Assuming one had drop-kick evidence of widespread fraud in the US elections, to whom would one present it, and what sort of action could that agency take?
If it were to be proven to this authority’s satisfaction midway through Bush’s term that Kerry had in fact taken Ohio (for example), would they be able to replace him, or order new elections to be held?
If the electoral votes total had been officially certified, then impeachment and trial(or resignation) would be the remedy.
Who you should report this drop-kick evidence to I don’t know. What’s Ken Starr doing these days?
I regret that such a body does not exist in our current climate.
Think of the woman who witnesses her husband molesting their daughter, she does not report it or leave her husband because she does not want to “destroy her family”.
In the US, the mainstream media is choosing to not report even the accusations of voting anomolies, IMHO because they do not want to start down a path that could lead to “destroying the family”. A Republican dominated congress will not launch any investigations, to the winners go the spoils. A Republican leaning Supreme Court is not in the business of investigations.
So, there you have it. Books will be written, message boards and blogs will be filled, maybe a few documentaries will be produced. But, that’s as far as it will go.
That seems abundantly odd to me. Here the answer is simple: Elections Canada, or the election authority of the province, if it were a provincial election.
Would it be the Supreme Court in the USA?
In Australia, the validity of any election may be disputed by a petition to the Court of Disputed Returns. The High Court of Australia sits as the Court of Disputed Returns and his wide powers, including the ability:
Any candidate can petition the Court of Disputed Returns, as can anyone who was enrolled on the electoral role on the date of the election.
Yeah, we’ve got a Federal Elections Commission here, and they’re even pretty non-partisan. For better or worse, though, they’ve never been given very much power and they’ve not been particularly good at wielding what little power has been given them. The prior posters are correct – we’re pretty much SOL here and would need a new bi-partisan authority, which authority would still have to swear fealty to the principle that elections here are local affairs. They might draft a “best practices” kind of deal, and if they could get on the agenda of the State Attorneys General Association (whose name I forget right now) they might gain some traction in most states. But that’s about it.