How the GOP Stole America’s 2004 Election & Is Rigging 2008 – Bob Fitrakis and Harvey Wassserman
How the GOP Stole America’s 2004 Election & Is Rigging 2008 – Bob Fitrakis and Harvey Wassserman, CICJ Books (2005) 103pp. (S) ****
Both Bob Fitrakis and Harvey Wasserman are tireless muckrakers in the finest sense of the word. They have provided an illuminating look into the 2004 presidential election and its numerous irregularities, principally in Ohio, but in other states like Florida, Iowa, Nevada, and New Mexico as well. As among the first to blow the whistle on election corruption and fraud, Fitrakis and Wasserman had been following the 2004 presidential election from its infancy. From their work, we see how history and conspiracy collide, and how the powerful incumbency of George W. Bush is undeterred in employing nearly every underhanded tactic at their disposal, in order to maintain and expand their power-base.
Among some of the many electoral “irregularities” observed by the authors are what follows. International election observers were banned from entering precinct voting areas by Ohio’s Secretary of State, Kenneth Blackwell, while election “challengers” were allowed free reign to harass and intimidate voters. “ . . . [T]he [Republican] challengers also served to confuse the voting process and to lengthen already very long waits for inner-city residents hoping to vote.”(p.43) In Ohio’s Lucas county, there was a burglary of democratic headquarters where several computers were stolen on the night of October 11, 2004. In some instances, there were spoiled absentee ballots that had already been marked for Bush that were sent out to prospective voters. Perhaps the most incriminating evidence is the wide discrepancy between exit poll results and final vote tallies, in states like Ohio, Nevada, Iowa, and New Mexico. In each of these states according to exit polls, Kerry was expected to win, only to have the votes go the other way as the night wore on. In New Mexico, regardless of demographics, Kerry lost in every precinct where paperless electronic voting machines were used. Kerry himself recognized this peculiar statistical anomaly.
And according to Fitrakis and Wasserman, the Republican majority in Ohio is just warming up. Among policy proposals being made is the display of picture identification as a prerequisite to having the right to vote. Also the Ohio legislature is considering expanding the level of corporate and individual contributions that can be made to candidates. These and other restrictions to the right to vote are possibilities for the near future, ensuring that single-party rule continues indefinitely into the future.
Thankfully, Fitrakis and Wasserman offer a few suggestions for averting so dark an outcome. Have international monitors deployed at every polling station while banning partisan “challengers.” Have a constitutional amendment ensuring every American’s right to vote. Have uniform federal laws, like the requirement that all DREs (direct recording electronics) provide a paper verification of each vote, so that states and municipalities are all on the same page. These are good ideas for a good start, but until the “big money” is reigned in and properly regulated and restricted in its access to candidates, it is this reviewer’s mind, that little else will change for the better.
In the meantime, the efforts of Fitrakis and Wasserman (and before them, Bev Harris and Black Box Voting and before her the Collier brothers with Votescam) must be fully applauded. By calling out nasty GOP electoral practices, they are performing an invaluable service to the public: exposure of what otherwise seeks to succeed by surreptitiousness and secrecy. If there is a common theme to be found in the Republicans desperate efforts, it is the insolence of power that believes it can fool the masses, while those it can’t fool, it can buy, or even yet deal with in a less savory fashion. Part of the nationwide Republican reelection strategy in 2004 was to widely disseminate disinformation in minority (i.e. mostly democratic) communities, attempting to sow the seeds of doubt as to the day of the election and as to whether certain persons will be eligible to vote, or even, if they erroneously are led to believe, they are not, that some legal repercussions may be the result should they attempt to vote. As a student of the 9/11/01 attacks, this reviewer sees an interesting parallel. On the morning of 9/11/01, the FAA and NORAD were engaged in military exercises, or “war games,” as they are sometimes known. But by pure coincidence, four planes were actually hijacked (a hijacked aircraft was the very scenario they were training for), so that confused personnel were at some point unable to distinguish reality from virtual reality. So we see the common strokes. Whenever possible, whenever too many questions are being asked, whenever popular resistance becomes too threatening, sow the seeds of confusion and exploit the uncertainty that ensues. “Divide and conquer” is as old as civilization itself. This is their cowardly m.o. and a tired public should by now be getting wise to the game. If not, we can only blame ourselves if we get more of the same in 2006 and 2008.
Both Bob Fitrakis and Harvey Wasserman are tireless muckrakers in the finest sense of the word. They have provided an illuminating look into the 2004 presidential election and its numerous irregularities, principally in Ohio, but in other states like Florida, Iowa, Nevada, and New Mexico as well. As among the first to blow the whistle on election corruption and fraud, Fitrakis and Wasserman had been following the 2004 presidential election from its infancy. From their work, we see how history and conspiracy collide, and how the powerful incumbency of George W. Bush is undeterred in employing nearly every underhanded tactic at their disposal, in order to maintain and expand their power-base.
Among some of the many electoral “irregularities” observed by the authors are what follows. International election observers were banned from entering precinct voting areas by Ohio’s Secretary of State, Kenneth Blackwell, while election “challengers” were allowed free reign to harass and intimidate voters. “ . . . [T]he [Republican] challengers also served to confuse the voting process and to lengthen already very long waits for inner-city residents hoping to vote.”(p.43) In Ohio’s Lucas county, there was a burglary of democratic headquarters where several computers were stolen on the night of October 11, 2004. In some instances, there were spoiled absentee ballots that had already been marked for Bush that were sent out to prospective voters. Perhaps the most incriminating evidence is the wide discrepancy between exit poll results and final vote tallies, in states like Ohio, Nevada, Iowa, and New Mexico. In each of these states according to exit polls, Kerry was expected to win, only to have the votes go the other way as the night wore on. In New Mexico, regardless of demographics, Kerry lost in every precinct where paperless electronic voting machines were used. Kerry himself recognized this peculiar statistical anomaly.
And according to Fitrakis and Wasserman, the Republican majority in Ohio is just warming up. Among policy proposals being made is the display of picture identification as a prerequisite to having the right to vote. Also the Ohio legislature is considering expanding the level of corporate and individual contributions that can be made to candidates. These and other restrictions to the right to vote are possibilities for the near future, ensuring that single-party rule continues indefinitely into the future.
Thankfully, Fitrakis and Wasserman offer a few suggestions for averting so dark an outcome. Have international monitors deployed at every polling station while banning partisan “challengers.” Have a constitutional amendment ensuring every American’s right to vote. Have uniform federal laws, like the requirement that all DREs (direct recording electronics) provide a paper verification of each vote, so that states and municipalities are all on the same page. These are good ideas for a good start, but until the “big money” is reigned in and properly regulated and restricted in its access to candidates, it is this reviewer’s mind, that little else will change for the better.
In the meantime, the efforts of Fitrakis and Wasserman (and before them, Bev Harris and Black Box Voting and before her the Collier brothers with Votescam) must be fully applauded. By calling out nasty GOP electoral practices, they are performing an invaluable service to the public: exposure of what otherwise seeks to succeed by surreptitiousness and secrecy. If there is a common theme to be found in the Republicans desperate efforts, it is the insolence of power that believes it can fool the masses, while those it can’t fool, it can buy, or even yet deal with in a less savory fashion. Part of the nationwide Republican reelection strategy in 2004 was to widely disseminate disinformation in minority (i.e. mostly democratic) communities, attempting to sow the seeds of doubt as to the day of the election and as to whether certain persons will be eligible to vote, or even, if they erroneously are led to believe, they are not, that some legal repercussions may be the result should they attempt to vote. As a student of the 9/11/01 attacks, this reviewer sees an interesting parallel. On the morning of 9/11/01, the FAA and NORAD were engaged in military exercises, or “war games,” as they are sometimes known. But by pure coincidence, four planes were actually hijacked (a hijacked aircraft was the very scenario they were training for), so that confused personnel were at some point unable to distinguish reality from virtual reality. So we see the common strokes. Whenever possible, whenever too many questions are being asked, whenever popular resistance becomes too threatening, sow the seeds of confusion and exploit the uncertainty that ensues. “Divide and conquer” is as old as civilization itself. This is their cowardly m.o. and a tired public should by now be getting wise to the game. If not, we can only blame ourselves if we get more of the same in 2006 and 2008.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home