Considering U.S. Elections in the context of International Standards

[madison2000]

http://www.cartercenter.org/doc1866.htm

I've heard that there are five standards for fair elections that the Carter Center uses around the world and the US does not meet them, but I haven't seen a list of what they are. This article from the Carter Center talks about the application of international standards to elections. If only we had implemented these before this election...

Excerpt from:
Expert Q&A: The 2004 U.S. Elections
28 Oct 2004

CONSIDERING U.S. ELECTIONS IN THE CONTEXT OF INTERNATIONAL ELECTION STANDARDS

"Would you discuss U.S. voting procedures in light of emerging international standards?

Dr. Carroll: According to international standards, the management and administration of elections should be impartial and transparent. Most countries with strong democratic institutions have an independent national election authority that administers elections nationwide with uniform processes and standards. In the United States, elections are administered at the state and local level, often under the direction of partisan officials, and with varying practices, procedures, and machinery.

The United States should adopt uniform voting procedures within states and perhaps nationwide, and antiquated voting machinery should be replaced with more reliable technology in all communities, rich or poor. In addition, simulations of voting systems would test reliability and accuracy before elections and build confidence in new technology.

There also needs to be a way to let voters know whether they have followed proper procedure and a way that they can immediately correct mistakes. Having a paper record of the vote or a paper receipt for the voter is a way to build confidence in the system. There is also a clear need to create an information-sharing system among counties and among states to cross-check voter registration to eliminate duplications, deceased registrants, and other errors.

[k8conant]

1. Unfortunately, here in the US "Might makes right"...

and the folks in power make the rules, break the rules, and get rulings that the broken rules didn't matter after all.

[RaulVB]

2. Florida meets NONE OF THOSE STANDARDS

Jimmy Carter said that before the "election."

[Beth in VT]

3. this is so depressing. n/t

[madison2000]

4. I think this is something the public needs to be educated about

Since "freedom is breaking out all over" and we are bringing democracy to other countries, shouldn't we meet the standards that we are setting?
I think most people on both sides of the aisle would be surprised to learn that our standards are so low in comparison with other countries- most of us know very little about how officials are elected around the world.

Edit: I don't think any of our 50 states meet the standards.

[ottozen]

5. BUMPER STICKER

A VOTE FOR KERRY was A VOTE FOR BUSH!?!

[FogerRox]

6. Jimmy Carter wouldnt have certified 2000 or 2004

[southwood]

7. Check out ...

www.aceproject.org

It is a bit of a boring website but covers a lot of aspects of election systems.
What I find most important is the aspect of voter registration. Americans take this for granted. In fact, in most of the world, voter registration is derived directly from the civil registry i.e. population register. It means that anyone 18 or older automatically gets his or her voting card. No possibility for provisionals, challenges before or during elections, no purging of voter rolls etc.
The notion of a civil registry is essential to a modern nation state, and basically finds its origins in the French revolution of 1789, first exported by Napoleon across Europe.
The strange and cumbersome process of voter registration in the U.S., different across States, takes care of low turnouts (citizens not bothering to register, citizens purged etc.)and enables manipulation of voter rolls for partisan reasons.
Also, the state-by-state winner-takes-all system allows for the notion of swing states. A national election (popular election nationwide) makes fraud much more difficult. In the present U.S. system, flipping or padding a few hundred thousand votes is capable of reversing the entire election result for President.

[madison2000]

8. thank you, I agree

There is nothing to stop people who own homes in more than one location from registering in more than one place and voting in all of them. I also think that equal treatment under the law should mean that it is not more difficult to vote in one state than in another. In Wisconsin and Minnesota you can register on voting day with proof of residence, and in other places its much harder. I think that having all these different rules does make it easier for someone to manipulate the vote and that it should be uniform across states.