OW IS THE TIME for Americans to stand up and say: enough already. Public faith in the legitimacy of our democracy matters more than the differences between two worthy candidates. We must demand that the men who would be president demonstrate leadership now to prevent America's highest office from sinking into the swamp of the Elian syndrome.
Lest we forget, that combination of self-promoting protagonists, eyeball-seeking paparazzi, pyrotechnic protesters, and unprincipled lawyers succeeded principally in abusing an innocent 6-year-old for six months before a midnight federal raid returned him to his father in Cuba.
Whose interest did this process serve? Elian's? America's standing in the world? Justice? No one's - except those petty actors whose swirl fascinated but ultimately demeaned and disgusted us all.
Democratic elections are inherently imperfect. Machines have an irreducible ''margin of error.'' Human recounts of ballots with ambiguous chads and dimples invite partisan subjectivity.
As spotlights now focus on our electoral process, we are rightly shocked to discover how far current practices fall short of our ideals. Realization of stark opportunities for abuse must propel us to repair these failings before the next election.
The challenge today, however, is to limit the damage that has already been done - and to avoid a swamp that threatens to paralyze succession and damage the legitimacy and authority of our national institutions.
Commentators have rightly asked, what ''constitutional crisis''? In uncharted waters, it is difficult to imagine what the future holds. But scenarios that could lead to dangerous consequences abound.
Imagine, for example, that after the current partial recounts in Florida, the overseas absentee ballots are opened on Friday and a winner is declared. Should Bush lose to manually recounted votes in Democratic-controlled counties, would his campaign not call for equivalent recounts in counties where Republicans control the electoral machinery? His campaign could also extend the call for recounts to Wisconsin, Iowa, and Oregon (states where Gore's narrow margin of victory would have triggered recounts under Florida law and which together would give Bush the presidency without Florida).
As the drama intensifies, volunteer groups would come forth with extraordinary stories of abuses - some real, others imagined, many motivated primarily by advocates' search for attention. As campaigns compete to magnify opponents' abuses, a growing number of citizens will conclude that vote counting has become little more than an extension of the campaign by other means. A search for judges and jurisdictions favorable to partisan causes will cast doubt on the integrity of our judicial system as well.
As partisan blood boils, self-imposed constraints on incivility erode, the temptation to probe legal limits grows, and prospects for real and perceived sleight of hand expand.
At the end of this scorched path lies what? A constitutionally mandated process in which the US Congress meets on Jan. 6 to open the state's submission of their certified electors.
Should Gore come to that crossroad the apparent winner but under heavy suspicion of fraudulent recounting, Republicans who control Congress could escalate further. They could, for example, disqualify the electors from states whose recounting process they deem illegal. In the end, by a straight party line vote, Republicans could unilaterally assure George Bush a sordid victory.
Couldn't happen here, we strain to reassure ourselves. How quickly we forget the scandal and impeachment process that paralyzed Washington for over a year, deepening citizens' cynicism about all things political.
Indeed, the scenario above follows the script of what actually happened 125 years ago when Rutherford B. Hayes stole the presidency from Samuel Tilden. A strict party line vote awarded disputed electoral votes from Florida, South Carolina, Louisiana, and Oregon to Hayes. The result: a hobbled president known to all as ''His Fraudulency,'' unprecedented partisan warfare, and a cloud over national politics for a generation.
To prevent Elian-ization of the presidency, Bush and Gore have one final chance to pull back. Before Florida's overseas absentee ballots are counted, the outcome remains genuinely uncertain. Behind this veil, not knowing what lies on the other side, the candidates should reach a grand compromise.
Together they should agree now to end further recounts, drop all litigation, and await the absentee ballots. After those votes have been duly counted and certified on Saturday, one man should stand up and concede.
To ensure the American people that this ugly spectacle will not repeat itself, the compromise should include a commitment to appoint members of the other party to at least three major Cabinet posts and immediate appointment of a special bipartisan task force on electoral reform to be co-chaired by former secretaries of state Baker and Christopher (consisting of equal numbers of Democrats and Republicans).
The task force should be charged with making a review of the deficiencies in our presidential election process and provide recommendations for substantial reform. The candidates should each agree that whoever becomes president will accept the recommendations of the bipartisan commission and implement them before our next election.
Graham T. Allison is director of the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at Harvard's John F. Kennedy School of Government.
