I think these are the two most important issues in the coming election. It is possible that without addressing them none of the others may be addressed.

Brazil just held an election in which 90,000,000 votes were counted in about 10 hours with few problems according to most observers. Despite their other problems this seems an incredible achievement. Computers with pictures of the candidates overcame the high illiteracy rate.

The current recommendation for the head of the SEC is a person who apparently has been in charge at a company where the very sort of practices he is supposed to regulate against were occuring. How aggressively will he regulate?

These are issues that need to be address and can be addressed with reasonable investment of time, money and effort, but are being overshadowed.

[quote]Originally posted by sportinlife:
Brazil just held an election in which 90,000,000 votes were counted in about 10 hours with few problems according to most observers. Despite their other problems this seems an incredible achievement. Computers with pictures of the candidates overcame the high illiteracy rate.

---

If this didn't make so much sense (meaning it may never get the attention of those who can/would make it happen), I would get more excited about it.

Nevertheless, this seems to be a fantastic way to vote. And with multimedia, you could inquire on the spot about where your vote-to-be stands on your issues.

[ November 01, 2002: Message edited by: bluebird48234 ]

[quote]Originally posted by sportinlife:
The current recommendation for the head of the SEC is a person who apparently has been in charge at a company where the very sort of practices he is supposed to regulate against were occuring. How aggressively will he regulate?

---

Not all did all those Brazilians vote, but an overwhelming majority voted for a committed socialist!

The brouhaha surrounding Harvey Pitt's failure to fully inform the SEC commissioners of William Webster's prior problems on the audit committee of two failed companies has thankfully ballooned to epic proportions. Though the White House is standing by their man, Pitt may be out--SOON!

Pitt is a tool of the very interests he's supposed to be regulating, and his selection by W. was a tocsin that administration wanted to give big business a free pass. He was is the inverse of Arthur Levitt, Clinton's former SEC chair, who often tried to do the right thing but met with strong opposition from industry.

Webster also should step down. John H. Biggs (also from St. Louis, like Webster), the first choice by reformers, was vetoed by the accounting industry and the White House. Senator Paul Sarbanes and others now can point to what W. is really up to--he doesn't want reform of any sort.

BTW, definitely check out Paul Krugman's EXCELLENT piece, "The Pitt Principle."

Also check out this Slateoverview of the press feast on Pitt.

The Krugman Article, in today's NY Times.

Professor Krugman begins:

"So Harvey Pitt decided not to tell other members of the Securities and Exchange Commission a small detail about the man he had chosen to head a crucial new accounting oversight board, after turning his back on a far more qualified candidate. William Webster, reports Stephen Labaton of The Times, headed the audit committee at U.S. Technologies. Now that company is being sued by investors who claim that management defrauded them of millions.

And what did Mr. Webster's committee do after an outside auditor raised concerns about the company's financial controls? That's right: It fired the auditor.

Mr. Pitt's response when this story broke beats anything a satirist could have imagined. "Pitt seeks probe of himself," read one headline. Honest: Mr. Pitt's own agency will investigate how he chose Mr. Webster."

Two positive developments on election day.:

1 - The current head of the SEC has decided to step aside. This is only a first step in implementing regulations that allow ethical business people to succeed.

2 - The elections don't seem so far to have generated significant legal controversy. Reform may yet be stalled, or even reversed, by the individuals elected, but they will have to be made if the future of the democratic process in the USA is to be secured.

The two overriding influences on elected officials are money and votes. Not many give more than mouth service to ethical or humane decisions.

Effective ethical leadership can bring out the most positive nature of people. For now I don't see that coming from either of the two major parties.

See my post in the "Fellow Outsporter for Congress" thread detailing yesterdays fiasco in SF, where 200 precincts ran short of ballots around 4 p.m.!

It's just not that hard, people - unless you make it so!

Gmginsfo, stop getting me to agree with you! Yes, ballots ran out in other places too! It's idiotic. Didn't Bush just sign an electoral reform bill? If Brazil can vote without hitches, so can the United States. We're not Russia or Haiti!

BTW, I see Grover Norquist on the "News Hour with Jim Lehrer." What a scary character. Okay, back to the thread.

With Tom Delay as the Majority Leader (yes, people, this is true!) and some Republicans like Inhofe, etc. in control, I really doubt that there will be ANY push towards business reform. We are going to see business giveaways that make Reagan look moderate by comparison.

Definitely check out \"Savoring Victory, G.O.P. Sets Agenda on Taxes, etc.\" in the NY Times.

FT, Casablanca is on TV tonite. You be Bogie and I'll be Claude Rains as we walk off the tarmac together!