Dan English
Remember the famous Press headline “Canadian Voters May Decide Our Election”? In the televised debate last night, on Channel 19, Dan English, our County Clerk running for re-election, mentioned that the Federal UOCAVA overseas voting law was implemented in our local election because of a “mandate” from the Secretary of State. I thought that was surprising. He implied there was no law, it was just a directive from the Sec. of State!
So, today, on the Press blog under the article, I asked Dan English two questions. Please read our exchange and give your opinion:
Here are my questions:
Dan, Last night at the debate you said the Federal UOCAVA law, for overseas voters, was implemented in our local election because of a “mandate” from the Secretary of State. Can you please tell me when that was mandated and how that mandate was communicated to you? Was it in writing, by email, fax, voice, etc? When did that take place?
To your knowledge, has the Idaho legislature ever passed a bill officially adopting UOCAVA into state law? If so, when did that happen and where can I find a copy of it? Thank you.
Here’s Dan English’s response:
Mary, the direction to include absentee ballots for voters in local elections has been given to the Clerks at various training sessions by the Secretary of State for at least the last decade. Unfortunately (for all of us) it was not in the form of a written directive but just oral. Early in the Cd’A Election Challenge I asked the SOS if they had ever issued a written directive and was told they hadn’t. This will be another good reason for the legislature to address it in code one way or the other next year. This will be particularly important with election consolidation where all local elections will be conducted by the counties all over Idaho.
As to the legislation concerning UOCAVA voters and the Secretary of State having the authority to issue instructions, I would refer you to following Idaho Code.
34-201.Secretary of state chief election officer. The secretary of state is the chief election officer of this state, and it is his responsibility to obtain and maintain uniformity in the application, operation and interpretation of the election laws.
The secretary of state is responsible for providing information regarding voter registration procedures and absentee ballot procedures to be used by absent uniformed service voters and overseas voters with respect to elections for federal office as required by section 102 of the uniformed and overseas citizens absentee voting act (42 U.S.C. section 1973 et seq.).
And from me:
Dan English, thank you for your answer. I am shocked! How could the critical influence of overseas votes in our local elections be decided by one person? The law you cited does not appear to give the Sec. of State the right to MAKE laws, it says his job is to enforce the election laws that have already been made by the legislature. And UOCAVA is not a law for local elections, it applies only to Federal.
Dan E., since you have been County Clerk for so many years, why, why, why have you not brought this problem up to the legislature before now?
Ol’ Dan’o is and explicit example of the Peter Principal. This poor ol’ guy has just been stretched too far. He’s over his head. His response just doesn’t make any comprehensive sense. I think he should just go to pasture willingly. If by chance the omniscient voters of Kootenai County re-elect him, God help us.He just grabs at straws. Guess he needs his government paycheck as badly as Rick Currie does.
Comment by Ancientemplar — October 14, 2010 @ 8:24 pm
During the Election Challenge trial, the absurdity of allowing the woman who has lived in Canada for 22 years to vote in our CdA election was almost palpable. But the judge decided to allow her vote as legal because he was worried about stepping on the Federal UOCAVA law. Now we find out that it is NOT a state law; that the legislature never adopted it!
I recall Dan English on the witness stand, under oath, and I’m very sure he said something like “Idaho adopted UOCAVA”. That sounds like a huge misrepresentation to me.
The truth seems to be that the Sec. of State just decided, all on his own, to apply the Federal law to our Idaho elections.
Comment by mary — October 14, 2010 @ 10:23 pm
And yet, this is the profound level of arrogance routinely displayed by our current leadership roster. To think that a vote from a patently obvious non resident would even be considered valid is Mt Rushmore sized stupidity or neon light, in-your-face arrogance. But it stacks up quite neatly with how the Kroc came about and the Education Corridor, etc, etc.
It is beyond frustrating. Think about this. All they need to do is to field uniformed enforcers and deploy violence PRN and North Idaho is akin to a 3rd world dictatorship. When they want it, as they want it, the way they want it and just try to stop them. It is scary. People are afraid to challenge their power. Prices have been paid for doing so. They keep an enemies list, of that you can be certain.
Comment by Wallypog — October 15, 2010 @ 6:41 am
Dare I say, “Loophole, loophole?”
Comment by Stebbijo — October 15, 2010 @ 7:04 am
Mary,
The voters’ first mistake was believing Dan English was competent to hold the office. People voted for him because he’s likable and can shovel BS, not because he’s competent as a public administrator. English is a poseur, not a public administrator.
During our examination of public records prior the election contest lawsuit trial, English’s incompetence and remarkable laziness became evident. The anomalies we saw, hundreds of them, varied from administrative carelessness to ignoring his own written policies to actions contrary to state statutes to assumptions of authority not vested by statute.
We also learned that Idaho’s Secretary of State, Ben Ysursa, and his staff were hardly any better. Ysursa is lazy and incompetent, just like English. That both of these slugs are members of different political parties ought to demonstrate that incompetence is not a function of political party affiliation.
Election law administration is far too important to have been ignored by our legislature, but ignore it they have. In part, that’s because our legislators mistakenly relied on both Ysursa and his staff and the county clerks throughout Idaho. Our legislators assumed, incorrectly, that Ysursa, English, and others were paying attention and would keep legislators apprised of needed changes. Ysursa and English are pushing all absentee voting. As we learned during the investigation leading up to the election contest lawsuit, there are serious vulnerabilities created by absentee voter registration and voting. Ysursa and his staff and English have demonstrated that while they may be aware of these vulnerabilities, they choose to ignore them. That is a failure of duty as much as Dan English’s failure to obey state election law to keep certain absentee ballot records.
It is time for our legislators to show some leadership, if any of them have any. As I said elsewhere, I was profoundly disappointed that none of our sitting legislators could be bothered to attend any of the election contest hearings and trial sessions. Among legislative candidates, only Kathy Sims was there — for several of the sessions. Her opponent for state representative, Paula Marano, was nowhere to be seen. Then again, neither was English’s opponent for county clerk, Cliff Hayes. Hayes would be an infinitely better county clerk than English by virtue of Hayes’ knowledge, skills and abilities developed during his years in Post Falls, but he’s an absolutely awful campaigner in a community where people judge the quality of candidate by the number of backs he slaps and unkeepable promises he makes rather than by his demonstrated ability in public administration and his personal and professional integrity.
Comment by Bill — October 15, 2010 @ 7:24 am
Yes, Bill, I agree that Cliff Hayes would be far better as County Clerk than Dan English, even though Cliff is an awkward public speaker and Dan is a cheerful, chatty guy.
“All hat and no cattle” is an old saying that seems to fit Dan English. I would rather have Cliff’s substance over Dan’s style.
Cliff Hayes gets tremendous praise for his 20 years as Police Chief in Post Falls; those who have worked under him commend his leadership and administrative skills. We need fresh eyes on our election system and Cliff has the integrity we can trust.
Comment by mary — October 15, 2010 @ 7:49 am
I’ve done my part. Voted against English and Ysura. Would like to see some major campaigning on the part of those two opponents. And while on the subject, another plug for write-in Howard Griffiths against Phil Hart. To return Phil Hart to office again is simply odious, but descriptive of the flat line mentality of the Idaho voter.
Comment by rochereau — October 15, 2010 @ 9:43 am
Dan English, was appointed KC clerk in 1995 and he has been re-elected ever since. In my experience with local politics incumbents usually get re-elected unless, there’s some big controversy. He’s a nice guy, but nobody should win an election on being nice. Had he known that there was going to be an election challenge, he may have run a tighter ship at the clerks office.So, he was at least lacksadaisical in overseeing
the city council elections.
Comment by kageman — October 15, 2010 @ 2:49 pm
If you will pardon my cynical humor, I’ll bet he isn’t careless about this election…..
Comment by rochereau — October 15, 2010 @ 3:05 pm
kageman,
As English’s testimony at trial clearly revealed, he was incapable of delivering proper supervision. He is a resume-builder, not a leader or an administrator. It is a serious error to equate committee membership with competence. He simply is unaware of the breadth of the job as it relates to elections administration.
Comment by Bill — October 15, 2010 @ 7:14 pm