Opinion
Election ethics
Looking for a print version?
Simply use your browser’s ‘Print’ command and a printer-friendly document will be generated automatically.
Also by Badger Herald Editorial Board:
- The Invisible Man Award: Wyndham Manning (May 7, 2009)
- The People's Choice Award: Jacqueline Hitchon et. al (May 7, 2009)
- The Lifetime Achievement Award: ASM (May 7, 2009)
- Honest representation (May 5, 2009)
- Junger for ASM Chair (May 5, 2009)
Sharing tools:
E-mail this article:
In a presidential race of great importance to many different people, acts that defy common decorum do regrettably emerge. With polls showing a slim margin separating the two major parties’ presidential candidates, a third party garnering even a small percentage of votes in the 2004 election holds the possibility of altering the race entirely. Ralph Nader, arguably the difference-maker in the 2000 election, is poised once again to factor into the election equation.
Citing Nader’s appeal to liberal voters, members of the University of Wisconsin chapter of College Republicans, under the guise of being Nader supporters, collected signatures to put Nader on the Wisconsin ballot. Matt Holsen, a CR member, attended several Students for Nader meetings and turned in stacks of signatures supporting Nader’s fight for ballot recognition. Personally responsible for nearly 600 marks, Holsen, along with at least 15 other GOP activists, collected more than 3,000 statements. CR chair Nicole Marklein collected 11 signatures while also openly supporting the re-election of George W. Bush. It should be noted that this collection of signatures were not submitted to the state election board by Nader’s camp.
Legality is certainly an issue in this blunder. Petitioners and circulators looking to obtain signatures must sign a statement of support for their candidate. If they are found to be in violation of this statement, they are at risk of being charged with a felony. Despite this issue, the greatest harm from this incident involves the ethical detriment to UW’s chapter of College Republicans. Poor principles on their part have placed shame on their organization. At a time when thousands of young people are getting politically involved for the first time, the actions of these unethical GOP supporters have done harm to all young people, no matter their affiliation, and their involvement in this ever-important political climate.
5 Comments | Leave a comment
Leave a comment
Herald Blogs
The Beat Goes On
Fans of Waits will not be disappointed
Muckrakers
Report: Barrett to make decision by the end of the week
Extra Points
Top Classified Ads (view all)
SPRING SUBLET: 1 bedroom in 2 bedroom at the Aberdeen. Rent negotiable. Email arkramer@wisc.edu
GENTLE WOMEN...THROUGH the lens of Douglas J. Nesbit, newly released book now available for holiday gifts! www.gentlewomen.us
A vote for Nader, Cobb, is a vote for Bush. Just like a vote for the libertarian presidential candidate is a vote for Kerry. But at the very least these third parties keep the dems and GOP in check in the long run.
"The actions of these unethical GOP supporters have done harm to all young people, no matter their affiliation, and their involvement in this ever-important political climate."
Collecting signatures is is legal and it is ethically defendable. It is no question that nader will make the difference in this election, otherwise the democrat party would not being trying to work against democracy by not allowing Nader on the ballot, because real idealistic democrats would vote for him, instead of voting for Kerry because he is the lesser of two evils.
What is ethically startling is that Democrats in Milwaukee County and throughout the state think that having twice the amount of ballots needed is important to Democracy. When having so many ballots poses a threat to Democracy because of the voter fraud that will undoubtedly arise due to the weak election laws, supported by Democrats, in this state.
Groups like "the new voters project" has already been seen as being fradulant in their registration of voters.
Groups like ACT has a great history of facilating an illegal enviroment and will do so in this election.
Relating to this discourse on Nader. The 527 group ACT, election fraud benefiting Dems, supporters of John Kerry incorporate the idea of the ends justify the means. By doing so promote illegal and undemocratic measures that go against the American Ideal of representive Democracy and that is available in this free Republic.
Getting Nader on the ballot helps Democracy by giving voters a choice.
The actions of GOP activists who got Nader on the ballot poses some questions, but does not compare to the actions of anti-Nader folks who work against giving voters a choice between a real liberal or a flip flopping waffling special interests serving candidate John Kerry possessing more postions then that of Paris Hilton.
To conclude, the GOP means legally, democratically, and ethically justify the ends. It serves a duel purpose. It allows liberal voters a choice alternative choice for President It also comprmises the voter fraud that will arise in places like Milwaukee and throughout the state.
The only ethical violations relating to Nader being on the ballot is those who commit whatever unethical and legally questionable actions to inhibit the democratic process out of soiled interest misguided and tryanical in nature by suppressing the right to vote for a candidate that fits with a voters views. Something Democrats are doing further proving that Dems are for freedom of speech as long as it is concurrent with their own.
A vote for Nader = a vote for Bush = a vote for Osama.
How's that for election ethics?
As a former UW student I remember reading Nicole Marklein's ridiculous right-wing columns. I find it very disturbing that she can lecture the UW community on sound politics and criticize the Democratic, while at the same time engage in underhanded, illegal tricks. Does she aspire to be the next Tom DeLay? Where is the limit to this slime? It's scary to think that people like her will be and currently are making our laws. Other that, I pray for an Kerry/Edwards victory on November 2nd. God Bless America!
I'm a real, idealistic democrat, but I happen to be 1) moderate and 2) reluctant to vote for self-indulgent kingmakers who don't mind being used by the GOP to get into the limelight.
Voters in WI have the right to have at least two (three?) ballots in case a mistake is made. I don't see how anyone can be against being prepared for record turnout. I remember in '98 when students in Madison had to stand in line for hours past closing because not enough ballots had been printed. The allegations of fraud for this point are weak at best. What's the connection?
As for the other allegations--I'll take your claims and raise you a private Republican registration firm that registered Democrats and then tore up their forms. Their own employees have turned them in. Both sides have their flaws on this, so leave the high and mighty self righteous sh-t at the door.
Why does the focus have to be on these few students who are in reality helping the democratic process by ensuring that more people are heard on election day. What I think is a travesty is that way the Democrats fought to keep Nader off of the ballot which put in jeopardy the votes of WI soldiers serving in the war (thanks to the delay it caused in the printing of absentee ballots).
Why don't we keep the focus on how politically active our campus is, especially compared to the 2000 election. Or at the least let's have some fair coverage including the unethical behavior of Kerry supporters who have been threatening and disrespectful. Or let's talk about the unconstitutional allocation of our Seg Fees. Nope, instead we'll just continue to buy into the liberal Madison system, where diversity is valued as long as you fit into the liberal image of what diversity means. To quote a Kerry supporter yesterday, "I don't get it, why would you come to Madison if you're not liberal." I've noticed that there are a lot things that these Madison liberals do not get.