On 13-Oct-04 Malcolm Williams wrote:
> This is a unique intervention by the Guardian to allow non US voters
> to have an opportunity to influence the US election. The idea is
> that you write to an individual voter. Go to:
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/uselections2004/story/0,13918,1326033,00.html
While I strongly share the views of no doubt many others on what
outcome of the US election we would like to see (or, perhaps more
accurately, not see), I don't like this idea at all. More accurately,
I think it stinks.
In the reverse situation, were I to receive a letter from some unknown
US citizen prior to a UK election urging me how to vote, I would be
offended even if I agreed with the writer's views. It would be none of
their business, and if it were the result of an American press campaign
set up to manipulate the result of a UK election then it would be even
more offensive and would deepen my resentment of influence emanating
from that side of the pond.
While it might be legal to write out of the blue to a US citizen in
such terms (though I have my doubts about that too -- "unsolicited
junk mail" springs to mind), I certainly have doubts about the
Guardian's suggestion:
"In formulating your letter, you will need to introduce yourself:
no individual Clark County voter will have any reason to be
expecting your communication. And in choosing your arguments,
keep in mind the real risk of alienating your reader by coming
across as interfering or offensive. You might want to handwrite
your letter, for additional impact, and we strongly recommend
including your own name and address - it lends far more credibility
to your views, and you might get a reply."
And you might get an unwelcome visit; and would be perceptibly likely
to end up in some CIA dossier ...
The proposed mechanism for transferring funds to the US to aid
"officially non-partisan groups whose activities, none the less,
have the practical effect of helping one candidate over the other"
may be technically legal but in practice is clearly a device for
working round the prohibition on "foreigners giving money to affect
the outcome of a federal election".
Indeed, on reading the Guardian piece as a whole, and taking account
of the quoted statements from US people therein and the mention of
particular organisations, I am strongly tempted to see this Guardian
"initiative" as itself being manipulated from the US by US citizens
themselves seeking to influence US voters by an admittedly unusual
means; not to mention seeking to enrich the National Association
for the Advancement of Colored People and the Christian Coalition
by donations from the UK. And why only these two organisations?
Surely there must be quite a few officially non-partisan worthy
causes out there?
Best wishes to all,
Ted.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
E-Mail: (Ted Harding) <[log in to unmask]>
Fax-to-email: +44 (0)870 094 0861 [NB: New number!]
Date: 13-Oct-04 Time: 10:17:29
------------------------------ XFMail ------------------------------
******************************************************
Please note that if you press the 'Reply' button your
message will go only to the sender of this message.
If you want to reply to the whole list, use your mailer's
'Reply-to-All' button to send your message automatically
to [log in to unmask]
*******************************************************
|