Backstory: Making your vote get counted

Making your vote get counted

By Michael Green

Last week, Congress certified the 2004 presidential election results, but only after a debate. A member of each house must sign on to any challenge to the outcome. Sen. Barbara Boxer, a California Democrat, joined House members in questioning the results in Ohio, prompting a discussion before the formalities continued, much to the disgust of Republican politicians and editors, including the Review-Journal editorial page.

Meanwhile, Democrat Christine Gregoire became Washington's governor while Republican Dino Rossi, the loser by 129 votes after several recounts, requested a revote--just do it over, presumably until he wins.

Similar issues came up in 2000, when intimidation, Democratic stupidity, Republican cupidity and morally bankrupt Florida officials and U.S. Supreme Court justices deprived Al Gore of the presidency. But when several House members challenged that result, no senator signed on. This time, Boxer did and her Nevada colleague, new Minority Leader Harry Reid, voiced approval of her effort.

Reid and Nevadans know--or should know--something about controversial votes. The first election to raise a lot of eyebrows in Las Vegas was in 1944. In the Democratic Senate primary, incumbent Pat McCarran faced a challenge from Lt. Gov. Vail Pittman, whose brother had been a longtime U.S. senator and McCarran foe.

The CIO was not yet the AFL's partner. Many considered it a radical union and it was trying to organize workers at Basic Magnesium, the industrial plant that gave birth to Henderson. McCarran was generally pro-labor and fanatically anti-communist. When the CIO opposed him, McCarran used that to paint Pittman as a tool of outsiders trying to interfere in Nevada--which, given Pittman's conservative background and many years in Nevada, was like calling John Kerry a draft dodger and George W. Bush a war hero.

It was a tough primary. McCarran had delivered federal pork, but he had antagonized many inside and outside the government. Finally, he beat Pittman, 53 to 47 percent. How? Pittman said, "Every means was used to obtain the desired result." Norman Biltz, a developer who helped fund McCarran's campaigns, said, "We found a way to get the Negro vote."

During World War II, African-Americans moved to Las Vegas in large numbers. Since they had no reason to like the segregationist status quo, Pittman expected their votes. That was odd for a Mississippi native who wanted to issue a campaign flier showing himself surrounded by black sharecroppers as evidence of his progressivism on racial issues. Uh, right.

But rumors flew then and have flown since that McCarran operatives ran busloads of black voters into Las Vegas from Southern California. Almost certainly, money changed hands: Not only was bribery rumored, but according to one old saw of local politics, filling the collection plate at black churches the Sunday before voting would "obtain the desired result" on Tuesday.

That wasn't the last tough Senate race--or the last involving West Las Vegas. In 1964, one-term incumbent Democrat Howard Cannon faced a challenge from Lt. Gov. Paul Laxalt. Cannon should have won easily: He had done a good job and was close to Lyndon Johnson, who was about to cream Laxalt's friend and ideological soulmate Barry Goldwater in the presidential race.

But reports connected Cannon to a scandal and Laxalt ran a great campaign. Cannon benefited when R-J editor Bob Brown, a Laxalt supporter who regularly hammered the senator, quit after publisher Don Reynolds ordered him to slant the news in Cannon's favor. The R-J strongly backed Cannon and Laxalt's name disappeared from the paper. Cannon won by 48 votes. After Laxalt understandably demanded a recount, Cannon's margin increased to 84. Again came rumbling of payoffs and corruption in West Las Vegas on Cannon's behalf. Whether that actually happened is hard to say.

Laxalt was part of the next tight Senate race, in 1974. In the aftermath of Watergate and Richard Nixon's resignation, Republicans took away only one Democratic Senate seat: Nevada's. Laxalt won by 611 votes, prompting his opponent to demand a recount. The result stayed the same.

Laxalt's opponent, Harry Reid, accepted that result. But at least he enjoyed an R-J editorial supporting his effort to make sure votes were fully and properly counted.

In 1998, Reid was on the other side. Seeking a third Senate term, he beat Republican John Ensign by 401 votes. Ensign demanded a recount, with the R-J agreeing on the importance of a fair election. In the end, Ensign lost by 428.

If all of this teaches us anything, it's that Nevadans--and our fellow Americans--do make progress. No one has mentioned bribes or payoffs in recent Nevada elections, unless it's been to vote out those accused of accepting them. You have to take progress where you can get it.