Source: Chicago Sun-Times
In an electoral season replete with unpredicted events, five developing situations are intertwined in ways certain to make for a combustible Nov. 3.
First, the Republicans’ voter suppression strategy, designed to create delay, confusion and discord in the handling of voters and their votes, is proceeding with increasing intensity.
Second, the number of election volunteers is likely to be seriously diminished because of COVID-19. Many of the elderly volunteers who traditionally staff voting sites justifiably fear exposure to the coronavirus. This could lead to the closing of polling places and a reduction in voter turnout.
Third, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s has opposed a House-approve $4 billion package of aid to states. This grant would help states obtain the resources needed to accurately and securely process every ballot.
Fourth, state election officials expect to receive tens of millions of mail-in ballots from voters who want to avoid exposure to COVID-19. Some states, such as New York and Kentucky, already have forecast that tabulating the results may take a week after Election Day. States that allow mail ballots to be counted, so long as they are postmarked on Election Day, guarantee that, given the volume, totaling the vote will spill over beyond November 3.
Fifth, Donald J. Trump is already blaring constantly that the 2020 election will be rigged. Trump has tweeted: “The Democrats are trying to Rig the 2020 Election, plain and simple!” “Because of MAIL-IN BALLOTS, 2020 will be the most RIGGED Election in our nation’s history – unless that stupidity is ended.”
Trump sure to cry foul
Trump will announce victory on election night no matter how many votes he and Biden have. Trump will then incite street agitations and launch judicial challenges based on conspiratorial fantasies, even without any evidence of voter fraud by the Democrats.
The way out of this toxic scenario is to build on a large majority of Americans averse to such planned Trumpian chaos and political instability by proposing a two-week grace period after November 3. People want every voter to be respected, which means every vote should be counted even if this requires additional time.
A demand for a grace period needs to start now to build up powerful support from a multi-partisan combination of national, state and local candidates for public office. Candidates should pledge not to announce their victory or concede defeat until Nov. 17. Support for this prudent proposal position can be strengthened by retired political leaders, “good government” groups such as the League of Women Voters, and all varieties of columnists, editorial writers, academic experts and other opinion leaders.
It is an undeniable fact that substantial millions of mail-in ballots will not be counted in time. People understand overloaded situations from their own occupations and professions. President Trump is making things worse by generating lawless provocations, with tweets and disruptive actions, and by undermining the U.S. Postal Service, including sending misleading information about mail balloting to voters.
As The Washington Post has reported: “President Trump … “does not want to fund the U.S. Postal Service because Democrats are seeking to expand mail-in voting during the coronavirus pandemic, making explicit the reason he has declined to approve $25 billion in emergency funding for that cash-strapped agency.” After all, he did bugle a boastful outlawry no previous president ever dared to utter: “I have an Article II, where I have the right to do whatever I want as president.”
Cooling passions
The mass media should continue the policy of not projecting winners before the polls close. Premature vote projections can depress voter turnout in states where polls haven’t closed.
A 14-day grace period movement will isolate Donald Trump. His bellowings will bounce inside the disbelieved echo chamber of his fabrications. Also, a two-week hiatus will provide time for passions to cool and restored public confidence that our public servants and volunteers can achieve optimal accuracy for electoral legitimacy.
Candidate Biden should not tarry in declaring that he will not ask for a concession from candidate Trump until at least Nov. 17. Mr. Trump will not make a reciprocal pledge so long as his documented campaign strategy is to sow doubt from all directions — domestic and abroad — on the integrity of the electoral process. Trump’s unwillingness to play fair and square, against a deep consensus behind a grace period, will further increase the futility of his destructive contrivances.
With such large stakes for our fragile democracy, we cannot afford to bypass such a course of action that will assure a peaceful transition in accord with the rule of law. Providing a decent interval for a full count of all the votes is a critical step for our democracy.
Ralph Nader is a consumer advocate and co-author of “Wrecking America: How Trump’s Lawbreaking and Lies Betray All.” Lou Fisher is a visiting scholar at William & Mary Law School. Bruce Fein is a constitutional lawyer and former associate deputy attorney general and general counsel of the Federal Communications Commission under President Ronald Reagan.
Nader is opposed to big insurance companies, "corporate welfare," and the "dangerous convergence of corporate and government power." While consumer advocate/environmentalist Ralph Nader has virtually no chance of winning the White House, he has been taken quite seriously on the campaign trail.Indeed, he poses the greatest threat to Sen. John Kerry. Democrats fear that Nader will be a spoiler, as he was in the 2000 election, when he took more than 97,000 votes in Florida. Bush won Florida by just 537 votes. The win gave Bush the election. Nader, an independent candidate, who also ran in 1992 and 1996, is on the ballot in 33 states, including Florida, Ohio, Wisconsin, and New Mexico—tough battleground states. Kerry stands a chance of losing those vital states if Nader siphons away the votes of Democrats. President Bush and Kerry have been in a statistical dead heat in nationwide polls, and votes for Nader could well tip the balance in favor of Bush.Many Kerry supporters contend that a vote for Nader is in reality a vote for Bush and have made concerted efforts to persuade Nader to throw his support behind the Democratic candidate. Nader, however, has held fast to his convictions that the two candidates are nearly indistinguishable and are pawns of big business.Designing Cars for Everything but SafetyNader was born in Winsted, Connecticut, on Feb. 27, 1934 to Lebanese immigrants Nathra and Rose Nader. Nathra ran a bakery and restaurant. As a child, Ralph played with David Halberstam, who\'s now a highly regarded journalist.Nader with Democratic nominee Jimmy Carter outside of Jimmy Carter\'s home on August 7, 1976, discussing Consumer Protection. (Source/AP) Nader graduated magna cum laude from Princeton in 1955 and from Harvard Law School in 1958. As a student at Harvard, Nader first researched the design of automobiles. In an article titled "The Safe Car You Can\'t Buy," which appeared in the Nation in 1959, he concluded, "It is clear Detroit today is designing automobiles for style, cost, performance, and calculated obsolescence, but not—despite the 5,000,000 reported accidents, nearly 40,000 fatalities, 110,000 permanent disabilities, and 1,500,000 injuries yearly—for safety."Early Years as a Consumer AdvocateAfter a stint working as a lawyer in Hartford, Connecticut, Nader headed for Washington, where he began his career as a consumer advocate. He worked for Daniel Patrick Moynihan in the Department of Labor and volunteered as an adviser to a Senate subcommittee that was studying automobile safety.In 1965, he published Unsafe at Any Speed, a best-selling indictment of the auto industry and its poor safety standards. He specifically targeted General Motors\' Corvair. Largely because of his influence, Congress passed the 1966 National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act. Nader was also influential in the passage of 1967\'s Wholesome Meat Act, which called for federal inspections of beef and poultry and imposed standards on slaughterhouses, as well as the Clean Air Act and the Freedom of Information Act."Nader\'s Raiders" and Modern Consumer MovementNader\'s crusade caught on, and swarms of activists, called "Nader\'s Raiders," joined his modern consumer movement. They pressed for protections for workers, taxpayers, and the environment and fought to stem the power of large corporations.In 1969 Nader established the Center for the Study of Responsive Law, which exposed corporate irresponsibility and the federal government\'s failure to enforce regulation of business. He founded Public Citizen and U.S. Public Interest Research Group in 1971, an umbrella for many other such groups.A prolific writer, Nader\'s books include Corporate Power in America (1973), Who\'s Poisoning America (1981), and Winning the Insurance Game (1990).
ZNetwork is funded solely through the generosity of its readers.
Donate
