On the eve of the election...
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/D/DEAD_VOTERS?SITE=WIJAN&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT
It is one day before the election, and I am just getting around to truly looking at the story behind a headline that caught my eye.
It appears that an elderly woman has died two days after casting her vote early for the upcoming presidential election. The question on everyone's mind is, of course, should the vote be counted?
Now, I am not looking at this from a political point of view. On the contrary, I am viewing the situation in light of the fantastic philosophical debate that I believe it sparks.
I personally believe that if you vote, then die before the election takes place, your vote should be counted. If you were fully cognizant of what you were doing at the time that you cast your ballot, I see no reason that the vote should be thrown out. The clear argument against this line of thought is that if these votes are allowed to count, then why can't we roam freely through graveyards looking for ways to pad the numbers? The simple and obvious answer is that dead people can't vote. It is a totally different thing, however, for someone to vote and then die.
Another argument I anticipate is the one that says that if these votes count, then we should be able to cast votes for already deceased relatives based on our knowledge of their political leanings. This is flawed logic, however, because no matter how well you know a friend or relative, and how sure you are of the way they will vote, you can never prove that they would have done a certain thing had they been alive. Any vote you cast for someone who is already deceased is merely conjecture. Votes from someone that was alive, and then died after the vote was cast, reflect the opinion of the person that voted, and can not be disputed.
The final argument that I have anticipated is the one that points out that since the individual who voted is now dead, they have no interest in the outcome of the election, and should not be allowed a say in the election. I would argue, however, that when a person votes, they don't do it only for themselves, but for their friends, their families, their party, and their nation. It is unfair to take this vote from a candidate simply because the voter happens to die.
If I may refer to the article briefly, it also points out that there are situations where certain votes from recently deceased individuals would be counted, while other individuals in the same situation would get their votes thrown out. Specifically, it points out that early votes cast in person can't be taken back, while a mailed in vote from a soldier who dies in Iraq would not be counted. Also, it says that the nature of the laws vary from state to state, and even county to county, so that there are different rules for different parts of the country. With this in mind, I think it is clearly more fair to count votes from voters that die before the election than to count some and not others. It is also more logical than not counting all votes of this kind, because of the amount of manpower it would take to weed out all votes of all individuals who voted then died.
It is the eve of the election, and I am looking forward to tomorrow night. Win or lose, I look forward to finally having something to gloat about, or if things go another way, something new to gripe about. The Packers beat the Redskins, though, so I'm cautiously optimistic.
Until next time.