An Article by:

Steve Hammons

also published in AmericanChronicle.com

Results from Diebold electronic voting machines used in New Hampshire’s primary are being questioned this week as apparent anomalies in voting patterns there are examined.

According to published reports, in areas of New Hampshire where Diebold machines were used, Hillary Clinton may have received significantly more votes than Barack Obama, compared to regions where Diebold machines were not used.

Despite repeated reports by experts that these types of voting machines can be hacked and voting results altered, the devices continue to be used around the country.

Questions were raised in 2004 presidential election about the accuracy of voting results in Ohio.

Some of these concerns were also related to Diebold electronic voting machines.

After the 2000 presidential election and problems counting Florida’s punch-card ballots, federal funds were made available for local jurisdictions to purchase different voting technologies.

Many of these funds were spent on electronic machines such as the Diebold devices.

DEMOCRACY AT RISK

Vote tampering in the U.S. and elsewhere is nothing new. But, reasonable efforts have often been implemented to attempt to minimize some of the more egregious activities regarding election fraud.

Now, with questionable electronic voting devices used throughout the nation, high-tech election manipulation is clearly a possibility, probability or maybe even established fact, according to some researchers and experts who have investigated the situation.

Because election and voting procedures vary around the country, there are not uniform and consistent standards for voting devices and other elements of election processes.

Although many people have called for increased universal standards to assist in maintaining the integrity of elections, little has been done.

In addition to questionable voting machines, other irregularities have been documented, reported and investigated. These include confusing ballots, inadequate numbers of polling places, polling places strategically located to influence voting patterns, removal of qualified citizens from voting eligibility lists and other concerns.

According to some observers, these kinds of circumstances may have significantly affected national and local elections in recent years.

CORRECTIVE ACTION

What can be done to improve the integrity and accuracy of our election processes? Experts and researchers of all kinds have made many valuable suggestions, based on extensive investigations of many aspects of current election problems.

Yet, there does not seem to be an adequate consensus about what steps should be taken.

Do we implement mandatory national standards or keep elections in local hands? And, how will decisions be made about things like electronic voting technology. Unwise and corrupt decisions can just as easily be made at the federal level as at the local level, as we know all too well.

Politically neutral organizations could create groups of experts to make logical recommendations about how to proceed. In fact, many such groups already have. But the problems persist.

In the case of Ohio’s 2004 elections, other similar questionable election processes and now in the New Hampshire primary, real or perceived irregularities are damaging American democracy.

If it is true that flawed voting machine technology is inadvertently making errors or allowing outright criminal voter fraud, we have a serious problem.

If other aspects of our election processes, inadvertently or intentionally, are also wrongly disenfranchising citizens, creating phony election results and helping put people in office who were not truly elected, our democratic system is truly damaged.

Tags: congress, constitution, corporations, democracy, economics, Elections, fascism, federal government, government, information technology, politics, privatization, self governance
Categories: Commentary, Economics, Democracy, constitution, government, self-governance, Politics, Congress, Corporations
No Comments »

An assessment of the political landscape following the Midterm Elections, which analyzes the opportunities and the best course of actions for the new Democratic Majorities…An Article by Dave, who forgot to provide us with his last name. However, we have an address to a Weblog that is published by Dave at the following URI:

URI: http://le-enfant-terrible.blogspot.com/

On November 7th I voted.

Many may see this statement as surprising–either because they assumed anyone with left-of-center politics will naturally be very excited about the elections or because they know me and assumed that I wouldn’t. In general I don’t put much faith in voting. It is essentially a chance every several years to legitimize the broader set of relations within society. To the extent it allows us to actually choose among leaders it is often a choice of imperialisms, a choice of capitalisms etc.

This year I felt differently. This election was widely viewed as a referendum on the Iraq war and the aggressive nationalism of the Bush administration. The stunning rebuke to the Republican party is an important tool for re-orienting the political climate, for establishing that the country as a whole is unhappy with the Iraq war and government corruption. It has heightened the sense of cost that politicians feel in supporting the Iraq war (Ned Lamont’s primary victory was also absolutely crucial in this) and in forcing elites towards consideration of an exit strategy sooner rather than later. As opposition to the Vietnam war created the “Vietnam Syndrome” and a reluctance to commit American military forces worldwide, we can only hope that we are creating an “Iraq Syndrome” that will help prevent future pre-emptive wars and aggressive militarism. By giving Democrats subpoena powers we put in motion a process that will surely reveal facts about the preparation/execution of the war that will further increase popular outrage. I also felt that splitting the power of government between parties would help curb a range of excesses that have resulted in vastly increased government surveillance power. Finally, the proposition in my state would have banned not only marriage (which I think should be a purely religious affair, untouched by government) but also any form of legal arrangement that was similar to marriage such as civil unions or domestic partnerships.

We should be careful, however, in hailing the new balance of power. In terms of the Democratic agenda there are some issues. During the election the Democrats were careful to avoid a specific platform, but since the election they have been promoting their “Six in ‘06″–six goals to accomplish after coming into power. The items are:

-increase the minimum wage
-negotiate for lower prescription drug prices
-restore 12.5 billion dollars in cuts for higher education
-use $15 billion in oil subsidies and use it for “energy independence”
-reinstitute “Pay-Go” rules (any new tax cut or spending must be offset elsewhere)
-vote on the 9/11 Commission recommendations

Now, some of these I have no issue with. Increasing the minimum wage is good (although it will likely not be by very much and they will probably still fail to index it to inflation so it automatically increases with the cost of living). Negotiating for lower drug prices is good, but its main effect is to just decrease the cost of existing healthcare programs (will those savings be used to cover the tens of millions without insurance? or increase the quality of healthcare?). $12.5 billion to help people with college costs is good (but is nothing within an over $2 trillion federal budget, and will these funds actually help break class barriers to college, or will it only help defray the cost to the upper-middle class?). Ending tax cuts for oil companies is good (but “energy independence” has been picked up as a catch-all phrase including tax breaks to oil companies for domestic drilling and investment in technologies that are already economically viable on their own). The Pay-Go rules are perhaps the biggest issue but they come too late to stop the massive GOP tax giveaways and commit the Democrats to fiscal straitjacket in the future. The one I have the least concern about is the 9/11 recommendations implementation. I have not seen the full list, and there may be objectionable changes, but instituting measures that don’t compromise civil liberties and that actually reduce terrorism (i.e. not racial profiling, not massive data mining) is a good thing.

You will likely notice that nowhere is there anything about Iraq. The Democrats would prefer to have this off the table at the moment. Iraq makes for a good election issue, but they are now stuck between advocating some form of withdrawal (which they are unwilling to do) and advocating some other strategy to control the country for America’s benefit (which means they have to tone down the rhetoric and agree with many statements the right is making). Some Democrats are willing to actively engage, but their plans often revolve around maximizing US leverage in Iraq. The event that may alter this political hesitancy and incoherence is the release of the James Baker III/Iraq Study Group report. The report will give massive political cover for politicians to support a bipartisan re-alignment of American foreign policy along Realist lines (crack down on Shia regional power, shift back towards American backing of dictatorships to enhance regional stability).

We should remember that the left need not be simply a Democratic interest group, it can be a powerful social force. Conservatives may now be for the moment wedded to the GOP, but they grew powerful as a social movement in the 1950s & 1960s through local campaigns, awareness raising and building a mass base around people’s grievances. The height of the American labor movement’s power was in the 1930s & 1940s as it waged a relentless struggle to increase wages and expand social programs. The New Social Movements that coalesced in the 1960s & 1970s achieved the most social change when they were vibrant, active movements that challenged existing social relations. The Civil Rights and Black Power movements completely upended the existing power structure of the country by mobilizing African Americans to collectively and directly challenge racist institutions, racist practices and unequal systems of wealth.

Sometimes social change requires legislation. Occasionally you need to play the inside game of electoral strategies and lobbyists to achieve a particular objective. Too many people on the left, however, are at risk of being caught up in the game of the big non-profits and politicians whose business it is to talk a good game. We should remember that between Nixon and Clinton, Nixon was by far the more liberal president. When the Democrats finally captured the presidency the result was NAFTA, GATT, welfare “reform” and more. Earlier in his term, when Clinton attempted to lift the ban on gays in the military and expand health coverage both failed because the conservative movement had achieved so much in terms of reworking the political landscape and the terms of debate. The Democrats will say to the left: “Settle down, we’re doing what we can while staying in office.” The reality is that this is true; that’s why the left cannot make its agenda putting Democrats in office.

Tags: congress, democracy, Democrats, Elections, left, legislation, National, politics, war
Categories: Commentary, National, Democracy, Politics, Legislation, Congress
No Comments »

An Article by:

Thomas Melaccio

Well today the Associated Press released an article, which was featured on page 13a of the St. Petersburg Times here in Florida. One would have thought it warranted front-page play but then again in my opinion many people only read the front page, sports and the comics. In my opinion what better place to put this article so not many will see it. Yes, the newly “elected” president of Mexico pledged to work hard for immigration reform with our congress so his citizens can work in the United States. Rhetorically, one wonders why our President doesn’t work hard with somebody to protect our interests here at home? Mr. Calderon is a member of [I don’t think you will believe this] a “pro business action party, which his predecessor also belonged to. Rhetorically, does one think there really may have been a problem with this election?

Now he says that he needs to work hard for the youth of his nation to find work because of a lack of alternatives in his nation. Rhetorically, do you think he should be focused on his own nation and keep his hands off of ours? We already have an abundance of companies like our auto industry [who say buy American but do much of their business south of the border and in other nations]. Just the other day they bragged about the increase in Hispanics in college. Yes, on scholarships and grants and all kinds of financial aide. What do you get? You got it- the student loan our president pledged to keep the rates from going up but just had to increase.

Well truthfully, where are our youth? Oh I know they are competing for jobs at major retailers with the illegal workers or those with false I.D. Yes, they are working for $6.00 and less and [this is the good news] as much as $9.00 and hour and trying to support their families. Our youth have no health care, retirement or pension [that’s a laugh who is going to have the money to bail these out- certainly not the government] and cannot afford to buy, much less support, a home.

Yes, something is errantly wrong in Mud Ville? I would ask you to look at my other articles concerning immigration. As Joe Friday on Dragnet used to say, “Just the facts” and that is what I try to present. Perhaps 2010 An American Paradigm is becoming 2008 and American Paradigm?

Well if you want to sit and do nothing and continue to keep these same representatives of ours in Congress, these same Democrats or Republicans with the same ideologies, you are approving it for you and yours for years to come. Just sit home and do nothing, or vote for them because, as you know in your heart your one of the ones doing great and are one of that 20% who are doing well. But if you’re an average American and love your nation it just may be time for you to wake up! Your answer will be given on Election Day. If you vote these incumbents from both parties in, regardless of what they profess, in my opinion you deserve “How Did We Get Here”.

If you vote for those they endorse you deserve the same.

Now I certainly desire to be wrong. It is just an opinion, however have you heard the truth from them? I’ll ask again, have you heard truth from this entire bunch and when? Tell me the truth about Iraq? Tell me the president didn’t say, “ I won’t raise the rates on student loans”. Tell me the past of many in Congress is not questionable? Tell me they are not biased toward big business? Tell me they have your interest in mind?

One could go on and on but you know something, in my opinion and based on what is transpiring right before our eyes, we average Americans are not considered capable of much. Give us a tailgate, a beer and a paycheck and we don’t give a damn about anything until it impacts us.

They had those famous sayings to excite people into action like “Remember the Maine”, “Remember The Alamo” [the Mexicans certainly do] and “Nuts” but the new slogan for Americans in these times is “Why”? Boot them all out and that will send a message for years to come! “Remember the People” should be the new battle cry!

If you enjoyed this pass it along and don’t forget you have a chance, it is called election day!

Robert T. Melaccio Sr. Copyright ©2006 Robert Melaccio

Tags: congress, democracy, Democrats, Elections, Florida, foreign policy, government, Mexico, politics, Republicans
Categories: Commentary, Democracy, government, Politics, Foreign Policy
No Comments »

An article by Joseph Murtagh, originally published in the Muckracker Report For the last six years, there’s been this assumption about George W. Bush that has occupied roughly the same place in people’s minds as the second law of thermal dynamics, or the existence of the moon, and which goes something like this: while the president might not be so strong on domestic issues, he’s very good at Protecting The Country From Terrorism.

Well, according to a story that came out recently, and which was mostly drowned out by the elections, the federal government’s record on fighting terrorism may not be as impressive as you think.

Researchers at Syracuse University’s Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC) recently discovered that in the first nine months of fiscal year 2006 federal prosecutors rejected 87% of the international terrorism cases brought by the FBI, and the rejections have been increasing steadily since 2001.

The White House responded to the report the way they’ve always responded to empirical facts: by calling it “faulty” and “inaccurate,” and deriding its findings as “intellectually dishonest.”

Judging from last week’s election, though, I think the nation has already made up its mind about who’s being intellectually dishonest, and it’s definitely not the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse at Syracuse University. On the contrary, it’s the same bunch of yo-yos who cooked up false intelligence to dupe us into going to war with Iraq. Who held closed door meetings in Washington the day before 9/11 with a Pakistani general who a few weeks earlier had sent a $100,000 check to hijacker Mohammad Atta. Who granted no-bid contracts to a bunch of oil-rich mafia goons who were willing to sell our troops poisoned drinking water to save a buck.

And speaking of intellectual dishonesty, how about exploiting religious conservatives for political gains and then laughing about them behind their backs? Or cheating black people in Florida and Ohio out of their vote? Or leaking the name of a CIA officer to settle a political score? Or refusing to declassify important documents about 9/11? Or torturing innocent people and then lying about it? Or pretending to fight a phony war on terrorism while stealing our liberties from behind our backs?

In fact, the only honest moment in George W. Bush’s entire presidency came recently on the campaign trail when he finally admitted to voters in Nebraska the real reason why we’re in Iraq. “You can imagine a world,” he said, “in which these extremists and radicals got control of energy resources and then you can imagine them saying, ‘we’re going to pull a bunch of oil off the market to run your price of oil up unless you do the following.’”

No wonder the Republicans lost. I think Keith Olbermann said it best on Countdown: “Having frightened us, having bullied us, having lied to us, having ignored and rewritten the Constitution under our noses, having stayed the course, having denied you’ve stayed the course, having belittled us about ‘timelines’ but instead extolled ‘benchmarks,’ you’ve now resorted, sir, to this? We must stay in Iraq to save the $2 gallon of gas?”

If you spend time with the sorts of people I spend time with, you’ll probably have cynics in your life trying to persuade you from feeling overwhelmingly joyful at the results of this election, but for the moment at least, I think you should ignore them. We’ve witnessed an extraordinary thing in this country: the checking of a powerful totalitarian movement by the will of the people, just when a lot of us were beginning to fear that the system was beyond repair. There’s nothing phony or indoctrinated about the message Americans sent to Washington on Tuesday, and when you consider that it happened in spite of one of the most vicious propaganda campaigns in modern history, Americans have all the more reason to feel proud.

But this election hasn’t changed the fact that there are still people in the world who are being tortured and maimed and killed at the hands of this administration, and it’s for their sake that we must make Bush and the rest of them pay for their crimes. Read the following to find out what you can do to make that happen:

Subpoena Power, Congressional Hearings, and Special Counsel

But in the meantime, take faith that the America of Geronimo, Jefferson, and Muhammad Ali is live and kicking.

Tags: bush, Democrats, Elections, Global, homeland security, legislation, power, Republicans, society, Terrorism
Categories: Commentary, Global, Society, Power, Legislation, Homeland Security, Terrorism
No Comments »