That's certainly not unfair by Carter's standards. Jimmah apparently thought the Venezuelan election fair despite the fact that:
1. The Chavez government bought a little Venezuelan software company and had it write the software that tabulated Venezuelan votes, replacing six-year old American software2. The government's software company would not release its vote counting software for public scrutiny
3. The Chavez government would not allow inspectors into the central place where votes were tabulated
4. Two-way communications between the central vote counting place and the polling places were allowed allowing possible vote-altering instructions to come from central command
5. Exit polls of three independent firms, including one that did exit polling for Clinton, found Chavez' opponents had won by a landslide
6. The Chavez government would not allow inspections of the great majority of the voting machines
Perhaps if the Florida Democrat party were allowed to do something like Chavez did, then it would be a fair election by Carter standards.
I'm not talking about Jimmy Carter and his activities. I'm talking about conflict of interest on the part of a public official, whether appointed or elected.
And I'm not talking about having Jeb remove Katherine Harris from her position as SoS. I'm saying that the top election official in a State (in this case and at that time, Katherine Harris) should not be an official, or even working, in an election in a partisan capacity that said official is overseeing. It's her job in the 2000 Bush-Cheney campaign that she should not have held.
Certainly Ms. Harris would have a partisan opinion in that election. Anyone would. But actually heading up an election committee is a far cry from just having an opinion. I consider that an immoral conflict of interest, regardless of whether or not it's legal.