Voting irregularities in the New York primary have resulted in several officials launching their own investigations. Now on the surface this seems like a speedy reaction to the outcry of the people, however, the issue gets muddier once you’ve looked a bit deeper.
New York City comptroller Scott Stringer, the man who ordered the audit of the controversial primary, is on record as a Clinton delegate in the 10th Congressional District. In an election peppered with voter suppression claims and 126,000 democratic voters being purged from the voting rolls it would be prudent for officials to put someone less biased in charge of the investigation.
It seems that there is already a huge conflict of interests at play here. An investigation spearheaded by a delegate of one of the democratic presidential candidates does not appear to be the best way to handle this. Stringer is quoted to have said, “Our audits are above politics. If we find issues that would call on me to recuse myself, I will.”
It is more than possible that Mr. Stringer could run the investigation in an unbiased fashion. He could give the disenfranchised voters a quick and speedy resolution, but given the climate in New York there will always be a large swathe of the democratic voters that will question the results.