MINDS MADE UP?
Was the fix in? After the fact, I discovered that some members
of the School Community Advisory Committee wanted to discuss the possibility of
using underutilized school buildings as multi-purpose facilities. They were
told they could only focus on criteria to decide which city schools should be
closed; not if they should be closed, but which ones. These people were chosen
for this committee because of their experience and dedication to the community
but were not allowed to draw on either to solve this “crisis.”
Without
knowledge of this, the Green Party created an innovative, alternative proposal,
spelling out why schools should not be closed and how we can use schools as
multi-purpose facilities. An op-ed was published in the Democrat and Chronicle and the proposal was given to Superintendent
Rivera, all board members, the hundreds of people who showed up at the
community forums, and the countless people who downloaded it from our website.
Community members loved it. Some at the forums called for the board to adopt
some version of it.
At the February
17 School Board meeting, Dr. Rivera presented his recommendations to the board.
Commissioner Shirley Thompson asked him if he had considered the Greens’
proposal. He said that he had not “studied the details of the
proposal.”
The fix was
in.
Will the
board rubber-stamp Dr. Rivera’s recommendation, or will they call for a more
innovative approach as they were told to do at the public forums? Either way,
people who believe in our community are not finished fighting for our
neighborhoods. A number of community groups have come together to conduct an
education charrette on March 5 to create a solution that addresses our
community’s problems, not add to them (see www.gpomc.org for details). It does
not matter if your neighborhood school is being closed; this is everyone’s
problem. Be part of the solution.
Dave Atias, Rowley Street, Rochester
THEFT TALES
In his column “The Invisible Elephant” (February 9),
Laurence Britt asks, “Was the 2004 election stolen?”
Is a canary
yellow?
This past
fall, I worked as a volunteer in the Palm Beach County, Florida,
election-protection program, assisting voters who experienced difficulties in
exercising their voting rights. From the very first day of Florida’s early
voting period, we were flooded with calls from distraught voters who had tried
to vote for John Kerry, but the Sequoia touch-screen machines kept registering
their votes for George Bush. In some cases, it took five or six tries to
correct the problem, but many gave up after two or three attempts.
In some of
our heavily Democratic communities, door-hangers were distributed on election
eve telling voters that their polling places had been changed when they had not
been, and in other cases — also in heavily Democratic areas — voters
reported to their usual polling places only to find them closed without prior
notice.
Many voters
were made to stand on line in the hot sun for more than eight hours, while in
some traditionally Republican districts, lines were non-existent.
According
to media reports, machines in some Florida counties registered more votes for
Bush than there were voters. And in neighboring Broward County, the voting
machine software could handle only 32,000 votes, and then it started counting
backwards.
Thousands
of provisional and absentee ballots in Florida never were counted, and in some
cases, as in Seminole County, many completed but uncounted ballots were simply
thrown away.
Despite all
of the voting irregularities we witnessed, all of the election-night exit polls
in Palm Beach County indicated a decisive win for John Kerry. Yet the morning
headlines declared Bush the winner.
As Britt
correctly states, “Exit polls are almost never wrong.” They are, in fact,
the most reliable source of election verification yet known.
So was the
2004 election stolen? You can bet it was! And if you don’t believe that, you
probably believe that Iraq had WMDs and that our Social Security system will
soon be bankrupt.
Wake up,
people!!
Vicki Ryder, Cornell Street, Rochester
GREENS, LIBERTARIANS LED THE FIGHT
I would like to thank City for Lawrence Britt’s article “The Invisible Elephant” (December 9).
The battle is still going on in the courts of Ohio, New Mexico, and elsewhere.
The FBI has been called in to investigate election tampering; hundreds, maybe
thousands of depositions have been filed; and it’s high time people started
reporting on it more extensively.
My only
regret with this article is that the author, like many others, seems to be
ignoring the “other” invisible elephant that happens to be in
“his” room. He stated that Representative John Conyers led the charge
finding the “disturbing collection of irregularities.” To my
knowledge it was David Cobb, presidential candidate from the United States
Green Party, who led the charge, with Michael Badnarik of the Libertarian
party. Conyers and Democrats joined up well after the initial fight had been
started by the Greens and Libertarians.
While I’m
very grateful and give much credit to the Black Caucus and Barbara Boxer, let’s
please start giving credit where credit is hugely due: to the US Greens and
Libertarians for fighting for Democracy in America. In addition to the websites
Mr. Britt listed, you can read more info and see videos as well as a daily
progress blog at votecobb.org.
Deborah Magone, Snowy Owl Ridge, Greece (Magone is vice chair of the Green Party of Monroe County.
FOXES ON GUARD
Thanks to Laurence Britt for summarizing the unease many of
us felt after this past election. To ignore both the widespread voting
discrepancies and the fact that foxes are guarding the chicken coops is to
ignore the erosion of trust that is developing in our voting process.
To say that
those with well-deserved suspicions are paranoid is to ignore the healthy
skepticism needed for critical thinking. When a computerized voting machine’s
results are not verifiable, or irregularities are not looked at with an honest
attempt to evaluate them, democracy is done a grave disservice. A voting
process that ensures voters that their votes have been accurately counted is
the foundation of American democracy.
Being
satisfied with our current system, including the technologically deficient
Diebold computers, is a mockery of American democracy. “We the
people” are capable of and responsible for making choices that guide the
direction of our society. We need to know that every vote is respected by those
involved in the voting process at every level. Valerie Coushaine, Pittsford
CONSPIRACY?
Laurence Britt’s excellent digest of the voting problems in
the last election was very welcome. The list of highlights from “a disturbing
collection of irregularities” was especially helpful.
Thus far,
those who have benefited most from the Help America Vote act are the
manufacturers of electronic voting machines and perhaps the “winners” of the
election. As for Republican remarks about conspiracy theories after 34
Democratic Representatives challenged the Ohio electoral vote, we hark back to
your August 4 article by Ron Netsky, covering an interview with an expert on
such theories, Michael Barkun of Syracuse University.
Barkun
stated that of course, some so-called conspiracy theories are eventually proved
to be true.
Bryna Weir, Brighton
NUKES AND US
North Korea announced that they are building nuclear
weapons, and don’t intend to negotiate them away. This announcement was met
with dismay by the US.
The US has
nuclear weapons, and doesn’t intend to negotiate them away. We are also the
only country to ever have used nuclear bombs to kill people in another country.
We spend some $400 billion per year on militarism, not counting the cost of the
wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Iraq, it
could be argued, was invaded by the US precisely because it did not have nuclear weapons. Why should
Iran and North Korea, specifically threatened by the US, make the same mistake?
Hank Stone, Route 64, Ionia
WRITING TO CITY
We welcome and encourage readers’ letters for publication.
Send them to: themail@rochester-citynews.com or The Mail, City Newspaper, 250
North Goodman Street, Rochester 14607.
Our
guidelines: We don’t publish anonymous letters — and we ask that you include
your street name and city/town/village. We don’t publish letters that have been
sent to other media — and we don’t publish form letters generated by activist
groups. While we don’t restrict length, letters of under 350 words have a
greater chance of being published. We do edit letters for clarity and brevity.
And in general we don’t publish letters (or longer “op-ed” pieces) from the
same writer more often than about once every two months.
This article appears in Feb 23 – Mar 1, 2005.
