WASHINGTON D.C., 9 October 2012 The Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE/ODIHR) today officially opened an election observation mission for the general elections to be held in the United States on 6 November.

The limited election observation mission's deployment follows an invitation from the authorities of the United States. As a participating State in the OSCE, the United States has committed itself to conducting elections in line with OSCE standards and inviting international election observers. ODIHR has assessed elections in the United States since 2002.

The mission is led by Ambassador Daan Everts and consists of 13 international experts based in Washington D.C. and 44 long-term observers to be deployed throughout the country. The observers are drawn from 23 OSCE participating States. The mission began its activities on 4 October.”

OSCE’s Limited Election Observation Mission in summary:

• Head of Mission: Ambassador Daan Everts (Netherlands)
• 13 core team experts from 10 participating States, based in Washington D.C.
• 44 long-term observers, deployed throughout the country

Please tell me this is BS

What are you afraid of?

so we want the UN to monitor elections in places like Russia, Iran, Iraq, and where ever else, and yet we are somehow above such monitoring.

After seeing the early voting fiasco in Florida I hope the UN is monitoring down there because rick scott deserves it.

In response to DirtyWaterLover's comment:

“The Voting Rights Act provides for the appointment of federal observers by order of a federal court pursuant to Section 3(a), or, with regard to political subdivisions covered under Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act, upon the certification by the Attorney General.

I am pretty sure a guy from Holland isn't federal, appointed by any federal court, and I KNOW the AG hasn't.

It may be moot, as Iowa and Texas has said they will arrest OSCE monitors within 300 feet.  OSCE said they do not need to be IN the polling place.  Cool!  Anyone can observe if they like, but OSCE defines monitoring as, "Election monitors check to make sure paper ballots are placed into boxes, that the boxes are sealed, and that voters’ names are being checked off of registration lists as they cast their votes. They also ensure that no form of intimidation is occurring inside the polling place. "

This post has been removed.

In response to NO MO O's comment:

Lets try this again.

IT IS ILLEGAL!

I thought dems were rather fond of the Voter Rights Act, as am I.

My bad.

This post has been removed.

This post has been removed.

This post has been removed.

In response to WhichOnesPink2's comment:

BTW, we( the U.S.) has had this compact since 2002. How come it's only a problem now?

so we want the UN to monitor elections in places like Russia, Iran, Iraq, and where ever else, and yet we are somehow above such monitoring.

-------------------

According to US law, yes.  If any of those countries have similar laws, I would expect both the UN and the US to respect them.

How hard is this?

This post has been removed.

This post has been removed.

OSCE observers have not been invited by one political faction to investigate claims against any other political faction. The OSCE observers have been invited by the United States Government. In fact, the OSCE has already observed a number of US elections, including previous general elections in 2004 and 2008 and mid-term elections in 2002, 2006, and 2010, always at the invitation of the respective administration that was in office at the time of the election.

--------------------------

I haven't so much as mentioned a political faction.  The monitoring of elections is spelled out quite clearly in the Voter Rights Act of 1965 and as amended in 1970 and 1982, which I cited.  It does not include OSCE, using OSCE's definition of monitoring, which I also cited.

If it started in 2002 (which I did not know, thanks), it was illegal then too.  If it was done by treaty, I'd like to see it and its Advise and Consent.

Thanks

This post has been removed.

The real question is WHY?

Why does the UN feel a need to monitor our elections?

This isthe same UN that puts Libya as the head of the Human Rights Council.

This post has been removed.

In response to 12-Angry-Men's comment:

Is it because Obama has turned our country into a 3rd world sewer?

Got to be a reason.  Fess up, Angry.

This post has been removed.

Section 8 of the Voting Rights Act, provides for the appointment of federal observers within political subdivisions certified by the Attorney General or by order of a federal court pursuant to the Voting Rights Act. The monitoring of elections by federal observers is an important aspect of the Voting Section's enforcement efforts. In some instances there are concerns about racial discrimination in the voting process; other times monitoring is done to ensure compliance with bilingual election procedures. The success of the federal observer program in consistently achieving both of these objectives is possible by the long-term commitment of the United States Office of Personnel Management to recruit, train, and supervise these federal employees, who serve as neutral and impartial observers of election-day procedures, and by cooperation and coordination with state and local election officials.

Sometimes, the Department learns of election-related problems that may appear to warrant the assignment of federal observers but there is insufficient time to either arrange for the assignment or to develop the factual predicate necessary for the certification of the political subdivision. In addition, such problems may occur in jurisdictions that are not eligible for such certification because they are not covered under Section 4. Finally, the Department may have information indicating potential violations of other federal voting laws. Under these circumstances, one or more attorneys may be assigned to monitor the election and maintain contact with state and local officials. Thus, from time to time attorneys have monitored elections either by telephone from Washington, D.C. or in person at the site of the election.

Section 5 applies to "covered jurisdictions", not the rules for monitoring above, which cover everything.

so endeth the lesson.

In response to skeeter20's comment:

OSCE is not the UN

This post has been removed.

We shouldn't have any fear of independent election monitoring, if we value our electoral integrity as much as we say we do.

(Citizens United seems to say that said integrity is for sale - or at least for rent - to the richest donor.)

In response to UserName99's comment:

Touche, I did say "partner", point taken, thanks.

Here is the list of where they will be monitoring.  Hey 12, ya really think all these are just "covered jurisdiction"?

Bub bye

1. Olympia, WA
2. Sacramento, CA
3. Tallahassee, FL
4. Frankfort, KY
5. Topeka, KS
6. Pierre, SD
7. Atlanta, GA
8. Springfield, IL
9. Saint Paul, MN
10. Salt Lake City, UT
11. Santa Fe, NM
12. Juneau, AK
13. Nashville, TN
14. Denver, CO
15. Bismarck, ND
16. Montgomery, AL
17. Madison, WI
18. Des Moines, IA
19. Carson City, NV
20. Phoenix, AZ
21. Charleston, WV
22. Austin, TX
23. Albany, NY
24. Boston, MA
25. Raleigh, NC
26. Indianapolis, IN
27. Baton Rouge, LA
28. Salem, OR
29. Oklahoma City, OK
30. Annapolis, MD
31. Trenton, NJ
32. Columbus, OH
33. Austin, TX
34. Albany, NY
35. Concord, NH
36. Columbia, SC
37. Lansing, MI
38. Jackson, MS
39. Boise, ID
40. Jefferson City, MO
41. Richmond, VA
42. Harrisburg, PA