$250,000 Reward For Election Fraud Whistleblowers

The Velvet Revolution has an interesting idea:

http://www.velvetrevolution.us/...

Offer a $250,000 reward for tips on election fraud that lead to a conviction. One problem: I doubt they have the cash for it right now.

but... Hillary Clinton is sitting on a big pile that she doesn't need...

How about this for an idea: Hillary Clinton and Eliot Spitzer pony up a cool $1 million as a reward for election fraud whistleblowers.

The mere presence of such a reward will make fraudsters think twice. Especially any organized fraud that requires telling multiple people about your plans. Can they be trusted to not stab you in the back for a cool $1 million?

Sure, that money might be better spent on tight election races... but the last minute get-out-the-vote is all for nothing if they rig it again.

What do you think?

•  Your poll lacks the proper response

  It's a great idea to offer a monetary reward, though I do question whether it needs to be nearly that large.  $1,000 would get most people to blow the whistle, given that it's not like most election fraud perpetrators are the thumbbreaking kind.  At least as far as I know.

  The appropriate course of action is to stiffen penalties.  I truly believe and have said frequently that vote tampering, vote negation, election fraud, election theft, etc. should be legally on a plane with treason.

  by The Termite on Thu Oct 19, 2006 at 02:38:21 PM PDT

  •  I agree but $1k seems a little low

    $5K - $10K seems better to me because of the stakes involved.

    by Kascade Kat on Thu Oct 19, 2006 at 02:41:36 PM PDT

    •  I'd buy that for a dollar.

      by The Termite on Thu Oct 19, 2006 at 02:49:39 PM PDT

      •  heh

        nice reference

        by occams hatchet on Thu Oct 19, 2006 at 03:14:27 PM PDT

    •  10K isn't enough

      An election judge, or CEO, or any white collar criminal will need a MUCH bigger reward.

      $250k should be the minimum. $1 million is better.

      by bex on Thu Oct 19, 2006 at 02:50:08 PM PDT

•  I don't think the $250K is legit.

  And I wouldn't necessarily want to have to pay someone a million dollars to save their own country.

  by Scout Finch on Thu Oct 19, 2006 at 02:40:10 PM PDT

  •  Don't forget...

    Many whistleblowers have to choose between doing what's right, and losing their job.

    A $1000 reward is enough for a snitch, but not enough for a political aid or computer technician who will get blacklisted.

    Plus, its needs to be big enough to scare potential fraudsters back into their holes.

    Plus, the media coverage would be better with a big reward. Its a great chance for the democrats to say "we have confidence that this election will be fair. And to prove it, here's a million bucks."

    Anybody who guffaws, is clearly hopefuly of fraud.

    by bex on Thu Oct 19, 2006 at 02:46:11 PM PDT

    •  Those are all valid reasons.

      But if computer tech or political aide comes forward who has been knowingly manipulating our last two elections, I don't exactly want to shake their hand and give a check for a million dollars.

      I understand what you are saying and think all of your points are totally valid, but I guess part of me just wants to see a son-of-a-bitch like that prosecuted, not celebrated.

      by Scout Finch on Thu Oct 19, 2006 at 02:58:09 PM PDT

      •  I totally understand

        Yeah, I wouldn't feel good about giving a slimeball a million bucks either...

        But there is a good chance that the whistleblower might not be a slimeball. Just a guy, afraid of losing his job, who looked the other way once or twice.

        Sometimes people need a little nudge to do the right thing.

        by bex on Thu Oct 19, 2006 at 03:04:16 PM PDT

  •  But I'd Rather Save a Penny Than My Country

    Make it $10 fricking million dollars for doG's sake.

    by Gooserock on Thu Oct 19, 2006 at 03:09:50 PM PDT

•  This is a great idea for 2 reasons

  1. The money needs to be large, $1K won't do the job.  Remember that the likely thieves will be Executives of voting machine companies and/or campaign consultants.  It will take a $Mill to turn these guys.

  2. We probably won't have to actually pay the reward.  All we need to do is scare the fraudsters into tripping themselves up.  If solid evidence does come in, we'll have to pay, but then it will be worth it.

  by ManhattanMan on Thu Oct 19, 2006 at 02:45:23 PM PDT

•  worst diary title ever.

  yeah nothing like bait and switch.

  So not only is there NOT any reward for anything, there isn't even a plan for one, just a fantasy cream about Hillary and Spitzer putting up money.

  by electiledisfunction on Thu Oct 19, 2006 at 02:53:54 PM PDT

  •  depends on if velvet revolution is legit

    RFTA:

    http://www.velvetrevolution.us/...

    Scout Finch says they probably aren't legit.

    I say, whatever, its still a good idea.

    by bex on Thu Oct 19, 2006 at 02:57:32 PM PDT

•  Should be $1,000,000 or Vote-By-Mail

  But the problem is, there was so much fraud in 2004 that a reward paid to every tipster would bankrupt the nation.  (Oops - already BK under Bu$h)

  But I love this idea!

  $1M is enough to even encourage folks to get close enough to the R's machine to infiltrate and dig in deep.  Really do the investigative work needed to bring this stuff to light, not withstanding that's what SoS's and election boards are supposed to do...

  Or each state could offer a four-year full scholarship to each of the whistleblower's kids...

  But the truth is, as Kos suggested today, Vote-By-Mail is the best answer.

  by Gasonfires on Thu Oct 19, 2006 at 03:04:47 PM PDT