Vote swapping needs coverage

Editor,

The 2004 presidential race is so tight, and the outcome so critical, that all aspects of the election process should be openly discussed. Although the Statesman has covered the election and related events in Utah, an important movement is underway that deserves attention: strategic voting through www.votepair.org.

Through its Web site, this effort builds a coalition of progressives across both states and political parties. Democrats in states that are safe for George W. Bush (such as Texas) or John Kerry (such as New York) “pair up” with David Cobb, Ralph Nader or Michael Badnarik supporters in swing states, where a handful of votes could make the difference between a Bush or Kerry victory (such as Ohio, Pennsylvania or Florida). Votepair.org arranges matches among these voters, allowing pairs to get to know each other and to develop a level of trust that each side will fulfill his/her pledge. In the end, progressive voters vote their conscience while also helping to defeat George W. Bush.

A key motivation behind www.votepair.org is an issue that readers of the Statesman should be greatly concerned about: the U.S. electoral system does not accurately reflect voter preference. Winner-take-all elections make spoilers out of third-party candidates, the Electoral College overrides the popular vote, and the election is decided in a handful of swing states.

Many voters are asking for a better way to elect our President. Votepair.org believes it is essential for the nation to move toward a system that actually reflects a tenet of any democracy: “every vote counts” (see http://www.votepair.org/votingreform.php).

The election season is a busy time for the media, but the Statesman has a responsibility to ensure that its readers get as much information as possible about their options and how they can help support fair elections, including through www.votepair.org.

Peter Ruben