13 votes against Rice today, and its meaning for Election Reform

[Peace Patriot]

Today, 12 Democrats and 1 Independent voted against Condoleeza Rice for Secretary of State.

They are:

Boxer
Kennedy
Levin
Byrd
Kerry
Reed (RI)
Durbin
Dayton
Akaka
Bayh
Jeffords

These are the leaders of the progressive coalition who are most likely to support Election Reform discussion and potential action in the Senate, and to support Conyers' efforts to investigate the 2004 election in the House.

When the opposition to Rice developed, led by Barabara Boxer, she let it be known that she needed our support. We gave it to her. And she put together this awesome vote against Rice--a nomination that usually receives rubber stamp Senate approval.

Barbara Boxer was ALSO the leader of the January 6 rebellion against Congress accepting the Ohio Electors for Bush, after such massive repression of minority and Democratic voters in Ohio, official misconduct, and evidence of election fraud. She was also the ONLY SENATOR who voted for the Ohio challenge.

I argued strongly that we MUST support Boxer in her efforts on the Rice nomination HERE AT THE 2004 ELECTION FORUM *because* she is the key to reform. And I worked very hard on this, as did many others.

And now, we've gone from ONE VOTE on the progressive side in the Senate to THIRTEEN VOTES.

Of course, the two issues are quite different--still, these 12 (+1) votes represent a growing movement in the Democratic Party to FIGHT BACK.

Right in the midst of this battle, some folks here at the Election forum started complaining about Election Reform getting all muddied up by "other issues"--as if election reform could take place in some pristine world in which ony that issue exists.

I cannot believe the naivete of this stance. And it had a material effect on our work yesterday and today to support Boxer. Right in the middle of the Senate debate on Rice, the moderators suddenly MOVED our post, where we were reporting live on all the speeches--MANY OF WHICH, ON THE BUSHCON SIDE, REFERRED TO THE 2004 ELECTION, SAYING BUSH "WON" SO DEMOCRATS SHOULD SHUT UP ABOUT RICE--from here to "General Politics," causing much disruption, loss of participants, confusion and interruption of the reports, and loss of reports.

People who had worked on this campaign for weeks couldn't find the post. *I* couldn't find the post, and my reports of Byrd's and on BOXER'S speeches lost timeliness. Many new threads were created to respond to the Senate debate--causing a lot of confusion.

Well, that's all over now. What happened happened. But it caused me to consider quitting DU, because this is not the right way to treat activists who are DOING SOMETHING, devoting their time, organizing, and providing vital action information.

On Election Fraud and Election Reform:

I agree with all who say that this is THE ONLY ISSUE. If we don't restore our right to vote, we do not have a democracy, and we--the public, the progressives and (I believe) the majority!--will not be able to do influence policy on any other issue.

I also do not think that Congress is going to restore our right to vote. I think we have to do this state by state. The Democrats in Congress don't have the votes or the power to get this done--and they may get bushwhacked into election reform that does more harm (for instance, reducing state power over elections, which I think would be a big mistake, with fascists in control of our federal government).

We can always hope that they will be able to shame the BushCons into real reform, but that's a tenuous hope, at best.

But the Congressional progressives CAN perform the vital function of informing Americans about what happened in 2004, and educating them on the ways that BushCons are stealing their votes.

So, we cannot ignore what is going on in Congress, and we cannot fail to support the progressive coalition, ESPECIALLY when someone like Boxer asks for our help.

To repeat: I agree that restoring our right to vote is THE ONLY ISSUE. Without it, we can do nothing. But, in addition to the grass roots worked needed at the state level, a fighting spirit is also needed, at all levels.

This fight today--and getting this many votes against Rice--is an excellent sign that a fighting spirit is alive, in all of us and in some of our leaders.