Most of the spin surrounding the disputed Florida and Michigan delegates seems to revolve around whether or not voters are being "disenfranchised" and who is to blame. Personally, I don't think the majority of blame can be laid at the feet of either candidate. Both could have objected to the stripping of delegates, but nobody wanted to jeopardize their popularity in Iowa or New Hampshire.
Clearly the best solution would have been to hold new elections in both states. I'm not about to get into that ball of worms in this diary. Neither campaign was exactly flexible when it came to solutions, and both Florida and Michigan's state governments didn't exactly help either.
Where that leaves us is: a bitter fight over the legitimacy of the contested elections. Should the disputed vote totals count? How will the delegates be seated? Are the voters being "disenfranchised?" After doing a bit of research with regard to international standards for fair elections, I have come to the conclusion that the only fair solution must not use either disputed vote tally with regard to distribution of delegates.
How did I reach this conclusion? By first examining the facts. Florida held an election that had both candidates on the ballot, but any campaigning by the candidates was banned. Michigan held an election with only one candidate on the ballot, and any campaigning by the candidates was banned.
Next, I examined what criteria internationally recognized election observation groups use to deem elections "fair and democratic." The Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe is perhaps the most pre-eminent group tasked with observing elections worldwide. I was able to locate their election observation handbook online in PDF format here (http://www.osce.org/publications/odihr/2 005/04/14004_240_en.pdf).
Page 16 of the handbook lists the criteria that elections should meet if they are to be deemed credible. Florida and Michigan meet all of those guidelines, except one.
For an election to be considered fair, it is required that:
"political campaigning can be conducted in a free and fair atmosphere
without administrative action, violence, intimidation, or fear of retribution against
candidates, parties, or voters."
The fact that no political campaigning was allowed in either Florida or Michigan completely invalidate any election results from the disputed contests. Of all election activities, campaigning is one of the most important. How can any candidate be given a fair chance to win the election when they are unable to speak to potential voters?
This is why I believe that under no circumstance should the vote counts from either Florida or Michigan be considered legitimate. Counting results that do not meet established guidelines for a fair and democratic election is more of an affront to justice than rejecting the tally completely.
|
|
|
Permalink :: 11 Comments :: Post a Comment
|
In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.
If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.
