate selection process must be open to anyone, regardless of social class and economic standing. In America's "pay-for-play" political system, personal wealth and fundraising ability are key national party qualifiers. And our system is getting worse. Not coincidentally, we have more millionaires in Congress than ever before.
Second: Electoral administration must be nonpartisan. The Carter Center cited Florida in 2000 where George Bush's state campaign chairman, Katherine Harris, was also secretary of state in charge of elections. In 2004, Ohio Secretary of State Kenneth Blackwell was also the GOP party chairman.
Just these two battleground states make clear our system is anything but nonpartisan. The three nationally certified electronic voting machine manufacturers — Diebold, ES&S and Sequoia — are big political money contributors. The man who was chairman and CEO of ES&S in 1996 is now U.S. Sen. Chuck Hagel. Back then, his own machines counted 80% of the Nebraska votes that elected him!
Third: The voting process must be equal for everyone: same registration standards, poll access and equipment. Currently, each individual county is free to choose their own types of voting machines, and registration standards vary from state to state based on the rules set by each secretary of state — again, a political position. The so-called "Help America Vote Act" has only further fragmented our electoral process.
In Tennessee, we vote on lever machines, Diebold, ES&S or Hart electronic machines, optically scanned paper ballot or touch-screen. Surprisingly, none of us will get to vote on a TruVote touch-screen, built in this state, which generates not only a receipt for the voter but, under a display window, deposits a copy of that receipt in a lockbox.
Which brings me to the fourth standard: There must be a credible means for a recount. I voted in Tennessee's primary on a paperless, ES&S iVotronic touch-screen, with no tangible evidence my vote was actually tabulated. Voters in Williamson County experienced the dangers of "just trust me" technology. Their ES&S audit reports showed 18,989 people voted at 9:30 p.m., 17,377 at 2:30 a.m. and 16,507 the next afternoon! The winner of one race was reversed as a result.
Ironically, our government has committed hundreds of thousands of our troops and hundreds of billions in our tax dollars to bring America's democracy to Iraq. We've paid with the blood of nearly 2,600 beloved killed and 20,000 wounded so our president can tout Iraq's free elections as progress towards that ideal.
At the same time, this president has demonized Hugo Chavez, duly elected leader of Venezuela, as a supposed enemy of freedom. The Carter Center was not able to monitor Iraq's elections for obvious safety concerns. Nevertheless, they found Venezuela did meet the above four standards, and they led an international team to oversee both their 1998 and 2000 national elections.
If open, honest elections are the cornerstone of a democracy, what does all this say about America's walk vs. our talk? And our future?
Copyright © 2006, tennessean.com.