Equality and Casting and Counting VotesThe various rules for voting and counting in the U.S., different in every state, coupled with possible Supreme Court intervention, means the entire electoral process is rife with anarchy and arbitrary actions. This includes the fact that large numbers of eligible voters are not registered and thus not able to vote. This is commonly due to various obstacles preventing registration, especially targeting African Americans and students. About 3 million prisoners cannot vote. Many immigrants -- despite having lived in the U.S. for decades and being an integral part of the working class -- have been deprived of citizenship and cannot vote.
While most other countries have a system where the federal government is responsible for enrolling all those eligible, the U.S. does not. Many countries also require the winner to secure 50 per cent of the eligible vote. The U.S. does not. Some also provide a means to count votes of those who reject the candidates, such as submitting a "spoiled" ballot. The U.S. does not. A ballot line in every state saying "none of the above" likely would have secured an actual majority in this election as many did not want to vote for either candidate. The turn out more likely represents not so much support for the candidates but rather a reflection of people's desire to have a say in governance -- a drive that will continue to have expression and be decisive in future developments as the broad movement for rights continues to advance. Arbitrary Elimination of VotesIn addition to the numerous mechanisms the obsolete U.S. system uses to make it more difficult to vote, whether a vote is counted is also arbitrary, with few established standards. There is no equal membership in the polity and certainly no equal casting and counting of votes. So while there is currently an appearance that Biden wants votes counted and Trump wants to stop the counting, the reality is that neither campaign has been concerned that, with the far larger numbers of mail-in ballots this election, larger numbers of votes have likely been discarded on arbitrary grounds. As various lawsuits brought to counter this emphasize, lack of standards "forces election officials to make subjective, arbitrary and standardless determinations as to whether to count a voter's ballot." Before the election in both Michigan and Pennsylvania, for example, groups from among the people concerned about mail-in votes being excluded brought lawsuits demanding a uniform standard for accepting them. These states, and others, commonly require that the voter sign the envelope provided for the mail-in ballot and that signature is then verified by election officials, commonly using the voter's registration card. However, there is no standard for saying the signatures do not match, nor training of officials for making comparisons. Ballots may also be rejected because the person forgot to sign the envelope. Or in some states did not have it witnessed as required. Or it was not received in time. And many states have no means for these voters to secure redress or even be notified. In Michigan, the lawsuit said lack of uniform standards concerning signatures allowed election officials throughout the state to employ arbitrary and diverging criteria. The state's Secretary of State issued guidelines that did not eliminate the practice of signature verification, but did implement a statewide standard designed to reduce false rejections. These included that if the signature had “any redeeming qualities" the ballot should be considered valid and only if the signature differs "in multiple, significant and obvious respects," should the ballot be discarded. The guidance also strengthened the mandate that election officials notify voters of rejected ballots and provide cure procedures. But it did not require that such remedies be timely enough for the election involved. Similarly, in Pennsylvania, the lawsuit said the state failed to require any handwriting training or to provide any standards or guidelines that would aid election officials in their signature analysis. Again, the state's Secretary of State issued guidance, prohibiting all of the state's county boards of elections from rejecting returned absentee or mail ballots "based solely on signature analysis." The state Supreme Court upheld the guidance saying the "county boards of elections are prohibited from rejecting absentee or mail-in ballots based on signature comparison conducted by county election officials or employees, or as the result of third-party challenges based on signature analysis and comparisons." It is possible that Trump will challenge both of these decisions. Lawsuits in many other states have also challenged the lack of notification and timely redress so voters can correct the problems and still have their vote counted. These include actions in Maine, New Jersey, North Carolina, Kentucky, Louisiana, Arizona and North Dakota. These battles are all indications that voters want a fair and
equal basis for participation, which does not exist, while the
candidates are acting in a self-serving manner to best meet their own
needs. Neither are calling for, nor have called for, the minimal
reforms required to ensure all those eligible can vote and that there
are standards for equality in voting and running for office. The people
are demanding this and far more -- including a set-up where it is the
people who decide the candidates, the agenda, a public process that
informs and unifies and where the people themselves are empowered to
govern and decide. (Photo: E. Newman)
This article was published in Article Link:   Website: www.cpcml.ca Email: editor@cpcml.ca |
It
is estimated
that the current population of voting age (18 and over) is 257,605,088
while those considered eligible to vote number about 239,247,182, a
difference of about 18,000,000 (estimates from the Elections Project).
Turnout this year is estimated at 159,000,000 or about 66 per cent.
Taking the estimated number of eligible voters, that means about
80,000,000 are not counted -- more than the 74,500,000 votes Biden has
so far received. If voting age population is used it is closer to
100,000,000 excluded. While there is great promotion that turnout this
year was higher than usual, which is the case, it hides the fact that
the Biden win now projected is based on the votes of approximately 28
per cent of the voting age population.