Posted on 09/27/2004 7:27:50 AM PDT by Phlap
WASHINGTON (AFP) - A repetition of problems that plagued the 2000 US presidential election is likely, former US president and veteran elections monitor Jimmy Carter said, charging that "basic international requirements" for a fair vote are missing in Florida.
Reforms passed in the wake of the debacle have not been implemented due to lack of funding and political disputes, Carter observed in a hotly-worded opinion piece in Monday's Washington Post.
"The disturbing fact is that a repetition of the problems of 2000 now seems likely," he said.
"Some basic international requirements for a fair election are missing in Florida," including non-partisan electoral officials and uniformity in voting procedures, he said.
Florida's top election official four years ago also chaired the Bush-Cheney 2000 campaign in the state, and her successor is showing "the same strong bias," Carter charged.
"A fumbling attempt has been made recently to disqualify 22,000 African Americans (likely Democrats), but only 61 Hispanics (likely Republicans), as alleged felons," he said.
Florida Secretary of State Glenda Hood has also appeared eager to get independent presidential candidate Ralph Nader (news - web sites) on this year's state ballot, "knowing that two-thirds of his votes in the previous election came at the expense" of Democrat Al Gore (news - web sites), Carter went on.
"She ordered Nader's name be included on absentee ballots even before the state Supreme Court ruled on the controversial issue," Carter said.
Florida's governor, President George W. Bush (news - web sites)'s brother, has "taken no steps to correct these departures from principles of fair and equal treatment or to prevent them in the future," he said.
"It is unconscionable to perpetuate fraudulent or biased electoral practices in any nation," Carter wrote.
"With reforms unlikely at this late stage of the election, perhaps the only recourse will be to focus maximum public scrutiny on the suspicious process in Florida."
The Carter Center has monitored more than 50 international elections, most recently in Venezuela and Indonesia.
Carter, a Democrat, led a bi-partisan commission charged with recommending changes to US electoral processes following the 2000 vote, ultimately decided by the US Supreme Court, which halted recounts of contested ballots in Florida after a weeks-long draw.
Since when do we care about International Requirements?
Gee. You could almost see the hand up the shirt, moving his lips.
What is hilarious to me is that "Veterans Elections Monitor" is a moniker he probably relishes. What disturbs me though is the fact that Jimmy Carter is obviously not of the belief that the USA is a Sovereign independent nation and doesn't need to abide by international voting requirements. Jimmy Carter is a sycophantic democratic pansy, towing the 'Rat line that Republicans are against black people, which greatly offends me as an American, because nothing could be further from the truth. It is the Republican Party that stands for taking risks in order to get ahead in life, unlike the 'Rat party, which enjoys telling people "let the Gov't take care of you because you're not smart enough to learn how to earn enough money to take care of yourself". How embarrassing is that? I think Republicans really need to do a better job of exploiting that fact.
I think I read it wrong.
Umm...I think WE have most of the guns. Only one way any wide-spread armed conflict is gonna turn out... We win!
In CA you do not need to show a DL. Of course illegals can get them. All you need to do here is to say your name. Your name should be on that list. That is it.
http://www.mediaresearch.org/cyberalerts/2000/cyb20001114.asp
I know she co-chaired Jebbs campaign.
There was partisanship on all sides.
It's Gore's job to be partisan; it shouldn't be the election official's.
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Former President Jimmy Carter says that despite changes designed to eliminate voting problems in Florida - where the disputed 2000 presidential election was decided by only a few hundred votes - conditions for a fair election in that state still don't exist. "The disturbing fact is that a repetition of the problems of 2000 [ that not enough dead and multiple democrat voters voted ] now seems likely," Carter wrote in an opinion piece published Monday in the Washington Post. .............
This sorry person needs to be put in a home somewhere.
He has got to be the worst president of all time.
The thread was about Carter.
Show me where Katherine Harris broke the law. All ballots had to be certified by the Secretary of State by 5 P.M. seven days after the election. No wiggle room. Her actions followed the law.
Someone has to certify elections. If it is an elected post, that person will very probably be a member of a political party. As such, that person probably attends conventions of their party, contributes financially to election campaigns, speaks out in favor of the candidates of their party, etc. Should we rule out all members of political parties from holding the office that certifies elections?
If the person who certifies elections is an appointed person, then it could be argued that they owe something to the person that appointed them, who was doubtless a member of a political party.
In the case of certifying an election, the appearance of impropriety is essentially impossible to avoid.
Good deal Jimmy, maybe this time we can focus on all the snow birds voting twice and all the dead people voting for your party!
True. But I raised a side issue that I though was germane to the general issue of fair elections.
Show me where Katherine Harris broke the law. ...
Why? I never asserted that she did. Both public and private entities have conflict-of-interest laws and regulations precisely because it's important to avoid both actual conflicting actions and the appearance that someone might have committed one.
Someone has to certify elections. If it is an elected post, that person will very probably be a member of a political party. As such, that person probably attends conventions of their party, ... [etc.]All good points. But active participation in a party is one thing. Participating in organizing an election for a particular partisan interest while being the head of the body that is supposed to regulate that election is going too far, in my NSHO. It's like having the head of Planned Parenthood in charge of an state's abortion clinic regulatory board.
In the case of certifying an election, the appearance of impropriety is essentially impossible to avoid.
100% Yes. But you can do a lot better than this.
"In Florida we are required to have two forms of ID in order to vote."
Really? Do you have to show them before voting or is this just to be registered? Having voted only in CA and WA where it's almost illegal to ask for ID (or maybe it is illegal) I think it's wonderful to require it.
As an aside, the Florida Department of Elections, which is a division of the Florida Department of State formerly run by Katherine Harris, has a well organized web site. See: Florida DOE and Election Fraud Letter.
PS, Glenda Hood, the current Florida Secretary of State who wrote the linked letter on cracking down on election fraud is a Republican. Horrors. (/sarcasm) If she is going to fight voter fraud, then more power to her.
This crap from the guarantor of the Hugo Chavez debacle !
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.