Re: suggested proposals for federal election integrity legislation

From: Ron Crane <voting_at_lastland_dot_net>
Date: Thu Nov 30 2006 - 11:50:45 CST
Arthur Keller wrote:
At 9:07 PM -0800 11/24/06, Ron Crane wrote:
Our voting systems (and our elections generally)
need to be under direct, constant citizen supervision, not solely under
the supervision of experts. Experts are great as another layer of
protection, but they should not constitute the sole layer.

Critically important is that anyone should be able to hire his or her 
own expert, or to band together collectively to hire an expert. 
Having only a few anointed experts is problematic, particularly based 
on how those experts are chosen.  After all, consider the expertise 
of Alec Yasinsac, a Florida State University professor.  Wouldn't it 
be beneficial if Christine Jennings could hire her own expert?
I agree on all points. But it's even better if elections can be directly and effectively supervised by ordinary citizens with no (or minimal) expert input. This approach minimizes the threat of election fraud and encourages citizens to inform themselves about and to supervise not only their elections, but their governments in general. It embodies a reversal of the modern tendency to delegate authority (and thus trust) to a distant, "professional" administrative state, and a return to the founding ideal of citizen self-government.


OVC-discuss mailing list

= The content of this message, with the exception of any external
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain
Received on Thu Nov 30 23:17:17 2006

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Nov 30 2006 - 23:17:19 CST