I just wrote about how the OSCE sent election observers and alleged that the USA had a duty to accept them in! But every time I find globalist meddling, there’s a UN treaty! It’s like a scorpion under a rock!
So I decided to look at the last report or two from OSCE about our elections and they do have a major political agenda. Here’s MY report on the 2010 elections report: The OSCE opposes Citizens United, support BOTH felons and ex-felons right to vote, and have disdain for both federalism and the Tea Party.
From the final OSCE report of the 2010 elections:
According to the mission’s final report: “The mid-term congressional elections were administered in a professional manner and generally enjoyed the confidence of election stakeholders, despite some reoccurring deficiencies in the electoral framework. Many of these shortcomings are consequences of a highly decentralized and complex system of conducting federal elections.”
They don’t like federalism! Try this:
The autonomy of states in conducting elections and the lack of consensus among the main political parties do not help to address some reappearing concerns, even when they are widely acknowledged by government, judiciary, press, and civil society. One of the longterm challenges which remains unresolved is the disenfranchisement of certain categories of voters, notably US citizens residing in the District of Columbia and US territories, as well as felons and ex-felons.
First, this is inaccurate. DC residents do vote in local elections and also for President by express Constitutional Amendment (XXIII). The citizens in the territories can vote in presidential primaries and can also, just as DC residents can, vote for non-voting representatives to Congress. And felons can vote in some states and in others if their civil rights are properly restored. But I am not sure OSCE isn’t trying to bring in prisoner voting in the United States like human rights courts seek in the UK.
The OSCE does not like Citizens United, the decision they extends freedom of speech to corporations:
These elections were the first held after the US Supreme Court decision, Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, which ruled that corporations and unions can spend unlimited amounts to advocate for the election or defeat of candidates as a right to free speech. It is disputable to what extent this decision contributed to the record 4 billion USD spent on campaigning during these elections. However, the transparency of campaign financing was noticeably undermined by the increased contribution of certain types of organizations that are not required by law to disclose their donors.
The disclosure of donors is yet more opportunity to restrict speech by people wanting to give to unpopular causes. People were fired in California for donating to Proposition 8 for example in retaliation after the gay marriage effort was successful. But there’s more:
It is recommended that Congress considers ways to increase transparency of independent campaign spending under the supervision of the FEC. Donor disclosure rules should apply to all persons, groups, and entities engaged in electoral campaign activities regardless of their form.
Pure meddling! Here’s more meddling on Citizens United:
The director of the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR), Ambassador Janez Lenarcic, expressed concern today about Thursday’s ruling by the United States Supreme Court effectively lifting limits for election spending by corporations and unions.
“The OSCE’s election commitments are essentially about giving voters a genuine choice and giving candidates a fair chance,” Lenarcic said.
“The ruling may affect both principles, in that it threatens to further marginalize candidates without strong financial backing or extensive personal resources, thereby in effect narrowing the political arena.”
We need a President that will say: Mind your own business! This ought to win OSCE the warn then defund letter! The OSCE is skeptical at best about the Tea Party:
One reason for the increased competitiveness was the emergence of the Tea Party, a conservative libertarian movement comprising many small organizations close to the Republican Party. The Tea Party was able to mobilize thousands of volunteers and supporters, and their campaign activities attracted significant media coverage.
Another controversial issue was the focus of Tea Party groups on voter fraud and voting by non-citizens, which many civil society groups considered as voter intimidation In response to the announcement by some Tea Party groups to send poll watchers to areas with a high percentage of voters from ethnic minorities to challenge alleged illegal voters, the DoJ decided to monitor these areas for potential voter intimidation. (footnote omitted)
But I found that there is a UN Treaty (The ICCPR, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights) and some sort of operative document for OSCE! I should have known that. Here’s a nice blood-boiling footnote:
Paragraph 7.3 of the 1990 OSCE Copenhagen Document guarantees “universal and equal suffrage to adult citizens”. Paragraph 24 provides that “the participating States will ensure that the exercise of all the human rights and fundamental freedoms… will not be subject to any restrictions except those which are provided by law and are consistent with their obligations under international law, in particular the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and with their international commitments, in particular the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The restrictions have the character of exceptions.”
Sorry again, OSCE, we have a Constitution and it comes first before United Nations documents! Thurgood Marshall surely did not appeal to the UN to give African-Americans the rights they were long denied – he appealed to the Constitution, instead! Martin Luther King, Jr., did not appeal to the UN but rather to our Judeo-Christian values to do the right! But six groups in the US, including the NAACP, (and the League of Women Voters!) went to foreigners to complain about their own nation! This is from their own letter to the OSCE:
The election observation role of the OSCE buttresses the activities of the federal government and non-governmental organizations and is essential to continuing the effort to make sure that all Americans can exercise their right to vote “privately and independently.” Further, election observation helps to improve our citizens’ trust and confidence in election results. Accordingly, we urge the OSCE to deploy its limited election monitors in those states where restrictions on voting have been most extensive—Pennsylvania, Ohio, Florida, Texas and Wisconsin. Poll monitors should be particularly vigilant about requests for, and acceptance of, identification of those seeking to vote, particularly if certain groups, such as racial minorities and young voters, are being targeted. Reports that organizations like True the Vote and others are training poll monitors to go into low-income and minority communities to intimidate voters make such monitoring critically important. Many of our organizations are working with local non-governmental organizations in these and other states and will be documenting instances of voter suppression. The presence of OSCE monitors would serve to underscore the importance of protecting voters in these key states.
Outrageous! Time to repeal the UN Treaty, get out of the OSCE (we’re not in Europe, so why do we need to be involved in their issues?) and get leaders who will stand for national sovereignty.