Enabling Suffrage Right before Colonizing Mars
By A. E. SOUAIAIA
Background: Please refer to the
report on ELECTION REFORM produced
by a non-partisan group.
The outcome of the
year 2000 presidential election was an irreplaceable
opportunity to educate the citizens about their civil duties and
inherent rights. For the first time, it is possible that those who
did not vote especially in the state of Florida may have felt the
weight of guilt resulting from not taking their own vote seriously
since it was shown that every single vote did matter then, just as
it matters in any other election.
The decision to
determine the winner of that election forced all the branches of
local and federal governments to intervene: state circuit courts,
state legislature, state executive branch, state Supreme Court,
federal appeal courts, and the US Supreme Court. Even in the highest
court of the land, the justices had failed to reach a unanimous
decision and issued instead a very controversial ruling that
virtually put the breaks on the process and allowed the person who
was ahead in the count at that point to declare victory.
One would think
that a president who was elected through such a divisive approach
would consider the overhaul of the election procedure a top priority
of his administration; not only to recapture a precarious mandate,
but to reestablish faith and trust in the system of representative
government and the democratic institutions. It is even the more
pressing need if such an administration were to present itself as a
role model and a propagator of democratic values to the rest of the
world community.
However, after a
military intervention that went against the will of the
international community and the dictates of international law; the
promotion of democracy in the Middle East remains the only
face-saving pretext that could be used to legitimize this costly
war. However, in this year’s State of the Union speech (2004), the
president added another item to his administration’s agenda that
will cost tens of billions of dollars. This dollar-burning project
is an ambitious plan to finance missions to Mars—a red planet that
is so far away from us that even if oil or other precious treasures
were to be found on it, it will cost unimaginable amounts of money
to bring it home or transport “pioneers” to it.
For a fraction of
the cost of one trip to Mars, this president could finance a project
to build software and hardware tools that will enable American
citizens to vote. It is unbelievable that in this digital age when
businesses moved most of the operations to the virtual world,
educational institutions offer courses online, individuals manage
their finances and checkbooks on their banks’ servers from home,
stockholders trade and vote online from anywhere in the world, and even doctors are
now looking forward to offering their services from remote
locations; while all these innovative and empowering things are
changing the way people work and interact; voters still express their
choices by attempting to punch a hole in paper ballets only to
discover later that their actions resulted in “pregnant chads”
instead.
Must it take
another one hundred years before busy working men and women are able
to power a computer and cast their vote in five minutes instead of
taking a day off from work? How long before citizens are enabled to
vote without activating an army of ballets’ printers, counters, and
tabulators? Or must it take another Suzan B. Anthony to remind us of
how important each vote is for a true democracy? she who in 1872 was
arrested after casting an “illegal” vote in the presidential
election and was fined $100 but refused to pay. In 1873 she
explained her refusal saying:
Friends and
fellow citizens: I stand before you tonight under indictment for the
alleged crime of having voted at the last presidential election,
without having a lawful right to vote. It shall be my work this
evening to prove to you that in thus voting, I not only committed no
crime, but, instead, simply exercised my citizen's rights,
guaranteed to me and all United States citizens by the National
Constitution, beyond the power of any state to deny. The preamble of
the Federal Constitution says:
"We, the people
of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union,
establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the
common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the
blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and
establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
It was we, the
people; not we, the white male citizens; nor yet we, the male
citizens; but we, the whole people, who formed the Union. And we
formed it, not to give the blessings of liberty, but to secure them;
not to the half of ourselves and the half of our posterity, but to
the whole people - women as well as men. And it is a downright
mockery to talk to women of their enjoyment of the blessings of
liberty while they are denied the use of the only means of securing
them provided by this democratic-republican government - the ballot.
Because of acts of
courage and responsibility like Anthony's, albeit more than a century
late, in 1920, the 19th Amendment was ratified to say:
The right of
citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or
abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex.
These efforts extended this fundamental right to women and other
segments of the society to be full citizens. It was in 1924 for
instance, that the United States Congress passed legislation
extending citizenship to all Indians born in the United States (as
if there were Indians born in Germany). Two hundred years ago, one had to be white, male, and wealthy in order
to vote. Thomas Dorr, in 1841, had criticized the gap between the
nation's ideals and its political practices. He complained that “the
Declaration of Independence declared that "All men are created
equal," and demanded that government represent the people's
interests.” He had to challenge the status quo wherein, in
order to cast a vote in the new democracy, one had to be white,
male, and a landowner. In some places, that left more than 85
percent of the adult population out of the political process.
Nowadays, that gap between the ideals and the realities did not
shrink enough to enable everyone to participate without hindrances.
Indeed, there is an inordinate and immoderate difference between acknowledging one’s right, and
enabling him or her to exercise that right. For example, it is not enough that I
tell you that you have the right to buy a loaf of bread, and then I
fix the price to a level that is affordable only by the very few.
Similarly, citizens who inherited the right to vote through the sacrifice of
many before us must demand that the government uses our public funds
to further enable all citizens to exercise this inalienable right.
There is no civil right that is more important than the right to
cast a vote in a democracy. Representative governments develop
policies that ought to be expressive of the will of the majority of
the people. The will of the majority of the people is determined
through suffrage. When one neglects or is incapable of expressing
his choices, then the government policies may not represent the will
of the majority. For that not to happen and for the government to be
truly representative of majority of its citizens; everyone must participate and
it is the responsibility of the government to facilitate the process
and enable the individuals to cast their vote.
Admittedly, securing the voting channels to the public alone will
not fix some of the problems with the American democracy. But it is
a major step forward nonetheless. Campaign finance reforms that will
balance the protection of the freedom of speech with the
affordability of speech forums for everyone will be the next biggest
challenge. But that is another topic for another time may be. For
now, politicians and citizens alike, must demonstrate and reaffirm
their strong commitment to the right of everyone to vote. It
will not only strengthen the society at home, but it will also
repair Western democracies’ credibility abroad.
Additional information and Updates: visit the
Election Reform Information
Project.
ACTIONS:
>>
email this
article to a friend >>
react to this
article >> more articles
Note:
Please email your
opinion to op-ed@majalla.org; Op-Ed articles are not
peer-reviewed.
New Op-Ed articles
are published monthly, and as special edition when warranted
|
