AGREED: Clarify rules for recalls

I welcome and agree with Sunday’s Editorial on the need to clarify and strengthen the laws regarding recall in Idaho.

As mentioned in the editorial, the issue regarding the 75-day window for gathering signatures and its final resolution by the Secretary of State not only defies any reasonable reading of the applicable statutes, but also raises the specter of behind the scenes influence pedaling in the minds of the public. The election process in its entirety is clearly the most critical part of our democratic process and must be protected against any and all threats to its integrity.

The editorial raises two additional points that deserve clarification. The first implies that Recall CdA petition gatherers registered petition signers. That is simply not the case. Petition gatherers carried registration cards with them. If an individual expressed a desire to sign the petitions, but was not registered to vote in the City of Coeur d’Alene, he/she was offered the choice of either going to the Elections Department to register or, fill out a card provided by the gatherer. Either the individual or the gatherer would then deliver the properly filled out card to the Elections Department which would then conduct the actual registration process. Gatherers provided a delivery service in much the same way as the U.S. Postal System does. We did not “register” anyone; that was done by the Elections Department. Furthermore, the signing of the petitions was never a condition for our providing this service. Our handling of this was done with complete concurrence, in advance, by the Elections Department.

Secondly, the editorial expresses dissatisfaction with the Idaho Constitution, echoing the feelings of Jennifer Drake of the anti-recall effort who, on numerous occasions, stated that the fact that recall is clearly supported by the Constitution, does not make it right. I do not know what her standard of right and wrong is. The issue goes well beyond rule clarification and defines the basic right of electors.

Article 1, Section 2: “All political power is inherent in the people. Government is instituted for their equal protection and benefit, and they have the right to alter, reform or abolish the same whenever they may deem it necessary”;

Article 6, Section 6: “Every public officer in the state of Idaho, excepting the judicial officers, is subject to recall by the legal voters of the state or of the electoral district from which he is elected.”

I am not a constitutional lawyer, but the Constitution does call for a reason: that the electors “deem it necessary.” A general election places people in office; the recall process removes them, both are constitutional and both are inherent in the power of the people.

Going further, the editorial fails to mention an additional issue that affected the outcome of the recall effort. The certification process conducted by the County Clerk and the Elections Department is charged with determining that the individual signing the petition is registered to vote in the City of Coeur d’Alene. The individual’s address is used to determine whether or not that person actually/currently lives within the City. Many people may not be aware that moving within the city limits could make them ineligible to sign a petition or to vote. They must register their new address with the Elections Department to be certified as a Coeur d’Alene elector. A person could have been born in the city, lived at the same address their entire life, registered to vote when they reached legal age, voted in every election, and then move next door prior to signing a petition. They would not have been considered eligible to sign a petition or to vote.

Clearly, we want to limit voting rights to eligible electors. But it does not seem reasonable to disenfranchise an elector because they moved without changing their city of residence or made a mistake when signing the petition. This would not likely be an easy rule to change, but there must be a better solution. In the mean time, we need to make people more aware of their need to protect their right to this critical component of our American democratic system?

FRANK ORZELL

Coeur d’Alene