Third World Monitors US Elections

The once model for worldwide democracy is about to have its national elections come under the scrutiny of outside observers. Even observers from the Third World, who would long have been considered the least likely to hold free-choice elections themselves. Oh how the mighty have fallen. A team of experts from 15 countries has descended on the United States to observe the upcoming presidential election. These 20 experts, from five continents, did not come to learn how elections ought to be managed. They came to monitor, to audit, to comment on irregularities. No problem that they find is likely to derail the election or cause any change in the count; after all, no one is going to tell America what to do. But their comments, if they do find problems, will go a long way toward damaging America’s already tarnished image. There are still those who believe the U.S. is the ‘gold standard’ for democracy, despite all the evidence to the contrary, and findings that free elections in the U.S. are, well, not so free, could greatly harm American prestige. The observers come from such wide-ranging nations as Argentina, Zambia, England, Australia, Chile, Nicaragua, Canada, Ghana, Mexico, India, Ireland, Philippines, Wales, Thailand, South Africa. It must be noted that several of those countries have themselves been in the position of having American overseers ensure the fairness of their elections and it must seem ironic to have the shoe on the other foot. Let us not forget the monitored 1984 elections in Nicaragua which were considered to be the most fair elections ever held in that country — fair they might have been, satisfactory they were not and American promptly broke its own laws to fund the overthrow of the elected government. The observer group has been brought to the U.S. by San Francisco-based Global Exchange, which describes itself as “an international human rights organization dedicated to promoting environmental, political and social justice.” The observers are being sent to five target states: Ohio, Arizona, Missouri, Georgia and, of course, Florida. They have chosen Georgia because it is one of only two states where voting will be conducted entirely by touch-screen voting machines. Arizona has publicly financed elections which makes it different from other states and Ohio is considered to be a hotly contested state. Missouri attracted the observers’ attention because of widespread reports of black vote suppression during the 2000 election. The interest in Florida should be self-evident. This is not the only international team to observe the elections because the U.S. State Department has actually invited observers itself. The United States invited a delegation from a 55-nation body known as the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE). That organization encourages, but does not require, its members to observe each others’ elections and the State Department formally invited them to send an observer delegation. The delegation will not have the authority to assess the fairness of the vote — it is limited to reporting on any observed problems without commenting on fairness. Global Exchange’s observers, on the other hand, are expected to identify problems and assess the election on the basis of its transparency, responsiveness and fairness. Elected American officials are not enamoured with this whole process. There is nothing they can do to prevent Global Exchange’s group from reporting what the have observed but they have tried to take action against the OSCE. Republican members of the House of Representatives have attached an amendment to the 2005 foreign-aid bill to ban any of that money from being used to finance outside monitoring of U.S. elections. On the floor of the House, Rep. Stephen Buyer stated: “For over 200 years, this nation has conducted elections fairly and impartially, ensuring that each person’s vote will count. Imagine going to your polling place on the morning of November 2 and seeing blue-helmeted foreigners inside your local library, school or fire station.” More irony. Some members of the Global Exchange team have stressed that the U.S. government should not feel threatened or offended by their presence. They note there is always room to improve and to share experiences and they say that it is only fair to let others judge you when you presume to judge others. However, Rep. Buyer probably more closely grasps the feeling of many Americans. The United States sees itself as the judge, never the judged; as the best, never to be questioned; as the people who run the world, not people who need to answer to the world. If Global Exchange discovers significant irregularities and unfairness in the electoral process, the spin-masters will go into overdrive to bury the story faster than most politicians can redefine the truth.