WITH A new CNN/USA Today poll showing Bush with an eight point lead among likely voters, it is probably safe to say that the debates are behind us. While the proclaimed winners of the debates were questionable: John Kerry held his own. The commanding lead Bush held going into the first debate quickly dwindled. Now, a lead regained, prospects of a Bush victory are looking better. Whoever the victor, one thing is clear: If the results are close enough, we may be looking at a repeat of the Florida mess of four years ago. Such an event could not be worse for our country.
Unnecessary litigation has long been the tool of choice for idealistic liberals, but in this day and age I do not believe that either campaign can be trusted to allow the results on election day to stand by themselves.
Looking at the latest Rasmussen Reports (one of the many polling services), Florida does not appear to be quite the battleground it was during the 2000 election. Bush has had a relatively solid 4-5 point lead in the state for several weeks now. The real swing state is Ohio. It is quite likely that whoever wins Ohio will win the election, and already the lawyers from both sides are hungrily circling.
Since Ohio is so hotly contested, it has been the subject of a lot of media attention. Ohio Secretary of State Kenneth Blackwell has been the subject of many legal attacks in recent weeks from the Democrats, labor unions and other activist groups. A federal judge overturned Blackwell's requirement for a provisional ballot to be cast in the proper precinct. A provisional ballot is a specific type of ballot given to someone who is not on the registered voter list but believes that they should be. If it turns out they were registered, the ballot counts. If not, it is discarded. Evidently, ruling that a ballot should be cast at the proper polling place was too much of a burden on voters.
Another suit was filed complaining that Blackwell would require those who cast provisional ballots to present a valid ID. It is absolutely ludicrous to think that everyone is not being required to show ID, much less someone casting a provisional ballot.
The legal shenanigans extend to other states as well, and the rulings have been very confusing. Various judges in both Florida and Colorado have ruled that it is legal to require residents to show up at (gasp) the correct polling place in order to cast a provisional ballot. Many states, Virginia included, require citizens to show ID before they vote, but this policy and others are not consistent across the union.
A 22-year-old man was arrested in Ohio for submitting over 100 false registrations. He was evidently being paid for his "services" in crack cocaine by a person affiliated with the NAACP National Voter Fund. A large number of groups are willing to pay people to "get out the vote." The problem with this is that many people take this too far and submit false registrations. Apparently, some affiliates of the NAACP pay especially well for the false ones. Hopefully these false registrations are mainly for people who will never vote, but the threat of widespread voter fraud is a real one.
Without standardized rules across the nation, it is quite possible that we will see an instance of voting irregularities. The AP reported that John Kerry will have "six so-called 'SWAT teams' of lawyers and political operatives [that] will be situated around the country with fueled-up jets awaiting Kerry's orders" on election night. These teams will be ready to contest the election in any state.
The Kerry campaign has office space rented in every battleground state that can be used for a recount. They have procedures set up for a recount, and they are working to bolster public opinion even before election day by pointing out every possible instance of voter intimidation. Such scare tactics are only the leading edge of what could happen if we see a very close election in several states. I would like to think that only John Kerry's "SWAT teams of lawyers" would be there to oppose a narrow loss, but in the reverse scenario, I imagine Bush's lawyers would challenge voting irregularities as well.
In 1960, it was a widely accepted fact that there were a great many voting irregularities. Kennedy's allies allegedly tipped the vote over to Kennedy in mob-controlled Chicago. Richard Nixon, despite his later proven faults, declined the opportunity to contest the results, saying that such a challenge would tear the nation apart. I pray that whoever loses accepts the loss and allows the country to move onward, and in the lack of such conviction by either party, I pray that a winner is declared by a plurality greater than the margin of litigation.
Daniel Bagley is a Cavalier Daily associate editor. He can be reached at dbagley@cavalierdaily.com.
www.rasmussenreports.com/Ohio_Fall%202004.htm
http://www.cleveland.com/news/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/cuyahoga/1097055103150421.xml
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20041021/ap_on_el_pr/kerry_day_after_strategy_12
Read More
UPADHYAYA: The Great and not-so-Good sides of U.Va.’s 2030 housing plan
By Apal Upadhyaya | 2 days agoInstead of improving the dire state of existing infrastructure, however, the University has shifted attention away from it and chosen to expand.
EDITORIAL: Support low-barrier shelters in Charlottesville
By Editorial Board | 3 days agoInvesting in low-barrier shelters now will pay off in increased stability for the homeless, which will undoubtedly improve the safety of shelters and the community writ large.
SHRAUGER: McIntire’s three-year model limits opportunities for first-year students
By Alex Shrauger | 4 days agoBy pigeonholing students into commerce so early, the University violates its own mission of providing a holistic education that produces students capable of succeeding in a variety of fields.
