MercoPress, en Español

Montevideo, June 28th 2022 - 09:06 UTC



US receives Monday OAS Electoral observation mission ahead of 8 November vote

Saturday, October 22nd 2016 - 09:33 UTC
Full article 6 comments
Costa Rica ex president Laura Chinchilla head of the OAS mission will be meeting electoral authorities in Georgia, Pennsylvania and the District of Columbia. Costa Rica ex president Laura Chinchilla head of the OAS mission will be meeting electoral authorities in Georgia, Pennsylvania and the District of Columbia.

Next Monday, October 24th, the Chief of the Organization of American States Electoral Observation Mission (OAS/EOM) to the United States, former Costa Rican President Laura Chinchilla, will begin a preliminary visit to the United States during which she will hold meetings with key authorities and stakeholders of the electoral process in the states of Georgia and Pennsylvania, as well as the District of Columbia.

 The OAS Mission will be comprised of 40 international experts who will observe specific aspects of the electoral process, including electoral organization and technology, campaign financing, and political participation, among others.

In accordance with international electoral observation principles, the functions of the observers are different from those of monitors and poll watchers. In effect the OAS/EOM will observe, collect information for an ex-post report, highlight best practices and offer recommendations for improvements.

On Election Day, OAS observers will be deployed to the states of California, Colorado, Kansas, Iowa, Maryland, Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska, New York, Rhode Island and Wisconsin, as well as the District of Columbia.

The OAS was invited to deploy this Electoral Observation Mission at the request of the US State Department on a letter dated June 30th, 2016 and the invitation was accepted by Secretary General Almagro on July 11th.

Top Comments

Disclaimer & comment rules
  • Captain Poppy

    How does the “fixes” for Hillary work here Chris, with 50 independent states and all, not to mention various local venues in each state? Hell in Massachusetts, overall a democratics state, there all localities where democrats never bother because they are so conservative. Also, there was this past poster who always stated that the majority of Americans are really conservative.

    WHat I really can't seem to grasp, if the democrats are fixing this election, where didn't they bother to do so with the HoR's and Senate elections. They must be idiots to give the two chambers to the GOP with a democratic president for the past 6 years.

    Oct 23rd, 2016 - 02:42 pm +2
  • DemonTree

    @ ChrisR
    Do you also believe the US elections will be rigged? Your comment implied you do and you have not actually denied it.

    Yes, the leader of the winning party is assumed to be the next PM, but people don't get to vote for them directly.

    Every eligible voter is allowed one vote in both the US and UK. In neither case do they get to vote directly for the leader, but the US system is more direct.

    And when I say most people's votes are irrelevant, I am talking about the 'first past the post' system that we use in the UK. If you live in a safe seat, there is no discernible chance that your vote will actually make a difference to the outcome. This is true whether you vote for the winning party or one of the others.

    Senior members of the parties are handed these seats, and none of the candidates make much effort to campaign there since the result is a foregone conclusion.

    Sounds pretty similar to California, Texas and New York being ignored by the presidential contenders, no?

    We even have an equivalent to the 'faithless electors' in MPs who 'cross the floor' and join a different party. If the government's majority is slim enough, this could even force a new election.

    “Just remember, when a lot of the people on this board were sitting on the fence or claiming the Remoaners would win the UK/EU referendum I encouraged voting 'Leave' and said all along that it would be the case.”

    Yes, you did. It's a shame you don't have the courage now to admit that it was you who caused the fall in the pound, instead of trying to blame others.

    “I shall laugh my socks off though if he “Trumps” it.”

    It's bad karma, laughing at others' misfortune...

    Oct 24th, 2016 - 06:28 pm 0
  • ChrisR

    @ Captain Poppy

    “ where didn't they bother to do so with the HoR's and Senate elections.”

    Perhaps they have learnt a thing or two from that 'little' error but is it really possible to fix multiple elections?

    I don't know but I suspect concentrating resources on just one candidate makes for a better chance to 'fix the horse race', so to speak.

    This from 'The Hill':
    ”There are plenty of reasons to criticize the Electoral College system. Not only may it lead to a popular vote loser winning the election, it also effectively cuts out most voters from the political process. California, Texas and New York, to name three of the biggest examples, are ignored by the presidential contenders. But while there may be legitimate reasons to change the system, it is worth understanding why there is an Electoral College in the first place and what it really was designed to do. Its focus was not to limit popular choice. Instead, it was an intricate compromise, adapting the existing electoral frameworks available in the states. Its key goal was to have a system that gave the country a clear leader selected by an agreed upon process.

    Just look at the final sentence: I thought having a straight election where every eligible voter was allowed one vote guaranteed that. It does in the UK.

    Also, how can it even be tolerated that someone select to be a representative in the college for an agreed number of wannabe electors then 'change their mind' and vote another way?

    I remember you posting to me some twelve months ago probably that you liked the time it took to get to a vote to be able to see for yourself what each candidate is like. I cannot imagine that anyone is happy with the two ludicrous people that have emerged from this process.

    The third party candidates just seem to be 'spoilers' to the main event.

    Perhaps I expect too much from such a powerful nation. I was certainly disappointed by Obama. What a waste the first coloured President has made of his chance in power.

    Oct 23rd, 2016 - 08:26 pm -1
Read all comments

Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!