In a stunning news item, federal officials warned last week that this year's national elections might have to be "canceled or rescheduled" in the event of terrorist attacks.
DeForest Soaries, chair of the U.S. Election Assistance Commission, recently sent a letter to the Department of Homeland Security and congressional leaders, to determine who will have the authority to delay the elections if it is deemed necessary because of a terrorist attack. This follows the constant drumbeat of warnings from Homeland Security that terrorists may try to disrupt this year's federal elections.
Since the devastating terrorist acts of Sept. 11, our political leaders have advised us over and over again that we ought to go about our business as much as possible. They have stressed, and with great legitimacy, that if we act out of fear, we are letting the terrorists win. Yet now comes this dangerous, troubling, and outrageous suggestion out of Washington, D.C., which is almost an invitation to the terrorists who want to bring us to our knees.
Why are we telling the world that we might not be able to vote if there are terrorist attacks? If we cannot vote, we are no longer a free nation. If we see our right to vote canceled, postponed, suspended -- or whatever the government wants to call it -- then in a real sense we've lost our democracy. If we're going to let an attack or threat of attack deter us from voting, then the terrorists have won. If they can get us to postpone our national elections, then they've ripped our national heart out.
Our right to vote is the essence of our nation. Our ability to freely cast votes for our political leaders on a national level is not something we can allow to be postponed.
Yes, of course there is the possibility that there may be some disruptions during our election year. But we go about our business. We don't tell the terrorists that we may not vote because of it. We don't cower inside, afraid to cast our ballots. We don't consider caving in -- and announce it in advance.
The Florida fiasco created chaos in our presidential election process in 2000, so imagine what the impact of delaying this year's elections would do. Our democracy would lose legitimacy. And once suspended, when would the elections be held? Would they be pushed back one month, two months, a year? Because by this logic of fear, regardless of when the elections are held, the terrorists could mount disruptive attacks. Would we ever be able to vote again?
Since the founding of our nation, there have been presidential elections every four years. Even during the Civil War and even during the dark times of World War II. We conducted our federal congressional elections in 2002, in the midst of concerns about terror and a pending war in Iraq.
For our current leaders to contend that due to some vague, undetermined warning (brought to us by the same intelligence agencies that apparently got it all wrong about Iraq), we may have to delay our elections and throw our entire political process into uncertainly is nothing short of grotesque.
We keep hearing we're "safer than before" from the threat of terrorism. Yet we are also being told that the terrorist threat is so great we may not be able to vote this year -- for the first time in our nation's long and proud history. Which is it? Which story are we supposed to believe?
Commented
Sorry, there are no recent results for popular commented articles.