Thursday, March 09, 2006

AlterNet: Reframing the Election Fraud Debate

This Alternet article cover familiar ground, vote fraud, in a way that is new to me and resonates much more than the usual "we been robbed" conspiracy theories — even though Im increasingly convinced that we been robbed!

Even if that is true, we have to step back and figure out a way to repair the damage. This sounds about right to me: "Reframing the Election Fraud Debate"

Theories of widespread election fraud are highly debatable, to say the least. Some people enjoy that debate. I do not. It encourages a sense of hopelessness and consumes energy that could instead be focused on long-term changes that could give us elections we can trust.

The election fraud debate frames the problem incorrectly. The question should not be whether there is widespread election fraud. It should be: 'Why should we trust the results of elections?' It's not good enough that election results be accurate. We have to know they are accurate -- and we don't.

In a word, elections must be transparent. People must be able to assure themselves that the results are accurate through direct observation during the election and examination of evidence afterwards.

No comments: