By John Q. Hosedrinker 
The author, a former Maricopa County recorder, urges Governor Polis not to pardon Tina Peters. Peters was convicted for violating election laws by allowing unauthorized access to sensitive voting data, betraying the responsibilities of an election administrator. Pardoning her would undermine confidence in election integrity, signal that election administrators are not valued, and potentially embolden future attacks on election officials, particularly by those influenced by figures like Donald Trump. The author emphasizes the importance of allowing the legal process to run its course to maintain the integrity of the election system.
Read the original article here
Governor Polis, Do Not Pardon Tina Peters. The situation is clear, and the implications of a pardon extend far beyond the individual case. It’s about preserving the integrity of our elections and resisting the potential for federal overreach, something that could seriously undermine the foundations of our democracy. Granting clemency to Tina Peters would send a dangerous message, and it’s imperative that Governor Polis resists any pressure to do so.
The core issue here is trust. The justice system, like it or not, made a decision. A jury of her peers, after a process of law, found Tina Peters guilty. Her actions, the charges levied, and the subsequent conviction shouldn’t be taken lightly. Her sentence, though viewed by some as overly harsh, reflects the seriousness of the crimes. To pardon her would be to undermine the judicial process and potentially embolden those who seek to manipulate our elections for their own gain. Moreover, it would signal to Trump, or anyone else with similar ambitions, that they can potentially exploit the system for their own gain.
The potential for such overreach is a real and present danger. There’s a push for federal control over state elections, a move that would centralize power and potentially open the door to widespread manipulation. The resistance to this centralization from state governments is essential. A pardon would be seen as a sign of weakness, an invitation for further encroachment on state autonomy. It would make it easier for those who wish to undermine the integrity of our elections to do so, and make it easier for them to succeed.
Beyond the political implications, there’s a human element to consider. The election administrators, the people who work tirelessly to ensure the smooth and fair operation of our elections, deserve our support. They face threats and intimidation, and they work under intense scrutiny. A pardon would make their jobs even harder and would diminish their confidence in the system they are working to uphold. They are the backbone of our democratic process, and their safety and confidence are paramount.
The narrative of a unified federal system seems attractive, but the reality is more complicated. A singular system leaves more room for exploitation from a singular point. Having a system where each state has its own procedures, makes manipulation that much harder and it’s why it’s so important to protect that structure. Even if a federal system seems efficient on the surface, the potential for abuse and the lack of accountability outweighs any perceived benefits. A truly secure election system is one where multiple checks and balances exist at all levels of government, where individual votes are easily verified, and where there are multiple points of auditing.
This is a crossroads. This decision is not merely about Tina Peters; it’s about the future of our elections and the strength of our democracy. We must safeguard the integrity of our elections. We must make it as difficult as possible to steal an election and protect the people, not just the systems. A pardon would be a profound betrayal of the public trust, a surrender to those who seek to undermine the very fabric of our society. It’s a decision that will shape the legacy of Governor Polis, and a decision that he must not make.