I would believe that it is against the law. Surely such laws weren't intended for the purpose of shutting down oversight, but the law's the law.
Republicans tend to be xenophobic and have the attitude that the US rules (or at least, SHOULD rule) and that every other country sucks eggs. So what are these farn fag eggsuckers doin' messing with our 'lections, which are the BEST IN THE WORLD??? The nerve of them eggsuckers. I would expect them to be quite unfriendly to any such monitors. I would expect his attitude to be popular in Texas.
It's hardly surprsing why he's feeling paranoic - unless the "impartial" observers are from Pakistan: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-20008687
What right does the UN have to over see any of our political functions?
Granted if it were up to me one of the budget holes I would close is the UN so I am not impartial either.
It's against the law for ANYBODY to loiter within 100 feet of polling places where I'm from. I don't see what the big deal is.
I don't like people looking at me so I should issue arrests warrants.
I bet he expects them to obey posted speed limits as well the gall of imposing laws on UN international delegates who do not have diplomatic immunity.
There is nothing intelligent about his remarks IMO.
I don't believe the state has the power to prosecute any foreign citizen. I think that's a federal power only.
UN election observers?
Maybe they'll draw observers from the UN Human Rights Council, whose members include Cuba, China, Saudia Arabia and Libya. Syria had applied for a seat this year, though Assad may have been too busy lately to finish the paper work.
I doubt all of these observers have diplomatic immunity which is granted by the federal government. Otherwise there are many foreign nationals sitting in state prison that want a lawyer ASAP.
"Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights"
So same bunch, in part.
I thought so too but OHCHR doesn't appear to be same as UNHRC. There's a separate wiki for OHCHR
Not a single state you mentioned is involved. It's a western organization.
As it happens, OSCE has now conceded that they don't need to actually be in the polling places and that they will abide by Texas laws, so this whole thing is moot now.
Not so much.
It was never a question about if OSCE will abide by local laws but the thread and the OP article is about how welcoming Greg Abbott is to having an external organization monitoring the election process. From the OP article:
It's no wonder that the world doesn't cheer much on the US conservatives:
It seems that Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott was mistaken from the beginning.
How embarrassing, we have Texas politicians that have no clue what is going on. The OSCE has been doing this in the US since 2002!!!
Oh, right, you don't live here. Move along now, nothing to see here. Everything is situation normal.
Not true. Federal crimes are handled in Federal Court. State and local crimes are prosecuted in state and local courts.
Mistaken about what? OSCE has said that it will station poll watchers in polling stations. When confronted with Texas State law it changed tactics to not actually being present to observe the election. This is an obvious change to what they had intended to do. The OSCE Election Observation Handbook specifically states how elections are to be observed.
You can't observe and gather "detailed information on the voting and counting process" without being present in the polling station, a requirement noted as late as last Friday by the OSCE in a statement that
Elsewhere in the OSCE operation manual it refers many times to being inside the polling station to observe and count blank forms, empty ballot boxes, interviewing polling station officials, and so forth. My favorite section is the section dealing with interviewing polling station officials.
We are supposed to believe this doesn't constitute interference?
Some states allow outside observers in polling places as state laws vary in this respect. If Texas State law was broken in 2008 by OSCE, that does not grant them the right to do so again.
Texas State election law mandates that all poll watchers be a registered voter of the county if the election is countywide; of that part of the county in which the election is held if the election is less than countywide; or of a political subdivision in which the election is held. [Sec. 33.031]. There is no provision that allows a foreigner to qualify as a poll watcher.
I am not aware that the OSCE broke texas law in 2008, can you please post that link? I apologize if someone already posted the article about them being found guilty of this and the outcome.
I am not aware tha the OSCE broke Texas law in 2008 either, they only say they were present in San Antonio during the 2008 election. But if they did, it doesn't grant them the right to do it again. You will note that OSCE wrote a letter to the State Department asking that Federal officials ensure that they are not restrained in their activities in Texas. OSCE asked our Federal Government to overrule Texas state law.
Perhaps this was a result of them not being able to directly oversee the voting process in 2008 and 2010? The Final Report notes that, "OSCE/ODIHR LEOM observers could not follow election day proceedings in Alabama, Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Ohio and Texas because laws in these states do not allow access for non-party observers to polling stations." Actually they weren't allowed for other reasons in the state of Texas which had more to do with the fact that they weren't registered voters. Interesting they would put a partisan spin on the rationale. We do know that OSCE has lobbied repeatedly to change their access to polling locations in states like Texas where they are forbidden to observe by law. From their 2010 mid term election report:
So we know what they really want now, don't we?
Separate names with a comma.