UN election monitors at US polling places?

If this is true, and not some urban legend, I shall be very cross.

This sounds also like a foreign policy matter that could be a topic of discussion at the presidential debate.

Did the White House get the UN involved in our election process? I’m just askin’.

From The Hill:

International monitors at US polling places draw criticism
By Alexander Bolton

United Nations-affiliated election monitors from Europe and central Asia will be at polling places around the U.S. looking for voter suppression activities by conservative groups, a concern raised by civil rights groups during a meeting this week. The intervention has drawn criticism from a prominent conservative-leaning group combating election fraud.

The Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), a United Nations partner on democratization and human rights projects, will deploy 44 observers around the county on Election Day to monitor an array of activities, including potential disputes at polling places.
Liberal-leaning civil rights groups met with representatives from the OSCE this week to raise their fears about what they say are systematic efforts to suppress minority voters likely to vote for President Obama.

The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, the NAACP and the ACLU, among other groups, warned this month in a letter to Daan Everts, a senior official with OSCE, of “a coordinated political effort to disenfranchise millions of Americans — particularly traditionally disenfranchised groups like minorities.”

The request for foreign monitoring of election sites drew a strong rebuke from Catherine Engelbrecht, founder and president of True the Vote, a conservative-leaning group seeking to crack down on election fraud.

“These activist groups sought assistance not from American sources, but from the United Nations,” she said in a statement to The Hill. “The United Nations has no jurisdiction over American elections.”

[...]

Read the rest there.

FacebookEmailPinterestGoogle GmailShare/Bookmark

About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in Dogs and Fleas, I'm just askin'..., Liberals, The Drill, The future and our choices. Bookmark the permalink.

36 Responses to UN election monitors at US polling places?

  1. Jerry says:

    Who will be monitoring the polls to verify that those who present themselves to vote are eligible to do so?

  2. dnicoll says:

    Just remember next time the US interferes with someone else’s election. Or country. Or invades somewhere.

  3. catholicmidwest says:

    They have no right and no jurisdiction. Remember your history. The UN is the successor of the League of Nations, which we put together. And it’s outlived its usefulness.

  4. Papabile says:

    Oh, it’s true. The Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) engaged last month with the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) to get them to agree to send observers. Press release here.

    Not exactly UN, but a supranational org. They did this in 2010, but it was less oriented toward a particular “problem” as it is today re “voter intimidation” or “suppression”.

  5. Mark Nel says:

    Damn good idea for the UN to monitor the US elections. The US is always demanding UN observer presence in other countries. Take your own medicine like a good boy now or do we need to block your nose and force you to swallow. Hee, hee. By the way I am not from the US, plus I do hope that Romney wins, so I am not amongst those who may be supporting this for the reasons Obama supporters may be supporting this.

  6. The US should withdraw itself from the UN

  7. chcrix says:

    Send them to watch the Panthers in Philly?
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Panther_voter_intimidation
    Oops. That won’t happen.

  8. SKAY says:

    Dick Morris brought this up last night on Fox. He said that the Governors have the right to keep the UN monitors out of their state. We will see if that will happen.

    The Democrats and the Black Caucas just do not want valid voter IDs and it has nothing to do with voter suppression — unless you are talking about keeping the dead and non citizens from voting-or legal citizens from voting three or four times. Then there are those citizens who just do not bother to register and just show up to vote on election day.
    Soros-who is for one world government-perhaps run by the UN(who would just love that) – is pouring lots of money into left wing groups backing Obama(who the BCauaas is backing).
    Will the UN decide that it can interfere if Obama does not win?
    We have a lot to lose-including our Constitution, our country and our freedoms guaranteed by the First Ammendment.

    It will be interesting to see if the Black Panthers do show up to intimidate again since they got away with it during the last election.

  9. Central Asia? Well, we know what a hotbed of democracy THAT is…

  10. Philangelus says:

    And will they extend extra efforts to make sure our military, who are risking their lives for our country, also have their right to vote protected?

    No? Hmm.

  11. John V says:

    So wait, my duly elected legislature passes a bill requiring voters to present a photo ID when voting, and my duly elected governor signs it into law, and the ACLU goes to the U.S. Justice Department and to the courts to prevent the law from being enforced, but the unelected ACLU seeks the help of an unelected, non-sovereign to monitor polling places for election fraud?!?

  12. wmeyer says:

    So wait, my duly elected legislature passes a bill requiring voters to present a photo ID when voting, and my duly elected governor signs it into law, and the ACLU goes to the U.S. Justice Department and to the courts to prevent the law from being enforced, but the unelected ACLU seeks the help of an unelected, non-sovereign to monitor polling places for election fraud?!?

    Yes, and now with new and improved monitoring by the U.N., to ensure that illegals get their (un)Constitutional rights!

  13. AnnAsher says:

    “looking for voter suppression activities by conservative groups” Reeeaalllly ?! What was that you were saying yesterday about the English Recusants and what may be a-comin’ ? Cross, indeed.

  14. wmeyer says:

    Wonder if they will be looking also for suppression or intimidation of white voters by black groups. The sort that the DoJ has so far declined to pursue.

  15. Scott W. says:

    Liberal-leaning civil rights groups met with representatives from the OSCE this week to raise their fears about what they say are systematic efforts to suppress minority voters likely to vote for President Obama.

    I’d say most of the effort to suppress minority voters likely to vote for President Obama is President Obama.

  16. Luvadoxi says:

    Even if there were the worst sort of voter fraud and abuses, what the **** business is it of the United Nations????

  17. qowieury says:

    I am glad. Why would we not want our elections to be observed? Since when do we try to hide our elections as if there were something wrong with them. The UN is not a tool that America uses to observe other countries. It is a worldwide organization that is just as much Russia and China as it is America. One of its very important duties is observing elections. What possible reason would we have to not encourage them to come here?

  18. acardnal says:

    Who will monitor the monitors?

  19. Sissy says:

    “Just remember next time the US interferes with someone else’s election. Or country. Or invades somewhere.”

    Yes, because the United States of America is really just like every other little lawless, banana republic, isn’t she? Yes, that’s the sort of moral equivalence that Obama preaches. There is no such thing as “American Exceptionalism”, according to Obama. According to him, we’re in the same league with Egypt and Venezuela. Another reason to vote for Romney.

  20. EXCHIEF says:

    The UN, if it ever had a beneficial purpose, has outlived its value. It is an expensive (to U S taxpayers) arm of Marxism and secularism. We (USA) should get out of the UN and boot its worthless butt out of its plush headquarters here in the USA. No more U S tax money for this fraud…oh, wait, we pay Obama and he’s a fraud too.

  21. robtbrown says:

    dnicoll says:
    Just remember next time the US interferes with someone else’s election. Or country. Or invades somewhere.

    Are you referring to the US interfering in Europe from 1941-5? Or to the interference in Bosnia in the mid 1990′s, painting our helicopters blue so they would look like they were from the UN? Or maybe you’re referring to our ships interfering by patrolling the seas, keeping the shipping lanes open?

  22. Marie S. says:

    I volunteer as an election judge in Texas. Other than officials with the appropriate county (elections office), state (Sec of State) or federal (DOJ) authorities, the only people permitted to observe the election inside a polling place are those who are registered Poll Watchers for a candidate. Everyone else has to stay at least 100 ft. outside.

    I wonder which candidate would register UN observers…

  23. SKAY says:

    “I wonder which candidate would register UN observers…”

    I wonder what countries will these UN monitors come from?

  24. JLC says:

    First, it’s the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), not the UN. It was initially founded during the Cold War to promote dialogue between the West and East on issues of security, to include economic, political-military, and human. One of the mandates of the OSCE is to monitor elections in member countries.
    I have worked with them before to monitor elections, yes, in Central Asia. The observers basically make sure that things are generally being run according to generally-accepted democratic practices. Before the election, they meet with various groups to get a sense of what the concerns on the ground are. They make note, and, if there are issues that come up repeatedly they may use their final report to comment on if the concerns were valid. They send monitors into polling stations (where allowed by local law) to watch the process, including ballot counting. After the election, they make a general assessment (“free and fair” or not) and point out areas where procedures could be improved. Let’s face it, no process is ever perfect, and having an outside observer make comments could actually help. The recommendations are non-binding, by the way.
    As a part of the OSCE, we made an obligation to invite monitors to our elections. The USG typically encourages monitors from less democratic countries to come and watch, basically to get an idea of how a well-established democracy votes. It’s not a bad situation all around–we get some international cred with our European allies, can show some developing democracies how it’s done, and we get a few minor suggestions on where to tweak our election procedures (if we feel like it).

  25. trad catholic mom says:

    Where were they when the New Black Panthers were out front of the polls with clubs? Did we see any cries from them when that news story broke?

    Yes, I thought so.

  26. John V says:

    @JLC
    Thanks for the helpful clarifying information. A follow-up, if I may. You state: “Before the election, they meet with various groups to get a sense of what the concerns on the ground are. They make note, and, if there are issues that come up repeatedly they may use their final report to comment on if the concerns were valid.” How does OSCE determine which of the “various groups” to meet with to “get a sense of what the concerns on the ground are”? If the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, the NAACP, and the ACLU send a letter to OSCE officials expressing their “fears about what they say are systematic efforts to suppress minority voters”, does OSCE limit its consultation to those groups? Would they, on their on initiative, also consider other concerns that are already well-known publicly, such as the Black Panther intimidation of white voters referred to in several of the comments posted here? Or does an individual or group have to approach OSCE with particular concerns in order for them to be considered and watched for?

  27. JLC says:

    They’ll meet with many groups that ask for meetings, as well as monitor the press for potential issues and seek out their own meetings. They also meet with election officials (well, they ask at least…it doesn’t always happen in places like Tajikistan), and other stakeholders.
    Keeping in mind that we have a hyper-fractured electoral landscape (with voting laws and regulations variable based on state, county, and, in some cases, precinct), and that this is a “limted observation mission,” they are simply not going to have observers in all regions. I do not know if they will have observers on the ground in regions where the Black Panther intimidation occured, nor do I know if they will be in places that the ACLU thinks will be hotbeds of voter suppression. Likely, they will try to cover these areas but may not be able to. A lot of it depends on the head of mission, but they usually get really good, impartial people in there.

  28. Giuseppe says:

    I used to recoil at the idea of a national ID card, as I thought it reeked of a police state. However, a national ID card with security features like passports would be a sure-fire way to help establish identity for voting as well as employment.

    Have a massive effort to get everyone registered in the next year and a half, and pilot it in the 2014 Congressional elections, in anticipation of 2016.

    This will give everyone time to get copies of their birth registration from their state agencies. (Hawaii is particularly good at this!) And allow elderly and disabled people to register by mail with possibly a in-home follow-up for verification.

    I’d happily use $1 billion of stimulus money for this.

  29. Sissy says:

    Guiseppe, I was just thinking the very same thing, yesterday. I never thought I would see the day that I would welcome a national ID number. Of course, we wouldn’t need one if each state would just require photo ID. The only reason to object is if you want fraud to take place. For those of our friends here who think that photo ID at the polling place is racist, I have a question. Do you feel the same way about the requirement to show photo ID in order to purchase firearms?

  30. wmeyer says:

    Of course, we wouldn’t need one if each state would just require photo ID.

    I think we must first get the Feds to stop trampling on the 10th amendment, Sissy.

  31. Sissy says:

    wmeyer, good point! Even so, we’re not going to see all the states making an effort to combat voter fraud.

  32. cl00bie says:

    Now this is a great idea!!! I think that conservatives should get on board with this. They should contact the U.N. and voice their concern about minority suppression in every single precinct in the United States.

    I wonder how many “observers” they actually have, and how they will choose which precincts to “observe”? It’s the tactic that lawyers use during discovery to “drown the opposition in paper”.

  33. Giuseppe says:

    @Sissy – I think carrying a national ID (like a passport) with passport-type security features to be used for employment and voting would be the ideal result. Voting for the Senate, House, and President are all federal issues. If the federal government merged voting IDs with work papers, then states would probably use the federal IDs for all elections, which I think would be the best solution. And as much as people criticize the post office, I have never had one bit of a problem doing passport paperwork there, and there are post offices everywhere, so it would be easy to send a postal worker to the homebound to do paperwork and get them their federal IDs that way.

  34. Sissy says:

    Giuseppe, I don’t really disagree. I lived in the Bahamas for 8 years, and had an opportunity to observe 2 of their national elections. Their system is as follows: you must register anew for each and every national election. To register, you go before the registrar (who visits each local polling station on an published schedule) and present your passport proving you are a Bahamas citizen which allows your name to be entered into the polling book. This is done approx. one month before the election. On election day, you return to the poll, again present your passport, and after you vote, you dip your thumb in indelible purple ink. No voting fraud there – and it’s pretty much a third-world nation.

  35. eulogos says:

    qowieury, It gives the impression that the US is somehow subsidiary to the UN, rather than a sovereign country. No other country or group of other countries has any say over how we run our elections.

    And wow-”looking for voter suppression activities by conservative groups” when the only known voter suppresion activities in the last election was intimidation by Black Panthers of people who might NOT vote for Obama! I’d like at least to hear that these folks-who should not be there in the first place- will be looking for voter suppression by any groups.

    Susan Peterson