The fiasco of the 2006 election has already started. Accusations, innuendos, severe security problems and lapses, and smug reassurances are appearing throughout the United States. Corporate voting machine manufacturers, Secretaries of State, election watchdogs--everyone has a say, but no one has an answer. Maybe it is because we have not asked a deep enough question yet.
Some of the complaints are superficial, but their implications are deep. People like Mark Radke of Diebold smugly reassure the public that everything is okay by focusing on the minutiae of their machines and their technology, he answers questions about why the machines is secure and asserts everyone should believe they are. Diebold takes this stance because enormous revenue and profit are at stake for the company, not to mention their reputation. But Diebold's assurances are not the issue.
Because no one can track or audit access to the machines, and because the code has been guarded as a trade secret, independent verification is impossible and accurate recounts in contested elections are impossible. The result is that the people can have no confidence that the election outcome reflects the actual vote. With that lack of confidence, the entire foundation of electoral democracy begins to erode. The people have no assurance that the office holders are those who were elected. The people learn that playing by the rules, which is the vernacular for confidence in the Rule of Law, is not rewarded. Erode Rule of Law, and Liberty itself is lost. Just go to a corrupt nation where there is no Rule of Law; there is no liberty in such a place, just market of corruption.
We must not allow ourselves to be lost in the minutiae of this problem. The impact on liberal democracy is profound if we allow it to continue. The answer must be just as profound a response as the nature of the threat. New laws, new regulations, better secretaries of state will not do it. All of those are changeable. I am proposing a Constitutional amendment as the only response that is solid and deep enough to answer the nature of the threat being posed. It should read as follows:
A well regulated election, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to an audited, voter-verified, certified paper record of the vote, shall not be infringed.
This is the only adequate response because it answers to the very dogma of our constitutional democracy. It guarantees accurate count as a right of the people, not just a good idea. Laws and regulations can and should be built on top of this foundation to guarantee these rights, but without the foundation, the laws and regulations will become hollow echo chambers in the ears of the people. That is, they will be rendered meaningless. The very source of our liberty depends on how we, the people, will stand up to guard it. What will you do?
Check out my forthcoming book Call to Liberty: Bridging the Divide Between Liberals and Conservatives. I regularly blog at http://www.calltoliberty.net. This post was cross-posted there.