Should candidates challenge elections?

From: Stephanie Frank Singer <sfsinger_at_campaignscientific_dot_com>
Date: Tue May 17 2005 - 18:01:01 CDT

I'll put my two cents in for random. And we should make it clear what
"random" really means. Otherwise people often mistake "random" for
"mostly evenly distributed" which is not a synonym at all!

It's a mistake to rely on candidates. Consider Joe Hoeffel, who ran
against Specter in PA for Senate in 2004. He would have a lot to gain
if fraud were proved, as he would either be a Senator now, or folks
would have to recognize that he came from nowhere to be neck-and-neck
with a well-established incumbent, in which case he would be considered
a candidate to reckon with (which he isn't). But it's not worth
risking the "troublemaker," "sore loser" labels that he faces for
complaining. It's not realistic to depend on candidates (or anyone
else) to work against their own perceptions of their own self-interest.

Here's another tack: not only do I, as a PA resident, have an interest
in the integrity of PA elections, I have an interest in the integrity
of each other state's elections, because of Amendment 14, Section 2 of
the Constitution. If enough voters were disenfranchised in, say,
Texas, then the Consitution guarantees that the Texas delegations to
the Electoral College and the US House of Reps should both shrink,
which gives my electors and reps more clout!

On May 17, 2005, at 6:40 PM, Ron Crane wrote:
>
> Whatever the process, it has to be transparent, established before the
> elections in which it is applied, and either (a) completely unbiased
> (random) or (b) open to *all* partisan inputs, including those of any
> member of the public. We cannot rely on the candidates to do the job.
> Just off the cuff, I prefer publicly-witnessed random choice, since
> it's easy for the public to understand and to verify, and it's not so
> open to the exercise of discretion, and it's not so open to
> manipulation via uneven (or unevenly-applied) bureaucratic obstacles,
> such as application fees, etc.
>
> -R
>
> _______________________________________________
> OVC discuss mailing lists
> Send requests to subscribe or unsubscribe to
> arthur@openvotingconsortium.org
>

_______________________________________________
OVC discuss mailing lists
Send requests to subscribe or unsubscribe to arthur@openvotingconsortium.org
==================================================================
= The content of this message, with the exception of any external
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain
==================================================================
Received on Tue May 31 23:17:40 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue May 31 2005 - 23:17:52 CDT