Imagine Elections 05: Winner Declared, Mass Dissatisfaction
By John S. Morlu, II 

10 May 04

Today is October 16, 2005. I am not kidding. I have just fast-forwarded the wall clock in my living room a year and a half into the future to examine and handicap the outcome of the all important, most eagerly awaited Liberia’s 2005 presidential election. This is because I believe that someone, among the ever-growing list of presidential candidates, will be declared the winner. Who is willing to bet on that? You can cash in your retirement savings or children’s college tuition and place the bet. I don’t see any hands going up. I guess I have won the argument.  

So, for now, why don’t we all just pretend a little that the famous day we have waited for has just come and passed. We have made a resounding choice for the political leadership of our beloved country. We have chosen a president, a cadre of legislators in the House and Senate, and a slew of local leaders. Wow! We did it. We did it. We can now begin the hard work of rebuilding our war-torn country and lay down a new political marker that is predicated on conducting the affairs of government in a manner that serves the interests of all the people, or at least the majority of the people. In this age, you just cannot satisfy all the people, all the time, and government cannot be all things to all the people. We know that be it government, or anyone else one can only try to do his utmost best in satisfying the will of the majority of the people. In any case, we have clearly entered on a new path and embarked on a new beginning. So let us all come together and move on to begin the work of making Liberia a better place to live and work once again.  

But wait a minute there, John, not so fast. How can we move on when not all of us are really happy with the choice for president, much less the composition of the legislative body? We don’t mind those local leaders. They really don’t have much power. Why are so many of you unhappy with the choices for president? After all, the democracy we believed that is centered on one man/one vote clearly seemed to have worked. Just because the person you voted for did not win is not cause for you to be so upset that you get a heart attack. However, I understand your frustrations, but we must all agreed that the system worked as it was supposed to work this time around. No, John you are clearly wrong. The system did not work as it was supposed to work. How so, my dear friends, and compatriots? We have several reasons.  

First and foremost, we know that the new president stole the election. He cheated! No, he neither cheated nor stole the election. He won fairly. Just live with it. The international community declared the election free and fair. Even Jimmy Carter said that it was free and fair. I saw him on CNN just the other day talking about the outcome of the Liberian election. He was totally convinced that the election was free and fair. U.S. President George Bush, British Prime Minister Toni Blair, German Chancellor Schurrder, French Prime Minister Chirac, Russian President Vladmir Putin and Chinese Premier John Zhamin all said the election was free and fair.  

Okay then, John, the new president’s party rigged the ballot boxes. We demand a recount. You are wrong buddy. Don’t go there. Liberia is not Florida, and there is no Judge Renquist or Scalia in Liberia. No one rigged the election. The United Nations, ECOWAS, the European Union and a host of election watchers from America, Asia, and Europe and all over Africa kept a close eye on all the ballot boxes. Even the folks from Latin America came in to observe this historic, seismic shift in the Liberian political culture.  

In fact, the election commission made a commitment this time around to get it right, and a reasonable bystander would agree that the commissioners pulled this one off beautifully. The Commission members really did maintain the integrity of the ballot boxes, and they need to be acknowledged and congratulated for a job well done. Well, John, even if we, the majority of Liberians, who are pissed off because this oddball won the election, were to concede to you with respect to your comments about what the international community had said about the election, we still believe that the condition in the country was not ready for a true election. The roads were still very bad, and people could not even travel beyond Gbanga, and a significant number of people in the country just did not get the right to vote, because they did not have access. On the contrary, I would contend that that still does not make the election unfair, especially since the same infrastructure impediments affected each candidate equally.  

John, I personally still think that the winner of the election must have done something to win the presidency, because I just cannot fathom that he was capable of pulling this one off. It is inconceivable that he is going to be our president for the next however long? He is just not the right fit, and not up to the awesome tasks ahead of us. He is part of the old school establishment, and he is just going to carry on the buddy patronage system that we all are tired of. I really sympathize with all that, but yes, he is going to rule over you and I for the next 6 years, probably 12.  

By the way John, I just finally got the whole picture. You’ve got what picture? John, I think I know how he did it—how he won the lection. My sister was talking to me last night about the outcome of the election and she made lot of sense. She told me that the reason this guy won was that he had an unfair advantage. What exactly did she say? Well, I think she quoted something that the Foreign Minister of Ghana had said while visiting Liberia as a member of the International Contact Group on Liberia (ICGL). She said the Ghanaian Foreign Minister visited Liberia sometime around April 16-19. I can’t really remember the exact quote, but it was something like this: People who are aspiring to the presidency should not use state money to position themselves for the election. I’m not really sure. I think she left the article she was reading in my son’s room. Let me go and get it—I found it!  

The title of the article is “ICGL Warns Parties of Misguided Attempts, Says Presidential Elections Unchangeable”, posted on allafrica.com, April 19, 2003. Ghanaian Foreign Minister Akufo Addo made lot of interesting points in that article. Oh, I just found the Ghanian Foreign Minister's comment that she referenced. The Foreign Minister said “the international community wholly rejects any misguided attempts by some parties to throw the monkey wrench into the peace process by tinkering with the composition of the government to satisfy personal whims." Now I think this is how the new president managed to win the election. You are correct, my good friend. But why are you just figuring this out now. Did you just wake and had an epiphany that doomsday was upon us? You can’t be that naïve! I know you are a very smart guy, with lot of common sense. In any case, just rewind the clock back to September 2003 when the composition of the newly selected Interim Administration was being orchestrated, and you can see clearly who was in a position to win. I guess that you and so many others are so pissed off that the new president won to the point that you are unable to think clearly. I really do empathize with you and others’ sudden level of frustration. So let me help you out and walk you through the path leading to the new president’s victory over many others with substance. There are two principal reasons:  

First, let go back to the quotation of the Ghanian Foreign Minister again, when he unambiguously stated “the international community wholly rejects any misguided attempts by some parties to throw the monkey wrench into the peace process, by tinkering with the composition of the government to satisfy personal whims." What he really meant was that the presidential candidates that contested in that historic election positioned their people in critical government posts to provide them subtle but convincing advantages —they were maximizing their limited resources, pure and simple—albeit, I may say, on the backs of the Liberian people. The Foreign Minister was giving Liberians a clear warning sign of what was to come…he handicapped the race for us. Basically, the candidate that was capable of outmaneuvering his or her opponents in this area—giving buddies critical government posts—was the person to beat. Why was this so important? It goes right to the heart of the unfair disadvantage that your sister mentioned to you. More specifically it raises the question of how you win an election. So how do candidates win elections? I learned the answer to this question while I was in college.  

In 1994, while in my third year at the University of Virginia, I took an elective class in economics from Professor Talbot, a visiting Professor from the London School Economics. It was called, I think, “Public Choice”. Boy, the professor was good. He schooled us in how elected officials, especially parliamentarians and congressmen, make decisions that affect the public. We learned about vote trading, interest group politics, political exploitation, and so on. The professor was very good about asking thought provoking questions. But two that really stuck with me were: Is there anything like exploitation of the majority by the minority? How do politicians win elections? I will not go near the first question, because Tom Kamara and others have had a field day with that topic. Maybe, some day if I come up with a new angle on that issue I will discuss it. But for now, let me tackle the second question, because it is more germane to this discussion and relevant to the quotation of the Ghanian Foreign Minister, when he stated in no uncertain terms that “the international community wholly rejects any misguided attempts by some parties to throw the monkey wrench into the peace process, by tinkering with the composition of the government to satisfy personal whims."  

In order to win an election, you must have one more votes than the other candidates, assuming simple majority rule. That means you need more people to vote you than the other guy—that’s not difficult to understand, and quite obvious in the eyes of the ordinary man. However, the critical question is how do you get more people to vote for you than each of the other guys on the block—those you are running against? You need money and organization. How much money you need or the size of your organization or how you determine the product mix, as we were taught in business school, depends on a series of factors-the nature of the competition, industry factors, government regulations, technology, and market size, to name a few. After you have figured out the product mix—how much money or the size of your organization, then you develop a strategy that will help you to achieve that end—in the case of the election, winning.  

For example, in the case of Liberia, the appropriate mix of money and organization depends on whether your campaign team believes that the major determining factor is how many bags of rice you give to people, how many t-shirts you can provide, how much money you give to that church, group or organization, how many visits you make to that county. It could also center on what is the content of the message that you believe will galvanize people around your cause (if you have any), or whether your campaign team believes that this time around it is different and the Liberian people want someone who means what they say. Basically, whether Liberians want a president who can come up with a comprehensive public policy that would make a significant difference in their daily lives over the long-term, by focusing on kitchen table issues like health care, education, employment, jobs, justice, and good governance. Therefore, how your campaign approaches the issue of how much money or the size of the organization that you need to mount an effective campaign and make a respectable showing on Election Day is totally dependent on where you sit today—your perception of the Liberian people.  

Based on information available, many of those aspiring to the presidency have made the decision that money matters more than anything else, because their perception is that the Liberian people want someone who can give them a beg of rice, or money to the church or that interest group. However, we know that in spite of their focus on money, they still need some type of organization. This is because they have to have people to coordinate the delivery of the rice and t-shirts, and all the other material things that they believe they can give to people to get their votes. If I might add, they need vehicles to get around and also to delivery the goodies—bags of rice, t-shirts and ten thousand dollar donations to churches. We also know that in order for them to do all of these things, they need money to buy the rice, t-shirts, make donations to the churches, and pay some of their followers—campaign workers.  

Who, in Liberia, was willing to continue working for free, especially since they have to feed their families? Or who in Europe and America was willing to leave their jobs and go work on a campaign in Liberia for free? How will these campaign workers pay their rent, mortgages or buy food for their families here in America and Europe? The key question is, therefore, did each candidate have enough money to give away and pay the campaign staff? How many of those that contested the election were independently wealthy? We all knew the answer—categorically, none. So then, how did the winner overcome the insurmountable tasks of paying campaign staff, giving away bags of rice and donations to churches to become the next president of Liberia, in light of the fact that he was as broke as any of us and his granddaddy didn’t leave him anything in his will upon death?  

The short answer is that he placed the bulk of his campaign staff in high positions throughout the government, where they took some money here and there to support their families while helping him out. Basically, he put them all on the government payroll and some of them did not have to show up for work, but still collected paychecks and some bribes—they were too busy with campaign activities to bother with doing the work for which they received payment. To make matters worse, these campaign folks also used government cars, which were given to them by the Interim Government, to deliver the foods to the poor and make trips on behalf of the declared winner to villages around the country and champion his cause. What do you think the $3 million that worth of cars that Mr. Charles Bryant purchased from the infamous businessman George Haddad were used for?  

Moreover and equally importantly, placing his folks in high places also had subliminal messages—the more people he had in high places backing him gave an indication that he was going to be the clear winner, and the man to beat. As you know, people like to be on the winning side of the fence. Don’t we all? I guess by now you know what the Ghanian Foreign Minister meant—presidential aspirants were effectively financing their campaigns with the use of your money, albeit indirectly and illegally. In a nutshell, the winner of the election was able to outmaneuver his opponents in this game of chess—he beat them to the punch. He was able to form a loose coalition with many people at the top—and they delivered for him the election—that is how he won. You’ve got it? I hope so. If not, I guess you are still living in fantasyland, my friend. There is nothing mystical here—it’s all what we call common sense.  

Secondly, compounding this problem of presidential candidates putting their buddies and supporters in high positions was the fact that we had too many folks running for the presidency. Don’t get me wrong on this one—I am a fervent believer that anyone who wants to run for the highest office in the land should have the opportunity to do so. That’s what democracy is all about. But we have to live with the outcome now that the new president won the election fair and square, although by financing his campaign with your money. Uh, that hurts! But even though he had the state apparatus on his side, a significant contributing factor for him winning was the fact that 18 capable and self-interested Liberians contested the election. Unfortunately, the new president is going take office in January, having won with less than a third of the popular vote, and in our kind of democracy, all you need to win is to beat your opponent by one vote. We are effectively back to minority rule, although not based on ethnicity as we have experienced in the past.  

Let’s look at the data just released by the election commission. The total population of the country is estimated to be about 3 million, of which 900,000 voted in the election. With 18 presidential contestants, that is equivalent to 50,000 or 5.6% votes received per candidate. But this is what really happened in October 2005: Winner (21%), candidate 2 (15%), candidate 3 (12%), candidate 4 (11%), candidate 5 (7%), candidates 6-12 (each received 4%) and candidates 13-18 (each received 1%). Everyone seemed to like candidate 5, who got 7%. Unfortunately, Candidate 5 just did not have enough money to mount an effective campaign. He is an honest man. Unlike the majority of the contestants, he was focusing on raising funds from individuals and did not figure out the chess game that was taking place in time to participate fully. He really had good ideas on how to move the country forward again. Above all else, he has an unbreakable commitment to his country. If candidates 6-18 had dropped out and given their support to him, and assuming that he got 80% of the vote cast for them, he would have won the presidency with 34% of the vote. At the very least, a larger number of people would have been happier now. While his 34% is not the majority, it is lot better than the 21% the winner got, and you’ all don’t really like the winner, anyway.  

At this point, you have got the point. Now, let’s rewind the clock to today. What can we do to prevent electing the wrong person, and let’s be realistic as we go about making a decision on the next president. We cannot do anything about those campaign managers, who have already gotten their positions through the backdoor. We can’t remove them from office, because the ill-conceived Accra agreement set it up that way—they were all allowed to divide the spoil of war. However, at the high level, we can petition the newly formed Election Commission to ensure that those in office don’t use state funds, vehicles or any other resources to carry out campaign activities. A simple election law or the enforcement of existing laws will do the job.  

However, on the grassroots level, we can demand each candidate to present to us their platform and disclose how they are financing their campaigns. If they were to refuse, then don’t give them money or vote for them come Election Day. Many of us living abroad think we are so far from the scene that we cannot really do anything to make a difference. I say to you, follow citizens, you can make a difference from anywhere in the world. Just think about this scenario. How many of us visited the Western Union a day ago, a week ago, a month ago, or a year ago. I just went there last week to send some money to my folks in Ghana and Liberia. We are all burdened with the state of paralysis in Liberia. No one is immune. So let’s come together and do something about our problems. We can no longer run from it.  

Here is what you can do immediately. The next time you send money to your mom, grandmother, father, sisters, brothers, friends, and distant relatives, please tell them the candidate you want them to vote for. I have come to find out that most of our folks back home are prepared to take their cues from us as to the candidate to support. I am not saying you call them now. Do your research and the next time you call them up in Liberia to give them that famous Western Union number and password, just quietly tell them the name of the candidate you planned to support. Better yet, make the secret of the password your favorite candidate’s name. It’s that simple. If you are the type of person, who does not like to tell people what to do, then just pretend that you are only trying to educate them on the issues of the day so that they can make an informed decision. After all, in a democracy, we all have a moral obligation to educate our neighbors and friends. How would you feel if your neighbor knew something really, really bad about the candidate you voted for but did not care to tell before you cast that wonderful vote? As the saying goes, do unto others, as you would like them to do to you. This is your chance to apply the “do unto others as you would like them to do on to you” philosophy that we all like to you. You owe that to your mother, father, sisters, brothers, grandma, grandpa and the countless other extended family.  

We all know that the October 2005 presidential election is almost upon us. Don’t wait until it is too late and then start whining. We all know there are lots of things at stake in this upcoming election, so we cannot blow this up. You don’t have to go Liberia to make a difference. We have one of God’s greatest gifts to mankind, the telephone. Over the next couple of months, you should save some money for an international phone card. Believe me, I clearly understand the challenges of living in a foreign country, and that is why I am suggesting that you save a penny a day until you have accumulated enough pennies for one international for phone call. Call grandma and grandpa and let them know where you stand with respect to the candidates. I bet you a billion dollars that grandma or grandpa will surely make every effort to deliver your message to everyone in your village or neighborhood. 

I believe, as you do, that the upcoming elections should center on issues that benefit all Liberians and it should not be just about talk. This is the show me the beef time! I am counting on you to make that one difference. So, I hope that the next time I see, or talk to you, you will tell me that you made that one call, and that you contributed $50 to your favorite candidate. Until then, take care of yourself. Adios! 

__________________________________

Author: The author is the Founder and President of the Liberian Institute for Public Integrity. He holds an MBA from Johns Hopkins University, MA in International Commerce and Policy from George Mason University and double BA’s in Economics and International Relations from the University of Virginia. He is a Certified Management Accountant, Certified Internal Auditor, Certified Financial Manager and Certified Masters in Business Administration.