I can't vote for Ralph Nader, even though so many of the things he says are on target.
"Washington, D.C., is corporate-controlled territory," Nader wrote in an op-ed piece for The Hill, giving numerous examples of how entrenched corporate interests are raiding the federal treasury and driving trade and regulatory policies to the disadvantage of average workers.
He is so right.
But I still won't vote for him. The reality of our two-party electoral system and the importance, in my view, of regime change, means my vote is too precious to waste on a progressive protest. In fact, I would very much like to see Nader disappear as a candidate since his presence will inevitably handicap the Kerry-Edwards ticket.
That said, Nader nonetheless should be given a fair shot at getting on the ballot in all states, without having to fight through the harassing tactics of Democrats.
Democrats should be ashamed of the antidemocratic actions being carried out in their name.
Nader is facing a multistate effort by the Ballot Project Inc., a group of Democrats and progressives formed for the sole purpose of throwing up roadblocks to a Nader candidacy. The group is committed to squandering Nader's resources and diverting the campaign's energy. It is helping local Democrats in over 20 states find pro bono lawyers to challenge the signatures and petitions that Nader's corps have collected to get on state ballots.
Mostly, the tactics are technical challenges to the validity of Nader's submissions - vetted with the precision of an electron microscope. Nader says that in Arizona, Democrats challenged 1,400 signatures because the county of residence was not listed even though the full address was. And in Illinois, Nader complains that thousands of signatories were challenged because they had moved within the state since registering to vote. Nader has now been denied ballot access in Illinois as well as at least four other states, though lawsuits by the Nader campaign are pending in Illinois and Arizona.
These tactics are reminiscent of the strategy known in legal circles as "papering the case." That is, when a wealthy law firm fighting an opponent with few resources files all sorts of extraneous motions and claims to overwhelm the little guy and make him give up regardless of the merits of his case. It's a dishonorable and unethical practice.
But there have been even less seemly actions employed - the kinds of dirty tricks that might be found in Nixon political saboteur Donald Segretti's playbook. Segretti, it should be remembered, famously sent forged letters to newspapers suggesting that Nixon's challenger, Hubert Humphrey, engaged in sexual misconduct. He also forged letters on the stationery of Sen. Edmund Muskie that included racist language. Anything to win.
The Democrats are demonstrating similar rat-fink tendencies. In Oregon, signature gatherers for Nader were threatened with prosecution. A letter from a lawyer warned campaign workers that any fraud used to circulate petitions "may result in a conviction of a felony with a fine of up to $100,000 or prison for up to five years." Then, according to Kevin Zeese, Nader's spokesman, the Democrats sent "a team of three people to circulators' homes and threaten(ed) them further - pointing to names on the petition, saying they suspect fraud and threaten(ed) criminal prosecution." This was an obvious attempt to intimidate the signature gatherers.
Also in Oregon, a Nader nominating convention was hijacked by Democrats who flooded the convention and then refused to sign the candidate's petitions. Because the attendance was limited, the large number of Democrats prevented Nader from gaining ballot access this way.
There's another bad guy operating here, and that is the crazy quilt of election law. Access to the ballot varies so much by state that in Colorado candidates can appear for a $500 fee whereas in Texas a candidate has to collect 64,000 signatures.
During the 2000 contest, Nader appeared on ballots in 43 states as the Green Party candidate. But this year the Greens declined to support him. Running as an independent, and as the Reform Party candidate in seven states, Nader has only secured spots in 14 states, including Florida, so far, according to Zeese. And a number of those are under challenge by Democrats.
Nader is right when he says that equalizing ballot access for independent candidates is an overlooked civil liberties issue. He is also right when he says that the Democrats' aggressive campaign to keep him off the ballot is a "sordid, undemocratic tactic, an affront to voters and a threat to electoral choice."
Nader may not get my vote, but he has my sympathy. Democrats should stop this ugliness and live up to their name.
