|

Are Elections Honest?

Share this article

Probably most would agree that the two-party system keeps important topics like peace and single-payer healthcare out of the public discourse and ensures that candidates outside the mainstream will never have fair access to the election process. We know that PACs and corporate campaign finance (Citizens United) have an outsized effect on who gets elected, and we know that the President is elected by an Electoral College that doesn’t always reflect the majority of the popular vote. We know these things because they have been well-covered by our press and broadcast media.

What is less well known is that the vote count itself – the process of tallying our votes – is suspect, and has been corrupted many times in the past, potentially changing outcomes in national elections. This story has always been off-limits for the news media, and apparently both political parties conspire to keep the counting process secret and hackable.

The USA has a long history of election theft by stuffing ballot boxes, going back to the 19th century and implicating both parties. The Collier brothers wrote a book based on their experience and in-depth investigations in the 1990s, titled VoteScam

In 2000 the vote was stolen in plain sight, when the Supreme Court (Bush v. Gore) ruled that the state of Florida had to halt its recount of ballots. From this event emerged the Help America Vote Act of 2002, which led all states to adopt computerized voting machines and scanners.

The result was that ballot-box stuffing became obsolete, and the era of wholesale electronic vote theft was born.  Ronnie Dugger told the story in The Nation of the 2002 election in Georgia. Robert Kennedy and Steve Freeman told the story of the stolen 2004 election in Rolling Stone. Incidentally, both The Nation and Rolling Stone have removed these pieces from their archives, requiring the reader to go to archive.org to find them. 

The ease with which many computerized voting machines can be hacked has been extensively documented and occasionally  reported in the mainstream media. Touch-screen, push button, and electronic scanners are all vulnerable. In some cases, there has been direct testimony detailing how this was done, beginning with the Ohio presidential election in 2004. In many more cases, there has been suggestive statistical evidence that electronic vote theft has occurred. 

Starting in 2004, there has been a consistent “red shift” in ballot counts vs polling results. This term refers to a statistical excess in Republican votes compared to expectations from exit polls, which had been our most reliable check on the voting machines. This story is reported in the book Code Red by Jonathan Simon, who has updated the volume every two years.

The Democratic establishment is well aware of all this tilt in the vote count before the 2020 Presidential election. In 2016, there was evidence that Bernie Sanders would have been the nominee, if votes had not been shifted during the primary elections in favor of Hillary Clinton, and votes for Sanders had not been suppressed. For example, in California, most Democrats are registered as independent, because doing so, they still have the right to vote in the Democratic primary as independents. However, new procedures in 2016 made it difficult and confusing to assert this right

In 2020, Donald Trump became the first Presidential candidate to make a public accusation that the vote tallying system had been corrupted. This was a difficult case to prove, because pre-election polls were too close to call, and exit polls were not available because Covid restrictions led to a high proportion of mail-in votes. 

Since 2004, election integrity advocates have been proposing a return to hand-marked, hand-counted paper ballots. The old-fashioned system may be supplemented with real-time video of the counting process. This was the system in use in the US for two hundred years, and it is still used in Canada and most European democracies. Arguments that it is slow and impractical seem beside the point, if the integrity of our democracy is at stake.

Similar Posts

  • Emergency Platform to manage “extreme global shocks”

    Share this article

    The Emergency Platform refers to a set of protocols that are to be activated in the event of a “complex global shock”. When activated the platform brings together leaders from member states, the United Nations, core member groups (such as the G77, G20), international financial institutions (IMF, World Bank)…

  • NACs- Natural Asset Companies – what are they?

    Share this article

    Share this article And why are we concerned? (Read update at bottom: the rule change has been withdrawn,…

  • UN General Assembly Head Approves Declaration to Form a Global Pandemic Authority with Lockdown Enforcement Powers

    Share this article

    This declaration aims to form a global pandemic authority that has a range of disturbing powers, such as the ability to enforce lockdowns, push for universal vaccination and censor what it deems “misinformation.” Some of the points it calls for include: Increased surveillance and digital health documents:..

  • SUPPORT:  Right to Food Amendment 

    Share this article

    In 2024 Representative Thomas Massie proposed an amendment to the U.S. Constitution that states: 

    The right of the people to grow food and to purchase food from the source of their choice shall not be infringed and Congress shall make no law regulating the production and distribution of food products which do not move across state lines.

  • The United Nations has proposed creating an ‘Emergency Platform’ to allow it to rule during major ‘global shocks’

    Share this article

    “When the world faces a complex global shock, we must ensure that all parts of the multilateral system are accountable for contributing to a collective response. No single agency exists to gather stakeholders in the event of complex global shocks. The United Nations is the only organization that can fulfil this role.”