portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article announcements united states

election fraud

Voter Bill of Rights

The Voter Bill of Rights is a list of 10 essential steps for improving our electoral system.
Dear Friend,

In recent days, we've been heartened by the activist community's
refusal to concede our democracy and determination to fix our
electoral system. When one voter is denied, democracy is in trouble,
when tens of thousands are suppressed, democracy has failed. We call
on you to take action to help save our democracy and ensure free and
fair elections in the future.

Please SIGN and CIRCULATE the Voter Bill of Rights (see link below),
a list of 10 essential steps for improving our electoral system. Our
goal is to get 25,000 people to sign the Voter Bill of Rights by
November 30, and then send the bill to all members of congress. We
also plan to use this as an organizing tool to educate and mobilize
people in our struggle for electoral reform.

To sign and download the Voter Bill of Rights visit:
 http://www.codepinkalert.orgNational_Actions_Voter_Bill_of_Rights.shtml

VOTER BILL OF RIGHTS

From unreliable electronic voting machines and millions of uncounted
ballots to partisan secretaries of state and 10-hour waits at the
polls, it is clear that our electoral system is in dire need of an
overhaul.

To build a more just, secure and robust democracy, I support the
following 10-point Voter Bill of Rights:

* Provide a Paper Trail for Touch-Screen Voting Machines
* Create Independent, Non-Partisan and Transparent Oversight
* Celebrate Our Democracy: Election Day as a National Holiday!
* Maximize Voter Access
* Count Every Vote
* Re-enfranchise Ex-Felons
* Implement Instant Runoff Voting (IRV)
* Provide Public Financing for Elections and Equal Air-Time
* Ensure Third Party Candidates Easier Access to the Ballot and Debates
* Abolish the Electoral College

Thank you all for your determination in the wake of this disastrous
election to set things right in the future!

With appreciation and in solidarity,

Medea Benjamin and Chris Michael
On behalf of Global Exchange and CodePink
www.codepinkalert.org
www.globalexchange.org

homepage: homepage: http://www.codepinkalert.org

1-9 are great--one is regressive in my opinion, #10 18.Nov.2004 16:54

green

some greens oppose removing Electoral College, for proportional rep of E.C. as better


Hi,

In regards to your Voter Bill of Rights mobilization---

I'm for all nine of your points--except the tenth one. ;-)

When you have the time, I suggest you analyze this argument for
proportional representation of a state's Electoral College vote is far
more progressive for a competitive democracy, and removal
actually is retrogressive for a competitive democracy as it plays
into collusive Democratic and Republican elite hands.


Bioregional Letter #1:
Why the Electoral Congress is Important to Keep,
and how to make it Popular and Geographic;

Proportional Representation in the Electoral College,
to Facilitate Geographic Representation and Party Competition

For a bioregional perspective on the electoral college, the electoral
college is useful. Removing the electoral college will only make and
engender more clientelistic relationships to unlocalized party politics
and will allow the existing parties to further marginalize the geographic
qualities of the vote. Proportional representation in the electoral
college allows for both a sense of of the popular vote, nation wide, as
well as allows for each states demographic of votes to matter in the
electoral college. This will assure third parties in electoral and federal
level politics. At issue as well is the way the majoritarian parties
gerrymander their own districts, instead of actually allowing
congressional districts. These districts are uncompetitive. Changing these
is required.

I would suggest that you keep in mind that proportional representation of
a state's Electoral College vote is far more do-able [removal of the E.C.
has been attempted at least 700 times by the way]. Maintaining the E.C. as proportional allocation of the totals is far more pro-localist and respects the local demographic of the vote.

Actually, this idea was widely known, and was about to pass (according
to October 2004 polls) in Colorado elections--until vote fraud likely
intervened. It was called "Referendum 36" there and was sailing to a solid majority win, which was going to (in my opinion it did,
what happened was e-vote fraud) make Colorado the first to proportionally
allocate its Electoral Vote.


more on that here:

1. Toward a Biregional State
 http://www.ssc.wisc.edu/~mwhitake/biostate/bioregionEC_1-3.html

2. Title: If Colorado Referendum for proportional rep. on electoral vote
wins, then Kerry wins
Author: crossed fingers
Date: 2004.11.02 11:45
Description: Though with these voting machines, who knows? Nothing can be
verified. METHOD: I've been creating a database all evening on incoming
changing totals, looking at MSNBC charts and BBC's Shockwave maps.
FINDINGS: "In Colorado, electoral seats could be divided up between
incumbent George W. Bush and Democratic candidate John Kerry if a
proportional representation referendum on the ballot on Tuesday succeeds."
[Presently BBC is now reporting (taking from AP) and I quote "Proponents
of Proposition 36...have conceded defeat." However, no where can I find
the actual totals! ok, Here is what Washington Times said: "The vote was
66 to 33 percent against the amendment, with 43 percent of the vote
counted." The way I am figuring it, without that referendum, its Bush by
270/1+ to Kerry ~266. The Bush total of 270+ is with him getting all 9
electoral votes from Colorado. However, with proportional representation
of the whole demographic of the vote in Colorado, with the present spread
of 53.2 (Bush) and 45.6 (Kerry) then Kerry will get a bit of the ones
temporarily put in the Bush column. OH GOD... "When Colorado voters go to
the polls in four weeks they won't just be electing a president; they will
be determining via ballot initiative whether the state's nine electoral
votes ought to be split proportionately based upon the results of the
election. If the measure passes, in other words, instead of getting all
nine Electoral College votes, the winner of the state's popular vote
almost certainly would get only five of those votes; the loser almost
certainly would get four. Had the proposed change been in place in 2000,
Al Gore would be president today. [even with Bush/Diebold vote fraud and
rigged Florida elections]." [and more information on the likely vote fraud
that turned it out there.]
 http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2004/11/301768.shtml



I'm for all of your nine points--except the tenth one. ;-)

The Problem With All this here is... 19.Nov.2004 03:12

Talus Jude

Voting (as you know it) is not a right in America. You are basing all you points on the assumption that you have the right to vote. Guess what, you don't. No place in The Constutition or The Bill of Rights does it say anything about voting as a right.

For two hundred and twenty-two years it has been this way. There have been those that have tried to make voting a right, and by all accounts and purposes have failed. If you really have the heart and are willing to take that extra step then take it. No more talk, no more sitting in front of the computer... take action.

It's time to create something new and learn from the mistakes we have all undertaken, if not for ourselves, then for our children and the world.

You don't need a plan to make a difference.