.KEYWORD ppeditorial1200
.FLYINGHEAD FROM THE EDITOR-IN-CHIEF
.TITLE The beauty and the beast
.DEPT
.SUMMARY There is a battle taking place in the United States over who will win the presidency. Just under the surface of this conflict, another battle is raging over the perception of technology, as lawyers, pundits, and politicians argue about whether machines are really more accurate than humans at counting votes. In this month’s editorial, Editor-in-Chief David Gewirtz weighs in on both of these issues as he considers the beast of this nation’s conflicting ideologies versus the beauty of America’s particular brand of democracy.
.AUTHOR David Gewirtz
We publish this issue of PalmPower Magazine on the first day of December in the year 2000. On this very same day, the United States Supreme Court will hear oral arguments from attorneys representing the two men who would be king.
A man named Bush, son of George, grandson of Prescott, will somehow make the case that the hand counting of ballots is wrong, inaccurate, and even un-American. Machines, argues former Secretary of State James Baker, are far more accurate and far less biased.
At the very same time, Albert Gore (Junior), son of the former Senator, has sent his representatives to do battle in courts throughout the 27th state, the state of Florida. For he, also the son of an American leader, wishes to be President and lead this great land. Gore, too, is represented (and presumably advised) by a former Secretary of State, Warren Christopher.
How is it possible that these two men, these two leaders, both of political dynasties, both advised by America’s then-foremost diplomats, are at such odds?
What is the beast that drives this signature event in American history? How can these men, who are arguably so similar, of similar ages, breeding, education, experience, and even socio-economic strata, be in a deadlock of such historic magnitude?
I believe the beast is in the similarity, not in the differences. Were these men radically different, one would have won. Richard Nixon and John F. Kennedy were radically different. Kennedy took the crown. Ronald Wilson Reagan was radically different from James Earl Carter, Jr. And "Bubba" Bill Clinton, man-oh-man, was he a different cat from that old George Herbert Walker Bush, a walking advertisement for East Coast establishment.
These differences, magnified by the times, made it easy for us to choose our standard bearer. But neither Al nor young George has any polarizing effect, positive or negative. And so, rather than choosing a man, America is trying to choose an ideology. And in this split over ideology, over left and right, liberal and conservative, pro-choice and pro-life, social programs and fiscal conservatism, religious tolerance and religious righteousness, our way and their way, we have our battleground. A battleground so close that the winner of 537 pieces of card stock and perhaps another few thousand square paper droppings…actual bits…will determine the course of a government.
Our ideology is our beast. And for our ideology, our designated gladiators are willing to sacrifice their honor, their credibility, and even their sense of reason and fair-play.
James Addison Baker III was the American Secretary of State from 1989 through 1992. Serving as White House chief of staff from 1981 to 1985, Baker was also a member of the National Security Council and a senior foreign policy adviser. In 1991, he organized the first comprehensive Middle East peace conference. This is a man capable of moving the Middle East, perhaps the most contested battleground in world history, closer to sanity. And yet, he’s also capable of making statements like, "At some point we must stop the counts of the votes so that the votes can count."
Ah, but the Democrats are also guilty of feeding the beast. On November 8, 2000, between 1:30AM and 1:45AM CST, Al Gore conceded the election to George W. Bush. Then, less than an hour later, between 2:30AM and 2:45AM CST, Gore retracted his concession. Think on this. If your arch-opponent just surrendered, giving you the presidency, and then you had it taken away from you minutes later, wouldn’t you react like a cornered junkyard dog? History may judge Gore kindly, saying that he was wise to retract his concession because all the facts hadn’t come in. But, then again, the action does not shed positive light on his behavior as a president. "Oops, I just pushed that red button, but I didn’t mean it," is not something you ever want to hear a president say.
And so, otherwise sane and credible people are doing stupid things. A well-regarded Florida state politician, one Katherine Harris, is the chairman of George W’s Florida campaign,. Can’t she see it’s really bad PR to be the one making the decision to certify a disputed and tainted vote? Men who should know better are attempting to tell us that counting votes by machine is more American than counting them by hand. Hello? I’m just guessing here, but I’d think the founding fathers didn’t really plan on us using punch card sorters and tabulators to determine our leadership.
And then, there’s the fight over the "chad," the literal bits that are the holes of the punch cards. Is or is not a "dimpled" or "pregnant" chad a valid vote? There’s nothing, not a thing, in our Constitution that says you have to be able to operate a punch card machine properly to earn your right to vote.
On the other hand, (and forgive me, for I am most certainly not a constitutional scholar), the 26th Amendment, which was ratified on July 1, 1971, says the following:
.QUOTE The right of citizens of the United States, who are 18 years of age or older, to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of age.
It would seem to me, therefore, that there are two elements at work here. First, common sense would have it that any indentation, mark, or other indication of intent would count as a vote. So, whether a chad has been completely removed on the one hand, or a mere pinprick mark can be detected on the other, clearly there was intent, and clearly there was a vote.
Now, the second element at work seems to be the 26th Amendment itself. To deny any form of mark, if it’s identifiable and verifiable, seems to be an abridgment of the right to vote. And since the areas of Florida in question are heavily populated by senior citizens, it seems even more probable that the 26th Amendment is active here.
And that takes us on to the various deadlines, county counting boards, and the remainder of the idiocy the beast has been spreading around. If the constitution, arguably the final word in the land, tells us in various amendments, including both the 19th (women’s right to vote) and the aforementioned 26th, that voting rights shall not be denied or abridged, then they shall not be denied or abridged.
In reading this, you might think I’m siding with Al Gore. Sadly, I’m not. While I’d like to think that our current Vice President is fighting for the right of each and every vote to count, it’s clear he’s not. It’s just that his team thinks if the votes are recounted completely in that predominantly Democratic region, he’ll win. So, in this instance, he’s on the side of right, but not for the right reasons.
And interestingly, our battle over ideology has become a battle over right and wrong. Unlike November 6, 2000 and all the days before, we’re no longer really concerned over which of these two indistinguishable politicians will score government housing at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. Instead, we’re concerned over just exactly what the right to vote really means.
And, herein, lies the beauty.
America, and Americans as a people, often do the right things for the wrong reasons. We’re a pretty self-centered lot. We were bred to be so. Yet our system is set up well enough (at least, it seems so, so far) that everything tends to self-correct. That’s the system of checks and balances (and paranoia) that our founding fathers, and their elected descendants, inculcated into our political system.
Al wants to be president. He thinks recounting votes will work for him. Wrong reason. But we’re now in a serious debate about votes, counting methods, and machinery, and all of us are much more aware of our vote and whether it counts. We may not choose to vote, but damn it all, we sure as hell expect it to count if we do. Right result.
George wants to be president. He thinks preventing recounts, going with the current results, and arguing for machine accuracy will win it for him. Wrong reason. And yet, the Supreme Court will look at the problem, various lower courts have looked at the problem, and we’ve all seen the Herculean efforts of the unsung and often denigrated vote count workers in Florida. Right result.
On November 6th, I decided to send out a mailing to all our readers, regardless of party affiliation, reminding them to vote. I decided that, as a citizen, a patriot, and someone with some influence, I owed it to all my misspent karma points to do something good, in my own small way. And so hundreds of thousands of vote reminders greeted readers throughout the world on the morning of November 7th, election day.
We got two types of replies from readers. From our American readers, we got replies expressing appreciation that our company has a sense of civic duty. My most cherished was the letter I got from TIME Magazine with very positive of comments. But from our international readers, we got replies that asked us why we insisted on involving them in our domestic affairs. Some were downright insulted that we’d waste their time, and they accused us of being American and therefore arrogant.
The honest truth is that we sometimes forget that we’ve got so many international readers. We live our lives right around Princeton, New Jersey in the United States, and it’s often very easy to get caught up in our own local affairs. Yet the Internet is a world without nationalistic boundries, and pressing the Send button is often the trigger-pull on a shot heard ’round the world.
What we’re seeing here, now, in America, is the business of the entire world. For better or worse (although, I’d like to think better), America is the world’s most powerful nation. Our economic actions affect everyone. If our stock market drops or the dollar gains in value, everyone, everywhere will feel it.
This event, this electoral stalemate between two parties and two ideologies, is big. Really big. It will affect everyone. And in it can be a lesson for everyone, those here in America, as well as our friends in faraway places with strange sounding names.
You see, there are no tanks in the streets. There is no military coup. There is an epic battle for control of the most powerful nation in history, the most powerful arsenal in the world, and the most powerful economy ever seen, and there is no national violence. Just a lot of lawyers yelling at each other, a bunch of judges with an excess of stomach acid, two spoiled old white guys, and a highly amused (and a bit annoyed) electorate and fourth estate.
We’ve had a cataclysmic political earthquake and the ground hasn’t opened up, bridges haven’t fallen, and highways haven’t collapsed. Business and life go on as usual.
And therein lies the beauty that always, always seems to trump the beast that’s inherent in our American way of life.
My best wishes to both camps. Grow up. Set an example. Don’t slide into irrelevancy. If you don’t start acting as if you deserve the jobs you crave, the next four years will be a really big bummer for you guys. For us, the voters, life will go on regardless of how silly you behave.
We’re Americans. And we’re high maintenance. I wouldn’t have it any other way.
— David
PS: So, why am I writing this in PalmPower, a technical publication? Mostly, it’s something I need to say. I’m a writer and a political sports fan. This is the real deal, and it’s something I have to get out of my system. But secondly, and not to be discounted, this is also a battle over the perception of technology. Are machines really more accurate? Is it a good thing to give up the human touch? Are we, in Y2K, really saying that we want to trust more in machines? You’re all a technical audience. You all know that machines, like their makers, are fallible in the extreme. Let’s not lose sight of that. Y2K isn’t over yet. It’s not the two digits, it’s the single piece of chad.
PPS: Let’s take it to the PowerBoards. We all need to vent. I needed to vent. Let us know how you feel about this issue by clicking the PowerBoard link below. But please keep to a higher ground than our politicians and keep the discussion civil and well-considered.
.BEGIN_SIDEBAR
.H1 Product availability and resources
For the 26th Amendment to the Constitution, visit http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.amendmentxxvi.html.
For the 19th Amendment to the Constitution, visit http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.amendmentxix.html.
For more information about Palm computers, visit http://www.palm.com.
.H1 Bulk reprints
Bulk reprints of this article (in quantities of 100 or more) are available for a fee from Reprint Services, a ZATZ business partner. Contact them at reprints@zatz.com or by calling 1-800-217-7874.
.END_SIDEBAR
.BIO
.DISCUSS http://powerboards.zatz.com/cgi-bin/webx?50@@.ee6ec94
