Election Reform

Despite the Florida voting debacle, and similar problems encountered in November in other states, it appeared earlier this year that Congress had zero interest in reforming the cumbersome and often unreliable process by which Americans cast their ballots in national elections. But now the optimists seem to be in ascendance. The political climate has shifted - due in part to the seizure of Senate power by the Democrats - and this has boosted prospects for an election-reform bill, one with teeth that could make it easier for states to ensure that each qualified citizen has an equal chance to vote and have the vote counted.

Mayor Rendell will name an election-reform committee tomorrow, but its agenda will be significantly more limited than he indicated a month ago. The committee's mandate is expected to steer clear of any political decisions - such as whether the city commissioners should be elected or appointed, and whether political patronage should be barred from the city elections agency. And the committee's timetable for giving the mayor its recommendations will be considerably longer than Rendell had indicated.

DID YOU VOTE YESTERDAY? Did you want to? There's no reason that any citizen should answer "No" to the first question and "Yes" to the second. A democratic society should make voting as easy and accessible as possible. The last time we checked, Pennsylvania was still a democratic society. And yet the state seems less than fully invested in making the levers of democracy available to its citizens. Some people don't vote because they don't care, or they think voting makes no difference, or they don't like any of their options.

Couple years back, they stole an election in Philadelphia. Fraudulent absentee ballots, if you recall. Voters were coached and cajoled into marking their votes for one Bill Stinson, a Democratic state Senate hopeful. Others' ballots were forged, outright. So, it's to be expected if folks do a double-take now that an election- reform task force appointed by Mayor Rendell is proposing to loosen absentee balloting rules. Almost anybody would be able to vote by mail. But this is an election reform that calls for a second look: It turns out that what appears, at first, to go against common sense proves to be a policy that's becoming widely accepted elsewhere.

A long-promised debate on legislative proposals to reform the financing of federal election campaigns will get under way today in the Senate. But even some reform advocates are doubtful much progress can be made. For starters, Republicans and Democrats differ vehemently over what constitutes reform. Many officeholders do not want to tamper with a financing system that they have mastered and that assures their reelection. And the public appears to have given up on pressing Congress to produce reforms, despite being convinced that the current system is corrupt.

A group of community leaders yesterday called for election reform - including changing laws to allow absentee voting as a matter of convenience - as a remedy to the "cynicism and despair" created by last month's state Senate election in Philadelphia. Nineteen leaders, brought together by the Fellowship Commission and representing a wide spectrum of neighborhood, civil rights and ethnic groups, also called for a halt of the state attorney general's investigation into absentee ballot fraud in the Second Senate District.

Despite U.S. District Judge Clarence C. Newcomer's blistering opinion about the way the City Commission conducts elections, the reforms he has ordered may have little impact outside the area of absentee voting. In addition to his ruling Friday voiding the election of Democratic state Sen. William Stinson and ordering Republican Bruce Marks to be seated from the 2nd Senatorial District, Newcomer decreed numerous changes in the handling of absentee ballots. But absentee ballots rarely make a difference.

In a sudden and dramatic about-face, House Republican leaders agreed yesterday to resurrect campaign-finance reform next month for debate and a vote. House Speaker Newt Gingrich and his leadership team changed course after they became convinced they would lose control of the issue under mounting pressure from Democrats and a small but militant group of reform-minded Republicans who have been demanding a vote. Republican reformers hailed their leaders' concession "as a great day for democracy," as Rep. Christopher Shays (R., Conn.

I WOULD LIKE THE Daily News to devote more coverage to these topics and ideas: 1. Lowering taxes. 2. The genocide occurring in the Darfur region of Sudan. 3. Outlawing abortion. 4. Reducing spending by the federal government. 5. Bringing all the troops in Iraq home. 6. Election reform in every state. 7. The amount of funding for the Veterans Administration, Department of Education and the military. 8. Balancing the federal budget. 9. Stopping the flow of illegal immigrants into the United States.

In a breakthrough for election reform, key House members from both parties agreed yesterday on a comprehensive package that would set minimum standards for all elections and authorize $2.6 billion to help states and localities make changes. The bipartisan deal gives a real boost to prospects for passage of comprehensive election-reform legislation after many months when the effort appeared stalled in Congress. "This is the bill that has a pretty good chance of making it through this year," said Doug Chapin, director of the Election Reform Information Project, which monitors legislation on the subject.

DID YOU VOTE YESTERDAY? Did you want to? There's no reason that any citizen should answer "No" to the first question and "Yes" to the second. A democratic society should make voting as easy and accessible as possible. The last time we checked, Pennsylvania was still a democratic society. And yet the state seems less than fully invested in making the levers of democracy available to its citizens. Some people don't vote because they don't care, or they think voting makes no difference, or they don't like any of their options.

WE NEED election reform, and we need it fast! Not tomorrow, not the next day, but right now. We need laws that have teeth. We want to know what you are going to do for us, not what the other guy did or didn't do. Talk about yourself, and your plans, not what your opponent does (or what you'd have us believe he or she did). Let him or her tell us what their plans are, not what you think they are. Tell us what your agenda is, and don't tell us what your opponent is going to do or not do. Anyone who talks trash about his or her opponent should be immediately banned from further campaigning.

AS CONCERNED citizens, we believe that the recent developments in this primary election call for a thorough and comprehensive review. Some of the very initiatives and institutions established to reform the election process and ensure an open and fair election have in effect altered and manipulated the process, resulting in an election that continues to disappoint concerned citizens and voters. Philadelphians passed campaign-finance laws that targeted pay-to-play. The goal was well-intentioned - but, in actuality, these laws have not adequately addressed all situations.

Mayoral candidate Tom Knox yesterday unveiled his "reform ticket" in partnership with Councilwoman Jannie Blackwell - the only City Council member to vote against ethics reform. Knox - a businessman who has fashioned himself as an anti-corruption, anti-nepotism outsider - saw nothing incongruous in joining forces with Blackwell, an insider who inherited her political power from her spouse and stood alone in City Council two years ago to oppose campaign-finance limits. "We want to reform city government, and she's the best one to do it," said Knox, who said he would support a Blackwell bid to become president of City Council.

I WOULD LIKE THE Daily News to devote more coverage to these topics and ideas: 1. Lowering taxes. 2. The genocide occurring in the Darfur region of Sudan. 3. Outlawing abortion. 4. Reducing spending by the federal government. 5. Bringing all the troops in Iraq home. 6. Election reform in every state. 7. The amount of funding for the Veterans Administration, Department of Education and the military. 8. Balancing the federal budget. 9. Stopping the flow of illegal immigrants into the United States.

YOUR APRIL 27 article on City Council's consideration of public financing of campaigns stated that the concept was received with disdain by the Council members present. It was not disdain, but skepticism. The skepticism stems from the understanding that there is no one approach to election reform that will "level the playing field," including campaign-contribution limits. The political system in Philadelphia is in need of more comprehensive reform. I've lost to that system, beat it and used it to get re-elected - so I clearly know it well.

Twisted language Having just returned from my fourth anti-Iraq-War march, I was horrified to read the Sept. 26 article about a pro-war rally headlined, "Now, a rally to support the troops. " What do you think all 100,000 to 400,000 of us were doing in Washington (and other U.S. cities) last weekend? If trying to stop an illegal war fought on the basis of doctored intelligence that has killed many innocent civilians and troops isn't supporting the troops but favoring a war that sends our people and theirs to their unnecessary deaths is supporting the troops, then I suppose we're in Alice's Wonderland again.

There's no right to vote enshrined in the Constitution, but it's certainly enshrined in the national psyche. We moan when voter turnout declines, and exult when other nations - most recently Iraq - use the ballot box to shape their political destinies. Yet as often as Americans sing the praises of democracy, our actions say otherwise. We're very good at extending the franchise and then taking it away, or making it more difficult or less attractive. Though barriers of race, gender, education and age are gone, this is not a fully enfranchised nation.

Please - let it not be a close contest. Please - let it not be a close contest. It was the one wish that unified citizens on both sides of the divisive presidential campaign: Whoever was going to win, let it be decisive, so votes, rather than courts, would choose the president. Let there not be "another Florida" in Ohio. Four years ago, the 2000 presidential election spawned an electoral-vote result that didn't match the popular vote, as well as revelations of polling-place mismanagement and confusing ballots, lawsuits, and a Supreme Court decision to end any challenges.

New Jersey poll workers kept busy all day Tuesday, tending to throngs of eager voters. That won't likely be the case in February, April, May and June. Workers usually can catch a nap between voters at fire district, school, municipal and primary elections. With good-government intentions, the state spread its elections throughout the year so voters could focus on issues and candidates separately, but it's gotten out of hand. Voters in any given town are invited to the polls as many as seven times in up to three different locations during the course of a year.