Reframing the election fraud debate
AlterNet
by David Dill
03/09/06
The election fraud debate frames the problem incorrectly. The question should not be whether there is widespread election fraud. It should be: 'Why should we trust the results of elections?' It's not good enough that election results be accurate. We have to know they are accurate -- and we don't. In a word, elections must be transparent. People must be able to assure themselves that the results are accurate through direct observation during the election and examination of evidence afterwards. U.S. elections are far from transparent...
http://www.alternet.org/story/33244/
Informant: Thomas L. Knapp
by David Dill
03/09/06
The election fraud debate frames the problem incorrectly. The question should not be whether there is widespread election fraud. It should be: 'Why should we trust the results of elections?' It's not good enough that election results be accurate. We have to know they are accurate -- and we don't. In a word, elections must be transparent. People must be able to assure themselves that the results are accurate through direct observation during the election and examination of evidence afterwards. U.S. elections are far from transparent...
http://www.alternet.org/story/33244/
Informant: Thomas L. Knapp
rudkla - 9. Mär, 19:03
