| |
 | On the Florida Election Reform Act of 2001 |
| On the report of the US Civil Rights Commission |
| Should fools be disenfranchised? |
| Our back pages |
| In memoriam: Victims of the September 11, 2001 tragedy |
 | HOME |
Links to other pagesDemocracy sitesPolitical information alliance Opinion pieces Dangerous precedent in Florida - Bruce Ackerman, NY Times Keep Them Out - Bob Herbert, NY Times Statistical analysesPalm Beach County - Dr. Greg Adams, Carnegie Mellon Univ
Florida GovernmentNew Florida House page and updated directoryNew Florida Senate Page and updated directory
|
Our back pages
|
|
What should have happened in Palm Beach County:
Dear Florida2002.org:
While many problems with the ballot and our recent election are well known, others are not. As a Palm Beach County resident and a Professor of Psychology with some expertise in measurement, I repeatedly encouraged our Supervisor of Elections and Canvassing Board to work more systematically and, as a consequence, more fairly. But this did not happen.
The Supervisor of Elections should have acknowledged the ambiguity of the butterfly ballot
In Palm Beach County, my own frustration began on the morning after the election, when it became apparent that, due to the poor design of the ballot, a number of my neighbors mistakenly voted for Buchanan while intending to vote for Gore. I immediately faxed a letter to the Supervisor of Elections in which I encouraged her to "consult with the best counsel [she] can find (including statistical as well as legal experts) to examine whether bias exists," and "...if it is the case that poor ballot design has resulted in bias ... to acknowledge this with courage, integrity, and an openness to creative (yet fair!) means of addressing this problem." Had Theresa LePore acknowledged problems with the ballot at the outset, I believe that the community would have stood behind her, and that perhaps we would have arrived at a just remedy. But this did not happen.The manual recount procedure should have been rigorous
On Saturday, November 11, a manual recount of pilot precincts was undertaken. The procedure was televised, and I was troubled by what I saw. Judges were making their decisions collaboratively rather than independently, in a way that guaranteed that the most dominant and persuasive voice would be given disproportionate weight. I went to the courthouse and voiced my concerns, and the next day consulted with other experts in measurement about the problem. On the morning of Monday, November 13, prior to the beginning of the full recount, I faxed a second letter to LePore (with an additional copy to Leon St. John, attorney for the canvassing board). In that letter, I encouraged the canvassing board to consult with experts before beginning the full recount. Had the ballots been tabulated by three independent judges, with a ballot awarded to a candidate if two of the three judges agreed, voter intent could have been more accurately discerned. But this did not happen.
At the county courthouse last Saturday night, I met a French journalist who had acted as an official observer of the recount, and so had seen the ballots as they underwent the manual tallies of the county commissioners. He asked me why it was that the punched holes for President seemed bigger, rougher than those for other offices such as Sheriff or Circuit Court judge. I told him that perhaps it was because it mattered, because we voted for the Presidency with trepidation and awe. We were clumsy in our voting for the presidency, but it is human nature to be clumsy. It is human nature to make mistakes, to be confused by our VCRs, to push doors that we should pull, to pay the waiter when we should pay the cashier. It is human nature to interface imperfectly with our complex world, and we should not be surprised when a small fraction of our neighbors - no more than 1 in 25 - fail to correctly decode a confusing ballot. Our clumsy voting doesn't make us stupid, and even if it did, it should not prevent our votes from being counted. (There is an item on an old personality scale, endorsed by many, which reads "I believe that the ideal form of government is a democracy run by the most intelligent;" the item measures a dogmatic adherence to an inconsistent system of values. It seems that such dogmatism remains widespread). Our humanity does not make us stupid, but it does make us "subjective." Our Governor Bush - Jeb - acknowledged this at the outset, and recused himself from the election review process. Now the other Governor Bush - George - is also recognizing human subjectivity, claiming that such subjectivity prevents a manual count from being valid. The Governors Bush are right about subjectivity being part of our nature. But the fact of human subjectivity is more problematic in some circumstances that in others. Subjectivity clearly plays a role when a single individual with a long partisan history is asked to interpret an ambiguous ruling - as Secretary of State Harris has done. It plays less of a role when multiple individuals work together, under a structured set of guidelines - as inspectors of ballots might be asked to do. Experts in psychological tests and measurement know that the human eye and the human mind are potentially superior to any ballot-counting machine. We know that individual readers will be biased, but recognize that the proper use of multiple readers can address this concern. "Proper use" means that each of several raters should make her or his judgements independently, in a way that insulates each rater from the influence of others. These judgements should be tallied separately for each observer, then logged and compared. These logs will reveal the degree of agreement between raters, which provides an actual measure of both the subjectivity of the process and the idiosyncratic bias of each rater. Where agreement between raters exists, subjectivity is overcome. Although a subjective count can be fair, there is a second issue which is more problematic. Several days ago the Texas governor argued that a manual recount of Palm Beach and several other counties would be "selective," and therefore unfair. On this he is correct. Because people are more perceptive than vote tallying machines, each candidate will typically benefit from a manual recount, and the amount of benefit is projected to be proportional to the candidate's strength in that community. In Palm Beach County, Gore received about 1.75 votes for every Bush vote. According to David Rusin of Northern Illinois University, a manual recount of just Palm Beach County can be predicted to give Gore roughly 1,200 additional votes, and quite possibly the Presidency to Mr. Gore. Consequently, a recount of just our county, or just Democratic counties, would not be fair. But there are no such problems with a statewide manual tally. It is hard to predict what would happen here: Because Gore and Bush pulled roughly the same number of votes statewide, they should benefit roughly equally from the more sensitive manual count. A statewide manual count need not be interminable. Initially, each ballot should be inspected by two independent raters. Ballots for which raters disagree should be set aside, then inspected if and only if the number of these ballots exceeds the difference between Bush and Gore for the remaining, agreed-upon, ballots. For these discrepant ballots, a separate panel of raters can be convened, and the process can be repeated. If the instructions are clear, the number of discrepancies is likely to be small, and it is unlikely that more than one or two cycles of inspections will be required. The process seems arcane, and perhaps these details seem trivial. But I believe that the perceived legitimacy of our next President depends on our proceeding systematically and fairly. This election should teach the lesson that every American vote counts, not that some votes - our votes - don't matter. - Kevin Lanning, (An edited version of this essay appeared in print editions of The Palm Beach Post on November 17, 2000).
Sunday, December 10, 2000
How will we look back at the sudden shift from efficiency to incompetence, from public service to cynicism, from community to selfishness?
How will we look at the second Bush era?
We will remember this as a time in which a trap door was lifted open, vertically, held for a month midway between the two stable equilibria of open and closed, of democracy and theft. We will remember December 9, 2000, as the day the U. S. Supreme Court slammed the door shut, and wounded itself, the country, and the environment forever. Tuesday, December 12, 2000 Please call, write, fax, or email your Representative and Senator. Watch this space for a full, district-by-district report of the vote on this critical matter.
Wednesday, December 13, 2000
We do appreciate the chutzpah of the court, and the Republican party, in its first delaying the recounts, then denying them because there was insufficient time for recounts to proceed properly. But we remain troubled by the selective application of "equal protection" concerns in this decision. The electors named in the resolution are: Charles W. Kane,
Maria De La Milera, Sandra M. Faulkner, H. Gary Morse, Armando Codina, Carole Jean Jordan, Tom Slade, Marsha Nippert, Robert L. Woody, John Thrasher, Mel Martinez, Feliciano M. Foyo, Al Hoffman, Alfred S. Austin, Thomas C. Feeney III, John M. McKay,
Cynthia M. Handley, Darryl K. Sharpton, Dr. Adam W. Herbert,
Berta J. Moralejo, Jeanne Barber Godwin, Deborah L. Brooks,
Dr. Dorsey C. Miller, Glenda E. Hood, and Dawn Guzzetta.
Thursday, December 14, 2000 We remain hopeful for a better future. As Vice President Gore said in last night's concession speech, "...the strength of American democracy is shown most clearly through the difficulties it can overcome."
Friday, December 15, 2000
In the wake of the November 2000 election, Florida Governor Bush has issued a call for election reform, and will shortly convene a bipartisan task force to address this issue. Florida2002 welcomes this.
In the weeks ahead, a series of working papers will appear here highlighting what we feel to be some issues and principles of election reform. We anticipate including essays on topics such as same-day voter registration, a comparison of vote-counting technologies at the polls, and voting without the polling place: mail and electronic approaches. These papers are themselves "of the people," and we invite your input as we articulate this agenda.
The task force on reapportionment will soon draw new districts, which will remain in effect until the election of 2012. There is a long and unfortunate history of gerrymandering in this country, and it is likely that the task force will fall back on this unfortunate precedent, and will forge twisted district boundaries which will sequester our voices.
In the wake of the recent election, Florida remains in the spotlight. The Florida task force on reapportionment needs to look forward, to set an example for the country as it enters the 21st century, rather than looking backwards to the precedents of a darker time. Is it - are we - prepared to do this?
It would take an unusual, and we think unlikely, act of political courage for the new districts to be drawn fairly. We hope to be proven wrong.
Saturday, January 20, 2001
In Florida, in the November 2000 elections, the more a voter was positioned to the political left, the less likely it was that his or her vote was counted.
We believe in the meaning and power of Democracy, and we recognize that, if our country is to be a democracy, such systematic disenfranchisement cannot happen again. In short, equal access for all voters across the political spectrum must be achieved.
The high road to equal access is the road to real universal suffrage. Between now and next year's mid-term election, we hope that substantial reforms will be enacted which will empower all eligible Americans. These reforms must include
fair redistricting, open registration, and equal access to efficient voting equipment.
Monday, April 30, 2001 Not once. Wednesday, June 13, 2001
Honors College
Florida Atlantic University
Can a manual recount be fair?
November 16, 2000Closing the door
If we look ahead to the years of 2030 or 2040, not that far from now, in that coming time of overheated cities, of desert farmland, of flood-prone coastlines, and starving seniors...Now we really do have a constitutional crisis
Saturday's 5-4 decision of the U. S. Supreme Court which stopped the recounts was a blow to democracy, a blow to the people, and a deep blow to the premise of an independent judiciary...."an unmistakably partisan decision without any foundation in law," according to former dean of the University of Michigan Law School Terrance Sandalow, a judicial conservative who was quoted in the New York Times.
Florida Legislature set to name its own electors
The U.S. Supreme Court deliberations on Bush v. Gore are center stage today. Meanwhile, as if working in the shadows, the Florida legislature is ready to take the election into its own hands. A column by Yale Law Professor in this morning's New York Times expresses concerns about the kind of precedent that is being set here.Justice Orwell, presiding
As foreshadowed by Saturday's decision to temporarily halt the recounts, the U. S. Supreme Court has voted along partisan lines to overturn the Florida decision and thereby effectively grant the Presidency to Governor George W. Bush. There were two main thrusts to the Supreme Court's argument - first, that the lack of a common recount standard resulted in a violation of the "Equal Protection" clause of our Constitution, and second, that there was no longer time to undertake a proper manual recount.Florida House chooses Bush slate; Senate to consider same today
By a margin of 79-41, the House passed a resolution naming the Bush slate of electors as the representatives of our State's will. Among those voting for the resolution were two Democrats representing districts in which a plurality of votes were given to Bush; there was no parallel consideration of voter sympathies among Republicans representing districts in which Gore had the advantage.
Next up: the State Senate will consider a parallel resolution, with nearly identical text, today.
Now what?
The closing words of Robert Redford in the movie The Candidate are words we might ask of the President-Elect, and ourselves, as well.
For our part, our movement towards Democracy and Representative Government will shortly begin as we monitor the handling of the data from Census 2000, and work towards a non-gerrymandered apportionment of state and Federal legislative districts. Look for our next update on this in early January.
The Florida2002 agenda for election reform
Part I: Representative representatives
We were reminded in the recent election that our constitution guarantees that state legislatures have the ultimate authority over the selection of electors to the electoral college. Yet our legislative districts are not drawn in a way to represent each of us equally, but instead to maximize the continued strength of the party in power. The first step towards election reform is to make the state and federal House of Representatives truly representative - and the time for this is now.Towards equal suffrage
In the weeks since the election, continuing analyses of Florida precincts have revealed a systematic relationship between the sensitivity of the voting equipment within the precinct and the proportion of voters in that precinct registered as Republicans. This finding, coupled with the infamous butterfly ballot here in Palm Beach County, the roadblocks in Duval county, and the disenfranchisement of African Americans throughout our state, combine to make the lesson of the 2000 elections a simple one:
On Bush's first 100 days
The Democratic National Committee has posted a new website with facts and figures about the first hundred days of the new administration. Though our greatest concerns are about Bush's environmental policies, including the threat to the still-pristine white sands of the Florida panhandle, we are struck by the fact that, in all of Bush's radio addresses since taking office, he has not mentioned the words "electoral reform" once.
Progress?
Recent weeks have seen two important consequences of last Fall's election debacle. The first of these was the near-unaninous passage of the Florida Election Reform Act, the second, the issuance of the report of the US Civil Rights Commission on voting irregularities in our state. Please click on the links for our perspective on these developments.
Wednesday, June 27, 2001
The Bush legacy
What will be the most lasting consequence of last fall's election? Will it be a consequence of the election itself, that is, a loss of faith in our governmental institutions? Or will it instead stem from specific policies of our current president?What matters more, "miselection" or "misgovernance"?
These pages attest primarily to our concern about the first of these, about the tragic loss of the democratic process that we witnessed last Fall. But we are increasingly concerned about the misguided policies of our government, particularly with respect to the three Es: an Energy policy designed to favor producers over people, an Economic policy designed to favor the rich over the poor, and an Environmental policy that can only be described as short-sighted. The first two of these garner most of the headlines, but the incessant degradation of our world may be the real story, the most important legacy of this presidency. For a sobering account of the truth about global warming, and the unconscionable inactivity of the Bush-Cheney administration in light of this, please see Bill McKibben's recent essay in the New York Review of Books, or go directly to the website for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
Saturday, September 1, 2001
Economy in the pits: A powerful argument for democracy
Even before the U.S. Supreme Court silenced our voices last Fall, the then-presumptive president and his staff were already declaring that - despite continuing growth - the economy was a shambles. The suggestion was not only foolish, but unconscionably irresponsible, for it is human nature to make purchasing decisions based on expected wealth. A leader who predicts recession creates it.The prophecy of economic failure voiced by the transition team was indeed self-fulfilling; it has now been realized, given extra impetus by foolish policy decisions and the theft of our national savings in a singularly cynical attempt to buy off the American voter.
After barely seven months of Bush, unemployment is up, growth is gone. If our $600 checks are to be called the Bush rebate, then surely our pink slips should be called Bush layoffs. But as we struggle through the Bush downturn which is not yet the Bush recession, there is good news for those who love democracy: We did not elect the man.
The fact that George W. Bush is our president is not an indictment of democracy, but the strongest argument possible for it, for Bush is arguably the biggest fool to ever occupy the oval office, and we did not elect him. No democratically elected president could be this bad, for the collective wisdom of the American people would not allow it. Were there equal access to fair voting for all, Bush would not be president.
In a recent essay (see below) we asked whether Bush would be remembered for "miselection or misgovernance." We now understand that these are linked, that a fair election would give us good government. Instead, we are left with an aristocratic government of the short-sighted, by the short-sighted, and for the short-sighted.
The lasting legacy of the Bush years will be to demonstrate, once and for all, how crucial it is that all voices be heard, and that all votes be counted.
Wednesday, September 19, 2001
The psychological war
Last week, I met with a group of college students and told them that I didn't know the answer. That in the face of an attack such as the one we experienced last week - in the face of the attack, for there is none other like it - there was no right answer. There was no right answer for the President, as he considered flying back to Washington, no right answer for the firefighter who gave his life in a vain effort to save another, no right answer for the mother wondering what to tell her child. There was no right answer for me, as I struggled to help my students understand a world in which the meaning of the New York City skyline has changed from that of breathtaking achievement to solemn memorial.Today, there is still not a right answer, but there is surely a wrong one, and that is to seek retribution without considering its feasibility, or likely consequence. Retribution for the sake of retribution alone is irrational, an attempt to recapture a sunk cost. The question is not how to start a war, but how to end one, how to stop terrorist attacks on American soil.
The maps in the morning paper show swirling lines of battleships and battle groups, all moving towards a land that is half-shaded, for our enemy is not a nation, not Afghanistan, not a man, not bin Laden. Our enemy is the resentment that has been marshaled against us.
The war against terrorism is a psychological war. In it, our attackers do not have a simple objective. They do not seek simple territory, nor natural resources. And, while America has made serious policy blunders, these in and of themselves cannot account for the depth of the hatred we now face. The motivation behind the attacks must lie elsewhere, and we must try to begin to understand it.
Perhaps we can understand the motivation of our attackers as the product of an inner struggle. While they believe they are engaged in a holy war, the real Jihad lies within each of them. They struggle with their own greed, their own temptation. These motives, denied, move to the shadows of their minds, and they are instead aware of America. Perhaps our attackers hate us, in part, because we represent what they desire and deny.
Perhaps we can understand the motivation of our attackers in terms of our seeming evolutionary history. If the ancestral savannah was a harsh place, early humans may have faced Sophie's Choice not once, but repeatedly, over many generations. On these occasions, the only prospects for genetic survival may have been to channel limited resources to a single child, while letting other children wither or fend for themselves. The children who survived would have been not merely the strongest, but also the most vigilant against potential sibling advantage. The children who survived are our ancestors, and those of our attackers, who today hate us as a child hates a favored sibling. Perhaps our attackers hate us, in part, because things are too easy for us, and because we have more.
Human nature is too complex to be summed up in pat phrases; our evolutionary history too rich to be portrayed, as it too often has been portrayed, in terms of simple social Darwinism. If our ancestors faced competition with siblings, they also faced innumerable problems whose successful resolution demanded thoughtfulness and cooperation. These virtues are also part of our evolutionary legacy, and this is the side of human nature that must triumph today. Fortunately, stress and trauma can galvanize as well as destroy. What is needed is a peace effort, not a war effort, an effort to understand and overcome human weakness through insight and understanding.
The meaning of New York has changed, the meaning of America is changing. Yesterday, we were the land of freedom and threat, of prosperity and greed. Today, we are the land of the vulnerable. Tomorrow, we must become the land that found the right answer in its darkest time.
Friday, September 28, 2001
Out of our sadness
There is no easy way out of our distress, for our distress is an intimate part of who we are, it is the caring and compassionate side of human nature which has been evoked by the recent tragedy.I encourage you to reflect on these responses of recent Nobel laureates to our tragedy, and to consider a donation to a charitable organization such as the American Red Cross.
Florida still matters, and democracy still matters. But for now all Americans must work together in good faith with the single goal of preventing a recurrence of the horror we have seen.
Peace.
Tuesday, November 13, 2001
Bush would not have won a fair election
Please encourage your friends and neighbors to read the text as well as the headlines of the recent articles which are alleged to claim that Bush garnered a majority of Florida votes. Try the interactive voting tool at the New York Times' site, for example. There are 24 different scenarios, combining different ways of reading the optical scan ballots, different ways of treating punched card ballots (dangling chads, etc.) and different criteria of interrater agreement. In the 24 heats, Bush wins 12 and Gore wins the 12 others. The most critical variable in these analyses was the handling of the optical scan ballots: If these ballots are examined for voter intent, Gore wins 10 of 12 heats. If voter intent is disregarded, and only filled bubbles and completed marks are treated as votes, then Bush wins 10 of 12 heats. (These analyses do not, of course, consider the flawed ballot here in Palm Beach county which led both to overvotes and to an impossible number of votes dedicated to Pat Buchanan). If not for Bush's single-minded focus on getting elected - at any cost - Gore would have won.I understand that there is a felt need for the country to be unified, but this patronizing misrepresentation of the data is beyond the pale. America is not well served by deceit, by pretending that the last election was a democratic one. We should own up to our mistakes so that it never happens again.
Monday, January 28, 2002
Still think it was a fair election?
Check out the retraction which recently appeared in The Economist, a magazine whose consistent advocacy of free trade has made it a darling of the New Right:
Wednesday, July 24, 2002
On President Bush's recession...
Item (from today's NY Times):Since President Bush came to Wall Street to reassure the markets on July 9, the Dow is off 12 percent and the Nasdaq composite index is down 5 percent. "There hasn't been any news... that has made anybody feel confident," said Thomas McManus, the equity strategist at Banc of America Securities.
Why the crisis? There are two possibilities. One is that this is the natural outcome of years of corporate greed, that the money the money managers stole and squandered came from us, came from our futures, our pensions. Another is that the problem was not corruption per se, but awareness of this corruption. On this account, we were doing just fine as long as our eyes were closed.
Regardless of whether the problem is structural or psychological, regardless of whether it is a crisis of capital or a crisis of confidence, it is clear that our concerns cannot be assuaged by the plutocrats in Washington.
Our government is in trouble. What will they do to distract us from their incompetence? Don't be surprised if our appointed President leads us to war with Iraq this October - just prior to the November elections.
... and Governor Bush's war-chest
Meanwhile, here in Florida, Jeb has managed to rake in millions as he has built the largest campaign war-chest in the state's history. In this day of heightened awareness of political and economic corruption, we must ask - where does the money come from? Why does big money want Jeb to remain Florida's governor? What would four more years of Jeb mean for our children, our highways, our cities, our pensions, and our jobs? Should we give up, and let corrupt money lead us further on the road to ruin?Wednesday, September 11, 2002
A day of rememberance
It is somehow fitting that today should lead us to remember the two great injuries our nation has suffered in this new century - the tragedy of September 11, 2001 and the electoral chaos that preceded it, on November 7, 2000, which allowed a cynical hijacking of the democratic process and the installation of an unelected President.Florida marked the occasion with late-opening precincts, early-closing precincts, precincts without registration lists, and the usual lack of direction from above. These problems are beyond the routine, and this is a problem. But the still greater problem was the response of Governor Jeb Bush's response to the massive incompetence which once again obscures the wishes of the people. According to the New York Times (September 11, 2002) our Governor said "What is it with Democrats having a hard time voting? I don't know."
If you, like me, are deeply offended by this, if you, like me, are fed up with the aristocratic attitude that the will of the people can be ignored, then please do whatever you can to help us elect a new Governor - be it Janet Reno or Bill McBride - this November.
Wednesday, September 18, 2002
Embarrassed again
In the eyes of the Nation, Florida again stands out as the place that can't get it right. In the eyes of The New York Times, this is a reflection of our governor, who "Six months after his state became a laughingstock for the 36-day stalemate in the 2000 presidential election ... declared that Florida would become a "model for the rest of the nation" in reforming elections." On election day, Bush blamed Democratic voters (see story below). In the week since the election, blame has been directed towards precinct workers and the election officials in Broward and Miami/Dade counties. The buck stops ... where?
The Florida2002 agenda
We at Florida2002.org seek same-day voter registration, fair redistricting, sensible electoral college reform, and equal access to fair ballots for everyone - old and young, woman and man, right and left, white and black.At Florida2002.org, we believe that the theft of our Presidency and the loss of our democratic ideals is the greatest scandal in American history. We believe that all of us should have an equal voice in the election process.
At Florida2002.org, we seek a return to democracy in America.
The Florida2002 agenda has been
(1) To remind our legislators that we want them to honor the judiciary.
(2) To remind our legislators that they are elected officials who serve at our will.
(3) To inform our legislators that we will work to defeat any representative or senator who attempts to short-circuit our electoral process.
Watch this space for a full, district-by-district report of the vote of the Florida Legislature as they contemplate defying the voice of the courts and the will of the people. Florida2002.org, a watchdog organization of concerned Floridians, stands ready to mobilize in response to this anticipated theft of justice.
We stand ready to begin working immediately to help elect pro-democracy candidates in the 2002 elections.
We stand ready to retake our state.
Join Florida2002 by adding yourself to our email list at the bottom of our home page. Help us get the word out about Florida2002.
