[Vision2020] Not A Revelation! Election Day Still a Long Way Off (Molly Ivins)

[Ted Moffett]

All:

Molly Irvin's article is hardly a revelation.

Events favorable to one party can be manipulated for maximum political
effect before an election.  US hostages in Iran held till after the election
to damage Carter in 1980?  No, couldn't be!  "Right Wing" media will slant
to the Republican agenda.  She is surprised they will lie?  The US Senate's
two senators per state representation is structured to give more weight to
votes in small populations states, and redistricting can swing US House
seats, using racial voting patterns, towards a party that has garnered a
minority of the overall popular vote.  OK.  Ho, hum... Money can buy votes
with huge attack ad campaigns aimed at a gullible and uninformed public.
Business as usual!

But in reading her article, unless I missed something, there was no mention
of electoral fraud, abuse, mismanagement, and underfunding of voting systems
as a structural problem in our Democracy that, if not solved, can render
moot all of the considerations she outlines as factors determining
elections.

Given what has been exposed about election fraud, abuse, mismanagement,
underfunding, etc. leading to a slanted vote outcome, in Gore v. Bush
Florida 2000, and Bush v. Kerry Ohio 2004, it can be stated with a
solid empirical foundation that fundamental problems with voting systems in
the US alone may explain the fact Bush won the White House in 2000 and 2004.

I see no reason why these problems with voting systems could not again
misrepresent the intentions of the voters next month, overriding all other
variables.

And the subject of voting reform to introduce proportional voting systems in
the US for US House seats, a development that has promise to limit
the abuses of redistricting for US House seats, received generated barely a
ripple on Vision2020.

Ted Moffett
-------------------------------------------------------------

Election Day Still a Long Way Off
By Molly Ivins

Stunning coincidence. The verdict in the long-running trial of Saddam
Hussein in Iraq is now due two days before our congressional elections in
November. Astounding. How ineffable.

Sometimes you know the Republicans have just lost the rag completely. This
week, Dick Cheney said to Rush Limbaugh regarding the Iraqi government, "If
you look at the general, overall situation, they're doing remarkably well."
The vice president also acknowledged there's some concern because the war
wasn't over "instantaneously." We have now been in Iraq just one month shy
of the entire time it took us to fight World War II. Seventy Americans dead
so far in October. Electricity in Iraq this year hit its lowest levels since
the war started.

What infuriates me about this is the lying. WHY can't they level with us?
Just on the general, overall situation.

Put me in the depressive Dems camp. We always look good going into the last
two weeks, until we get hit with that wall of Republican money (though I do
think Ohio is beyond political recall at this point for the R's). Of course,
both sides always complain about unfair advertising, but I must admit that
almost all political advertising strikes me as ludicrous and I don't notice
the D's looking simon-pure. A little shading, a little emphasis here and
there -- I'm hard to shock on political ads, but I do get more than miffed
when they take the truth and just stand it on its head.

For example, if ever there has been a friend to Social Security it would be
Rep. Chet Edwards from Waco, Texas, a D loyal to the FDR, LBJ and
government-exists-to-serve-the-people tradition. So what are the R's
attacking him on? Not supporting Social Security. All this kind of thing
does is render political debate completely meaningless.

The argument now is that D's have a seven-point structural deficit going
into any election. I see the problem, I just have no idea what the actual
numbers are.

Let's start with the easy end, the Senate. From the book "Off Center" by
Jacob S. Hacker and Paul Pierson, as recently quoted by Eric Alterman in his
blog: "The mismatch between popular votes and electoral outcomes is even
more striking in the Senate. Combining the last three Senate elections,
Democrats have actually won 2.5 million more votes than Republicans. Yet now
they hold only 44 seats in that 100-person chamber because Republicans
dominate the less populous states that are so heavily overrepresented in the
Senate. As journalist Hendrik Hertzberg (of the New Yorker) notes, if you
treat each senator as representing half that state's population, then the
Senate's 55 Republicans currently represent 131 million people, while the 44
Democrats represent 161 million people."

OK, we all know about the small-state advantage in the Senate. How did the
People's House get so far out of fair? Paul Krugman explains: "The key point
is that African-Americans, who overwhelmingly vote Democratic, are highly
concentrated in a few districts. This means that in close elections many
Democratic votes are, as political analysts say, wasted -- they simply add
to huge majorities in a small number of districts, while the more widely
spread Republican vote allows the GOP to win by narrower margins in a larger
number of districts."

I should also point out that Democrats used to pack minority voters into the
same districts when they drew the redistricting lines because of simple
racism. Minority candidates need more votes to win, as polling consistently
shows them several points ahead of where they actually finish because some
people still cannot bring themselves to vote for black politicians even if
they agree with them.

For instance, race is a factor this year in Harold Ford's Tennessee Senate
contest -- even though political people keep pretending it's not.

I'm the one who has been writing for two years that the American people are
fed up with the war in Iraq and with the Bush administration's lies and
incompetence. I'm the one that keeps beating the Washington press corps
about the head over how out of touch it is. I'm the one who has been
insisting there's a Democratic tide out here, and that the people are so far
ahead of the politicians and the media it's painful to watch.

So how come I'm not thrilled? Because I watched this happen two years ago --
same rejection of the Iraq war, same disgust with Bush and Co., same
understanding Republicans are for the rich, period, same polls showing D's
with the lead going right into Election Day. And the same geographic
gerrymander and same wall of money in the last two weeks. I'm not close to
calling this election, and I'm sure not into celebrating anything yet.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20061019/67dd2f67/attachment.htm