Sunday, January 16, 2005

Guest Post: Letter to AZ Rep. Hayworth

This letter was written the day after the Electoral College vote was counted by Congress. The author is an old friend of GuvWurld and is identified at the end of the letter. I expect any reply received from Rep. Hayworth would be forwarded here for a follow-up post.


Dear Representative Hayworth:

Thank you for reading my email.

Regarding your brief speech at the January 6th certification of electors...

You mentioned there was misinformation in some of the reports out of Ohio ("some that are inaccurate"). Please refer to the following link to John Conyers' report. I request that you detail what exactly is untrue in the report and make that available on your website:

You said "We should operate by the consent of the governed." You stated this as it relates to Bush winning the popular vote. That the people have spoken. I agree. However, the representatives that protested yesterday were also operating by the consent of the governed by giving voice to those people in Ohio who felt they were discriminated against. They have spoken as well.

You also said that the protest "Serves to plant the insidious seeds of doubt in the electoral process." From the protestors perspective, the process is broken. So why wouldn't they want to shine light on its problems? When there is no paper trail for e-voting machines AND when many of those machines are made by companies which have pledged Republican support, then the electoral process is broken. I refer to the CEO of Diebold stating that he would do all he can to deliver Ohio to Bush and also to Sen. Chuck Hagel getting elected on his own ES&S machines in Nebraska. Such conflicts of interest are more insidious than an election protest. Ideas implemented by HAVA still HAVA many problems. A paper trail and open source codes for e-voting would be a good start toward a solution.

You used the terms "Sour Grapes" and "Publicity Stunt" to describe the January 6th protest. Do you feel it is hypocritical to use these terms when Republicans charged after Bill Clinton relentlessly from the moment he was elected in 1992 until the day he left in 2001? That more time was spent investigating fellatio and Whitewater than was spent investigating 911?

It was mentioned that January 6 was not the time and place to bring up these issues. I say, it wouldn't be a protest otherwise. True, many of those who protested at the podium later voted to uphold the election results, but there were about 30 representatives who voted against. Those ~30 people were speaking for many thousands of people from Ohio who felt they were disenfranchised. January 6th was the only time and place to formally protest the election. I believe that is written in the U.S. Constitution.

I find it curious that Republican members of the house kept saying that the protest was a waste of time and that you could be spending time on important business. Can you tell me what important business needs to be addressed during your January 7-19 recess? Can you tell me how a 2-hour debate on January 6th was cutting into your time in "moving the country forward" during your 12-day vacation? Please post your reasoning on your website.

I cannot speak to the quotes you read from David Wade and Joe Lockhart because I cannot locate them. Perhaps you can post this on your website as well.

Thank you, Rep. Hayworth. I appreciate your time.


David Migliore
Tempe, AZ



Post a Comment Top of Page / GuvWurld Blog Home Page

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?