This site seeks to educate the media, candidates, political parties, activists, advocacy groups and political appointees about the importance of neutrality in election administration. ElectionNeutralityNow believes election administrators should be deputized with an oath of neutrality.
If any member of Congress moonlighted as the receptionist at an insurance agency, being willfully uninformed could result in a criminal prosecution. Mandatory anti-money laundering training vests the responsibility for identifying perpetrators of this complex, international crime on arguably the lowest paid employee of an ordinary small business.
Willfully uniformed members of Congress should be held to a similar standard. Prosecute them. Congress is scamming voters via the Election Assistance Commission and the Federal Election Commission. These agencies govern our election systems and were established by Congress. Both agencies are dysfunctional, acting more like secret slush funds than federal agencies.
The Federal Election Commission, according to a recent New York Times editorial, will be scrutinized by an Obama appointed panel. The Times, in their usual biased fashion, blames Republican FEC appointees and limits their recommendations for change to getting better Republicans.
The six-member commission has become nigh unto dysfunctional as the three Republican appointees vote together to block any effort to penalize campaign abusers, producing 3-to-3 standoffs on enforcement...It's obvious that the Republican commissioners are out to torpedo the F.E.C. from within and render campaign laws defunct, regardless of an offender's party.
What about looking at the entire scope of election administration? Hello! Congress can hardly claim victory over the war on election incompetence, lack of adequate technology and partisan manipulation of the election process. The Help America Vote Act knee jerk reaction to the debacle in Florida in 2000 created more problems than it solved.
The HAVA inflicted open, festering sore, the Election Assistance Commission, was established to study and recommend changes to voting technology. Prevent another Florida. Yet here we go again with Minnesota. The same paper ballots. The same voter errors. Congress remains willfully uninformed about Minnesota. Of course, a Democrat may win.
None of the EAC Commissioners are actually technology experts. One Commissioner spent millions of HAVA funds on statewide voter registration system development that produced nothing. The EAC Commissioners are do-nothing crony appointees making $l40,000 a year. Not outraged? Commissioner Rosemary Rodriguez uses her post to advance personal and political gain. Her student poll worker training program was a violation of the pubic trust. Over a million dollars trained student poll workers, who as centers of influence arguably added critical numbers to the 60% of students who predictably voted Democratic. Schools receiving taxpayer dollars were in critical or Democratic majority states.
One of those New York Times reporters might condescend to ask Commissioner Rodriguez why she was eager to abandon her EAC appointment so quickly? It must have been a disappointment not to be appointed to the Colorado Secretary of State job.
Our willfully uniformed Congress has a backup. Militant partisan activists, touted as experts. Few have any experience as election administrators. Most of their advocacy is based on conjecture, paranoia and an irrational fear of technology. Their campaign to trash millions of dollars of newly purchased voting machines - which Congress used taxpayer dollars to pay for - in favor of paper ballot systems was successful. Most of their assertions were utter fabrications, repeated as fact by politicians like the Secretaries of State in Ohio and California.
Authoritative research proving voters make more errors on paper ballots, machine counting error rates may exceed direct response machine error rates, and inconsistent laws for counting paper ballots lead to elections that are not final for months after election day is discounted, ignored or buried.
Elections need finality in order to be credible.
The word of God does not echo through the New York Times. Why would anyone take their opinion as gospel? It is blasphemy to preach Republican appointees are responsible for all the dysfunctions of governance. Study the FEC and the EAC together, along with the legislation proposed and enacted. This is where th truth resides, and salvation will be found.
Obama has already stated he wants to look forward towards change, not backwards to blame. Hopefully, he will keep his word.
Denver hosted the Democratic Convention in 2008 on the l00th anniversary of the l908 Denver Democratic Convention. Barrack Obama's nomination was a spectacular affair. The smarmy side of Denver's election history was ignored. Barrack Obama's lack of history and his emergence from the smarmy side of Chicago politics were ignored. Then Rod Blagojevich rammed through the facade.
Who will ram Denver's political facade? Denver is destined to see a similar scandal. The only question is when. Here are ten reasons why.
1.Denver is a single party town, just like Chicago. Citizens were duped into abolishing the l04 year old election commission in an illegal 2007 election. Elected Republican election commissioners checked Democratic dominance, such as when I refused to allow the secretive Rosemary Rodriguez to serve as President and sole spokeswoman for the Commission during her boss's re-election.
2.A Clerk and Recorder runs Denver's elections with almost no oversight. City Council is hell-bent on awarding unearned proclamations extolling the performance of colleague O'Malley. Compared to what? Certainly not best practices. There are no requirements for the staff of the Clerk to have elections experience. Key positions could be filled with cronies and political supporters. The high salaries now paid for these top positions in the elections office will be too tempting for any politician to just give away (lol) to an elections professional. And the Clerk's will be sought be ambitious politicians looking for a stepping stone.
3.The demise of the Rocky Mountain News The Rocky never covered the day to day foibles of the Election Commission or the Clerk's office, but at least the possiblity existed. Stories of greed, influence and incompetence were ignored by both papers.
4.The Politically Correct Denver Post The Denver Post will continue to turn-cheek on the machinations of the Denver Democratic Party. Like 60% of the national media, the Post has a liberal bias and will not hold the Democrats accountable for anything.
5.True Believers, Insiders and current Mayor John Hickenlooper. Don't say bad things around John Hickenlooper. He doesn't like it. When I confronted him unexpectedly to express concern over the bloated voter lists in Denver county, he just threw it back at me calling me an "extremist." Without someone to criticize goings on at City Hall, things will go to hell and a handbasket before you can throw a shoe at me.
6.Park Hill is the next Hyde Park Park Hill is home to the Mayor, four City Council members, countless bureacrats running Denver city government. It is not known if a homegrown Bill Ayers lives there. I hope we don't find out. These are the type of Democrats who fancy themselves progressive and open minded. In reality, they are victims of group think and received opinion from the New York Times, The Nation and silly CNN personalities like the gape-mouthed-at-the-sight-of-Sara Palin Campbell Brown. Bias and Bull. I hope bugs fly in their mouths.
7.The Webb Machine Wellington Webb's daughter Stephanie O'Malley as appointed to the Clerk and Recorder vacancy months before the official election, guaranteeing her a win. For the first year, she behaved much like she lived in Chicago and didn't even show up for work on a nine to five basis. Then her first real election failed, the second November election in two years, and she began to apply herself. That doesn't change the fact the former Mayor's daughter was appointed to run elections. This is at the heart of how Denver will become the next Chicago.
8.Carol Boigan, Paul Lopez, City Council Barrack Obama eliminated all his opponents in his first campaign by challenging their petition signatures. Carol Boigon's invalid signatures were accepted by a vote of 2 to l when I was a Denver Election Commisisoner. She used her Council budget to pay for a newsletter endorsing the abolition of the Denver Election Commision. When I took her to court, she paid it back out of campaign funds. Paul Lopez did not meet residency requirements, was elected and allowed to serve anyway. Residency requirements are important. If Paul can get away with it, someone else will inevitably try. Think about it. Any organization can just launch puppet candidates. Never mind. I don't want to think about it.
9.Dennis Gallagher, Other Elected Officials Dennis Gallagher coordinated a last minute robocall campaign to abolish the Denver Election Commission, featuring the voice of his Auditor's office and city employee Dennis Berckefeldt. Berckefeldt was paid around $50,000 for the job, which generated an ethics complaint by City Hall Examiner Lisa Jones. The do-nothing ethics commission seemed to say it was wrong, but did nothing. Elected politicians in Denver run amok.
10.Mark Grueskin, Other Activist Attorneys Mark Grueskin defended Carol Boigon. He is a very good attorney, but he doesn't care about the law. Or rules. Or integrity. He just wants his clients, many of whom are Democrats, not to be punished for breaking the rules. It is useful to have attorneys like Mark Grueskin championing your causes.
Denver will be the next Chicago. It won't take long, certainly not l00 years. Probably not l0 years. Maybe in just l year.
Of course, the "public good" should always triumph, but what represents the public good is usually debatable. The idea that the making of these choices should occur in a vacuum -- delegated to an all-knowing political elite -- is profoundly undemocratic...
Robert Samuelson was in Denver recently, sponsored by the Colorado Council on Economic Education. Following his speech, as I was walking out the door, I noticed his last fans departed, leaving him momentarily alone. I walked over, picked up a copy of his book and engaged him in a brief conversation. Turns out, he had a financial advisor, who was an alumnus of the same firm that laid off both of us.
We're BFF now. Which explains why he hits the nail on the head of my favorite topic these days, the Democracy Alliance.
The Democracy Alliance is an all-knowing political elite, profoundly undemocratic, making choices for all of us in a vacuum.
We should debate every assertion made by the Democracy Alliance, CAP/CEO and Obama transition executive John Podesta, and anyone else who believes they know what is best for the rest of us.
The Secretary of State Project, directed by the Democracy Alliance, is buying up Secretary of State. For sale are local Democratic and progressive activists, ambitious operatives seeking to advance their careers and political agendas. The donkey trading has been successful in Ohio and Minnesota, where Democratic partisans run elections rife with missing ballots, questionable registrations and blatant attempts to disenfranchise Republican voters.
Partisans should never run elections, Secretaries of State or otherwise. Elections are sacrosanct, and should be held to a higher standard than ordinary functions of government. Unfortunately, instead of a higher standard for election officials, the Secretary of State Project proves these offices are seen as spoils of victory to which their soldiers are entitled.
The Colorado Democracy Alliance Colorado Model turned an entire state government - legislature, Governor and Senate - from red to blue in a few years. The Democracy Alliance has been influential enough to ensure all candidates for the SOS vacancy appointment have their seal of approval. We don't know if any of the three finalists for the job are beholden to the Democracy Alliance, but we should.
Standard operating procedure or just politics? Tell that to the FBI. I'll be Governor Blagojevich believes everthing he did was
standard operating procedure.
While the Democracy Alliance may not be breaking the law, they are violating the public trust. Like any trust document, the public trust is a contract. Certain transactions are forbidden. Like advancing personal or political gain at the citizen's expense. Like buying or selling appointments or jobs.
Corruption is the inevitable outcome of the influence trading Democracy Alliance promotes. True, DA cannot be charged with campaign finance violations. They do not actually accept money. They broker it to other organizations. The process is simple. They meet twice a year, anoint organizational favorites and prioritize brokered funding.
Acting as brokers, again the Democracy Alliance is above the law. And certainly the DA is above the reach of average Democrats, with a $l0,000 pay to play entry fee.
DA members actually believe in the need to counter the vast right wing majority's influence peddling. After last month's smack down, Republicans are certainly asking, "what influence?"
"The recent parallel typically cited is the Heritage Foundation's work to inform Ronald Reagan's transition to the White House in 1980. Heritage produced a thick tome with policy suggestions, and CAP has a similar volume due out next month. But the Heritage Foundation house historian, Lee Edwards, said its staff wasn't similarly absorbed into the powerful mechanics of transition, which will give structure and staff to the Obama administration.
"There was nothing like that intimate relationship between Heritage and the Reagan transition," said Edwards, a distinguished fellow at the conservative foundation who worked on the 1980 project."
Polico.com blogger Ben Smith wrote recently questioning the lack of transparency of a Democracy Alliance beneficiary Center for American Progress.. Obama's transition head John Podesta is CEO of CAP.
Perhaps the Democracy Alliance or their spawn CAP are altruistic visionaries advancing only the public trust. With all the buying and selling and trading up and down, who knows?
I can think like a Democrat. My youthful indiscretion was working for Jimmy Carter. If I slip into fun-envy remininscing, I just snap out of it. I know better.
The more I know, the more conservative I become. I've been blogging for several years. Now I know something for certain about the blogosphere. The liberals won. And men are masters of the universe. Just ask the New York Times. Liberals love to quote the New York Times.
"Women get dismissed in ways that men don't...At the seminar "How to Take Names and Be Taken Seriously as a Political Blogger," many women said that their male colleagues and major media groups tended to ignore them."
Take special note of the fact that the liberal blogosphere, mostly male, dismisses and ignores women. Liberal male bloggers are the new good ol' boys, or good ol' bad boys.
Of course, there is HuffingtonPost. I prefer Salon's Camille Paglia, even though I used to think she was a nut. She is uber liberal. Paglia's raw-rub on the frenzied vitriol hosing Sarah Palin immediately following the Republican Convention:
...Over the Labor Day weekend, with most of the big enchiladas of the major media on vacation, the vacuum was filled with a hallucinatory hurricane in the leftist blogosphere, which unleashed a grotesquely lurid series of allegations, fantasies, half-truths and outright lies about Palin. What a tacky low in American politics...When liberals come off as childish, raving loonies, the right wing gains...
It was those childish, raving loonies who helped me decide not to accept comments on my personal blog. My advocacy is election administration. 99.9% of comments were copied from other blogs. Most were utterly uninformed. Not true and very nasty.
"It is nonsensical and counterproductive for Democrats to imagine that ... values can be defeated by maliciously destroying their proponents."
Liberal bloggers' salvation depends on maliciously destroying opponents.
The truth is irrelevant for these devotees. Hysteria is everyone's higher power. The viral nature of the blogosphere incubates lies, which eventually proliferate of their own power. Lies become truth in the minds of their recipients, who cut, paste and repeat them furiously. You too can become the target of that "... gigantic, instantaneous coast-to-coast rage."
I particularly like Paglia's take on mental zones and the lack of independent thought.
...Like Los Angeles and San Francisco, Manhattan and Washington occupy their own mental zones -- nice to visit but not a place to stay if you value independent thought these days. Ambitious professionals in those cities, if they want to preserve their social networks, are very vulnerable to received opinion...
If I didn't know better, I'd believe in a conspiracy theory. All that received opinion and group think, directed by their higher power. I know better. It is not directed, just dominated by the younger, savvier progressives and Democrats. Winning the war of words is not the their imagined utopia, just an ordinary sort of purgatory.
The witch-trial hysteria of the past two incendiary weeks unfortunately reveals a disturbing trend in the Democratic Party, which has worsened over the past decade. Democrats are quick to attack the religiosity of Republicans, but Democratic ideology itself seems to have become a secular substitute religion. Since when did Democrats become so judgmental and intolerant? Conservatives are demonized, with the universe polarized into a Manichaean battle of us versus them, good versus evil. Democrats are clinging to pat group opinions as if they were inflexible moral absolutes.
Speaking of good and evil, does anyone believe the winner in Minnesota will truly be the winner? The voter errors, counting errors and plain old lost and found ballot errors are reported daily. Elections need finality to be credible. Elections should be a moral absolute. Counting and recounting lasting days or weeks destroys the integrity of elections and opens the door to fraud.
Paper ballots are not more reliable or accurate than voting machines. We do need better machine technology. The voting integrity activists, mostly progressives and Democrats, ransaked the courts and forced paper ballots on election officials, many of who just spent millions on voting machines. You won't read about the University of Maryland study illustrating the vulnerability of paper ballots.
...Policy makers considering a switch to paper ballot/optical scan voting systems should consider special security problems connected with paper. "The history of the paper ballot in the United States is checkered with ballot theft and ballot box stuffing," the report says. Tampering with touch screen systems requires greater technical skill.
Today it is paper ballots and elections. What's next?
I shouldn't, but I do. If ACORN registered you to vote, the taxpayers financed your registration, and possibly your vote. Before you Soros-funded bloggers go wild, how do we know who funded what? We don't.
The General Accounting Office should audit all taxpayer funded voter registration and turnout projects. ACORN alone has more than l00 subsidiaries. The Wall Street Journal estimated $l6 million in funding for ACORN. No one knows exactly how many orgainizations are funded or for how much.
While we figure out how much we are spending, shouldn't we decided who is responsible for registering voters? I'm not talking about the thousands of local jurisdictions who accept the registrations and send them to State offices. Since l995, any citizen can write their pertinent infomation on a napkin and send it in. That's called Motor Voter and that's what got the former Secretary of State of Ohio in hot water in 2004. He wanted a uniform paper weight and form for easier processing. He was accused of trying to disenfrachise poor people.
80% of voters manage to register and re-register if they move. We are talking about the 20% who activists claim are challenged and disenfrachised by current registration requirements. Even liberal Supreme Court Justices have repeatedly confirmed that registration requirements are not a burden and are necessary to ensure the integrity of elections.
Blame that on the media for not reporting both sides of the voter registration issue. It is more exciting to imply that tens of thousands of citizens are denied their right to vote. None of those tens of thousands actually materialized in the Novemember election. You didn't see a retraction on the predictions either.
How much money should taxpayers spend on the 20% of eligible voters who cannot manage to register and re-register when they move? How many times during a lifetime should the government need to inform citizens that they need to register and re-register when they move? Or become imprisoned then released? Fortunately, more citizens move than go to prison.
Actually, I would favor a federal law mandating prison officials re-register felons upon completion of their terms. Don't let them walk out the door without registering to vote. If you sign up for food stamps or receive any federal entitlements once you leave prison, you are asked if you are registered to vote. When you get your driver's liscense, you are invited to register to vote.
Registering to vote is easy, and the fact that 80% of eleigible voters are registered is proof.
After we have decided how much we are spending on registering 20% of eligible voters, we can think about what a waste it is. Substantial research indicates that efforts to make voting easier do not improve voter turnout. In fact, even in Ohio overall turnout was not much higher in 2008.
In case you are wondering, I believe everyone who is eligible should register and vote. I just do not believe that I should have to pay for you. I believe you are responsible for registering, re-registering if you move, and turning yourself out to vote.
The real question is, should we spend taxpayer dollars on something we know doesn't work?
Here they go again. Tova Wang's research has been discredited by fellow Democrat and Election Assistance Commissioner Gracia Hillman. Common Cause is lost in a maze of partisan advocacy.
According to Commissioner Hillman, the consultants' conclusions could not be easily corroborated by supporting data....In her opinion, data was imited in some areas and did not necessarily support the conclusions well.
Apparently it didn't take, since once again Ms. Wang has written a speculative report on imaginary problems on November 4th.
...across the country voters arrived at the polls to find they were not on the registration list.
No they did not. In fact, in spite of predictions by the New York Times that tens of thousands of voters would be disenfrachised by routine voter list maintenance, there were few reports. Ms. Wang does not document this statement. She perpetuates the myth promoted by voting rights activists that routine voter list purging disenfrachises large numbers of eligible voters.
Federal law should require that all precincts have stocked and utilize emergency paper ballots whenever anyvoting machine in a polling site goes down
Like many activists, who have no practical experience administrating elections, Ms. Wang forgets that duplicating is usually not considered a best practice. Paper ballots are a step backwards, wasteful and inefficient. An irony is that most paper balltot advocates also consider themselves green.
How green is wasting millions of paper ballots in every election?
This year we once again saw the insidious types of deceptive practices that are designed to suppress voting - misinformation campaigns meant to mislead and confuse voters about whether they can vote and how, when and where to vote.
Not! Voter suppression exists in the imagination of Ms. Wang and her merry band of voting rights' activists. Vote caging, the imaginary bogeyman, is a strategy of using insufficient addressee cards returned by the post office to challenge voter eligibilty enmasse. When discussing vote caging, Ms. Wang fails to note most strategies were never executed. Vote caging mostly exists in the imagination of the perpetrators and voting rights activists.
Ms. Wang's activism is noble. Her kind of reporting is healthy. What is not healthy is the utter lack of transparency and accountability. When Common Cause claims to be nonpartisan, and claims to hold power acccountable, they are lying. Exaggerating claims of disenfrachised voters and deceptive practices, while dismissing ACORN's fraudulent activities, tells one side of the story.
I'm holding Common Cause accountable. They are the power now. Tell the other side of the story.
It depends whether you are Republican or Democrat. Jennifer Brunner and Mark Ritchie were elected by the Secretary of State Project, one of numerous Soros-funded web based political activist groups taking over local, state and federal elections.
CAP, which has 180 staffers and a $27 million budget, devotes as much as half of its resources to promoting its ideas through blogs, events, publications and media outreach.
Jennifer Brunner and Mark Ritchie have made as many political decisions as Secretaries of State as Kenneth Blackwell and Katherine Harris. The difference is Brunner and Ritchie are Democrats. The media bias towards Democrats is well documented. Political decisions by these Democratic Secretaries of State have not been reported at all.
The issue is those political decisions are never reported accurately as being political. In fact, Brunner was honored by The Kennedy Center as a Profiles in Courage award winner recently.
It really doesn't take courage make political decisions.
Governor Ritter will soon appoint a new Secretary of State. He has the authority to appoint a Democrat. It would be good for the selection committee to question applicants on their relationship with the Secretary of State project.
Does he have the integrity to appoint a public servant?
Election administrators should be neutral, not puppets of George Soros, the Democratic party or as one or two candidates are, simply out to game the system for personal gain.
I like Governor Ritter, even though he once said I am like a spider who eats her young. We disagreed over Hillary-care in l993 as Leadership Denver participants.
But, PL....EASE!
Gov. Bill Ritter will not consider a candidate's party affiliation when determining whom to appoint as the next secretary of state, Ritter's spokesman said.
Both rumoured candidates Rosemary Rodriguez and Ken Gordon could only be described as uber partisan activists. Which is not necessarily a criticism if you are partisan. I'm criticizing the pretense.
Rosemary Rodriguez faked a photo in 2002 for the Rocky Mountain News showing chain locked doors to a rigged voting site. The claim was that voters were being denied their right to vote since they could not register and vote on the same day.
Nevermind that 80% of eligible Colorado citizens were already registered. Nevermind credible studies by the London School of Economics and American Univerity illustrating easy voting measures like same day voter registration do not increase turnout.
Voters wisely defeated the measure, which would have thrown elections in our state into chaos.
Same day voter registration is partisan. It benefits the Democrats. It costs a lot. Enormous amount of taxpayer dollars spent to accomodate people who may be just to lazy to follow the simple rules of advance registration. 80% do follow. 20% can't seem to get it together.
Laziness isn't the only problem. With 60% of the media only reporting stories favorable to the Democrats, don't expect to read or hear about the problems in Minnesota. The prior Secretary of State said she was certain numbers of ineligible voters often voted.
The technology for secure same day voter registration does not exist today. In fact, Ms. Rodriguez has been paid $l40,000 annually for several years to not get the technology job done at the Federal level. Her excuse is the EAC could not do what the private sector does in banking and airlines, create a secure request and verification system, because "money" is involved in the private sector.
Money must be different from taxpayer dollars.
Ms. Rodriguez doesn't believe in purging dead people from voter lists, since one may resurrect and be denied the right to vote. She doesn't believe in removing felons, since one may forget to re-register after they serve their time. No consideration for whether they will vote from prison. She doesn't believe in removing duplicates, since she apparently believes in body doubles who may want to vote also. Residents who move out of state or county to county? No problem, vote as if you still lived in your old place. Even if someone else lives there.
Ditto for Ken Gordon.
The problem with Governor Ritter's pretense is dishonesty. Saying partisan political activists are nonpartisan is dishonest. Be honest about it, Bill! You are an Emperor Who Has No Clothes.
Put your clothes on Bill. It doesn't matter if you appoint a Democrat. You have permission by law. Just don't appoint another Emperor.
We need an authentic public servant in the job. Not a partisan political activist.
It is believed that deadlines for registration, stringent ID requirements and other restrictions protect Americans from crimes like "voter identity fraud," in which the malefactor impersonates a real voter, risking a prison sentence in order to add a single vote to the tally. Fortunately, everyone agrees that this impractical crime does not exist.
A good example of group-think and received opinion. An inconvenient truth - everyone doesn't agree and the crime does exist.
The agrument that ineligible voters will not risk a prison sentence is a chimera. Prosecution for voter fraud is practically nonexistent. Those who attempt it are coached and armed with the knowledge the risks of never being caught or punished are in their favor.
...I have lived and worked in Chaffee County, seasonally, for two years. I have paid rent and paid taxes. It seemed reasonable to assume that I would have the right to vote.
This frames the argument for advocates of the right of noncitizens to vote. Certainly they live and work and pay certain taxes. So do felons.
Having the right to vote does not mean one can disregard the reasonable requirements of proving eligibility. Even the liberal Justice Bryer has stated repeatedly that registering and providing ID are not burdens on citizens.
The explicit right to vote is not included in the Constitution. Until we put it there, we will risk having presidents chosen by the Supreme Court, partisan officials creating rules to sway the election in their favor, and voters disfranchised.
What this citizen fails to point out is same day registration is a partisan issue. Same day registration and relaxed registration laws favor
Democrats. Democrats are as guilty of Republicans - the veiled reference to the Supreme Court - of trying to create rules to sway elections in their favor.
The good news is substantial research, virtually unreported, by the London School of Economics and American University does proove that making voting easier with same day registration, early voting and and mail ballot voting does not improve voter participation.
Individual motivation is the determining factor in voter participation. The good thing is this citizen was motivated.
Perhaps he could be convinced that complying with the basic rules of registration and residency enfrachise as many voters who theoretically are disenfrahised by the same rules.
Congratulations, President-elect Obama! After the celebrating comes the cleanup. I hope you will clean up our election systems, not corrupt our confidence further.
You have a lot of confidence. Spread that wealth around. Use your confidence capital to create new strength, vigor and transparency in our election systems...
Face the State Interview
