NO LITTLE KIRK, WE SAID YOU COULD HAVE “A” DOG: Curiouser and curiouser is an apt description after 10 days down the rabbit hole in the case of the deadline-missing candidates.
Because a “preliminary” half-ruling by former “de facto” State Elections Chief Kevin Cronin has determined half the equation in saying that soon-to-be-former House Majority Leader Kirk Caldwell did not withdraw from running for his old post until after the filing deadline- doing so on Wed. July 23, not before the filing deadline on the 22nd- enabling the Democratic Party to pick their replacement candidate, Isaac Choy
But as to whether Caldwell- or anyone- broke the law as the ruling infers, by illegally filing for a second office without withdrawing from the one he had previously filed for, Cronin exercised his “I’m not here” privilege and was silent.
According Ian Lind who today provided the pdf file of Cronin’s ruling:
That appears to bounce the issue of Caldwell’s candidacy for the city council back to city clerk Denise Decosta, who by law (Section 12-8 HRS) must decide on challenges to candidates for county office. Now that Cronin has ruled that Caldwell remained a candidate in his House district until sometime on the morning following the filing deadline, and state law prohibits a candidate from filing for more than one office, Decosta appears to have less wiggle room in determining whether Caldwell’s council filing was valid.
So Decosta, who if she wasn’t a law-breaker herself at best aided and abetted Caldwell in breaking the law prohibiting the filing for more than one office, will be the one to decide whether Caldwell’s filing for council is valid regardless of how the insufficient-valid-signatures issue with Caldwell’s filing plays out.
If she rules Caldwell, having had his filing accepted by her office, legally filed for council she would be the one who was the scoff-law for allowing him to file for two offices at once. But if she rules that her office made a mistake in accepting it and bans Caldwell from the ballot, it’s all’s well that ends well- for her... unless of course Caldwell sues her for screwing him- despite the fact that he apparently didn’t know or intentionally broke the law despite the fact that he makes the laws..
Caldwell’s kind of like the guy with two girlfriends. He’s thinking the worst that could happen is that he’ll have to chose one or the other if they find out about each other. But when they do uncover his scheme they both ditch him.
It appears that Kirk is in for a rude awakening when he wakes up to find that after diddling around with two constituencies his new bed in the political gutter.
And you know it couldn’t happen to a nicer- or at least more appropriate- guy.
Anyone who observes- or cares about- the legislature knows Caldwell primarily for his blind devotion to Speaker Calvin Say and for his penchant for obstructing legislation by assuring it gets killed, if not by him then through his support of powerful committee chairs.
If the speaker didn’t like a bill or it didn’t serve their leadership faction politically he was the hatchet man. He and Say killed dozens of good bills this session- the kind people look at and say “how did that not get passed?”- and pulled the same crap when veto overrides were proposed, denying a vote on many of them by claiming, as he did during session, that “there weren’t enough votes”, without even bother to hold one.
He’s been a real champ at these political moves, shielding legislators from having to commit on controversial issues in an election year.
Cronin also has more problems of his own today after breaking another law and running up against common sense because he reportedly already ordered the ballot to be printed without allowing the parties to examine them (in violation of state law) and included Caldwell’s name on the ballots even though his ruling practically obviates the rejection Caldwell’s council filing
It’s quite the biblical parable. But presumably there will be some other twist such as Cronin’s decision being nullified because perhaps his self-proclaimed “de facto” leadership status might be insufficient to allow him to make the decision in the first place.
We just heard the Mad Hatter say to stay un-tuned
-----------------
And in a follow-up to our SuperScamFerry story yesterday there are two seemingly conflicting stories out of ferry-builder Austal’s home town newspaper, the Mobile Press-Register, regarding the copmpany’s military contracts and plans to build warships for the Navy.
The first, published Wednesday, is headlined
Audit: Austal failed to keep tabs on LCS Company didn't keep Navy managers informed
It tell us that the big Navy shipbuilding contract they are depending on might be on shaky ground saying:
Austal USA failed to keep Navy managers informed about the cost and schedule of the littoral combat ship under construction at its Mobile yard, according to a recent report that also faults the Navy and the project's lead contractor, General Dynamics Corp., for failing to ride herd on the company.
Overall, the review by the Naval Audit Service outlines a "significant breakdown" in internal controls over the high-profile project, now some $300 million over budget and a year behind the original timetable.
Program managers "were not provided valid and reliable cost, schedule and technical performance information for decision-making purposes," the report said.
"These issues raise concerns regarding Austal's management processes impacting the timeliness, accuracy, reliability and validity of performance management data that (Navy leaders) were supposed to rely upon to manage the contracts."
But then today there’s this:
Austal begins $254M facility; Shipyard counting on expansion to win more military contracts
Austal USA is banking on a $254 million expansion of its Mobile shipyard to lay the groundwork for large-scale U.S. military work.
Austal broke ground Thursday on a modular manufacturing facility that promises faster, less expensive ship construction at a time when the Defense Department is trying to rein in costs, particularly on ships.
Whether the U.S. Navy responds with new contracts remains to be seen, but one Washington, D.C., analyst said he feels there's a good chance the multimillion-dollar gamble will pay off.
"I don't think there's ever a guarantee in life," said Jay Korman, senior Navy analyst for consulting firm Avascent Group. "But when you look at the progress they've made on their program, they are right on track. I think the military customers will come ? that's the bottom line."
Gotta file this one under “huh?”
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query Kirk Caldwell. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query Kirk Caldwell. Sort by date Show all posts
Friday, August 1, 2008
Monday, August 18, 2008
OUTFOXED AGAIN
OUTFOXED AGAIN: Just when it couldn’t get any more devoid of rationality it turns out that there’s now another wrinkle in the Dance of the Headless Chickens in the Honolulu filing deadline debacle today after Honolulu Advertiser reporter Derrick DePledge dug up an Aug 7 court ruling certifying a “replacement” for a candidate that was never an official candidate.
The replacement candidate, Isaac Choy, is the same one that was named in the Kirk Caldwell mess on July 26. But in a “that was our story and we were sticking to it but this one is much better” spiel from self declared “De Facto” Elections Chief Kevin Cronin, it is now Chrystn Eads- who never filed completed papers- that was “disqualified” to put Choy on the ballot.
And that didn’t happen until a formerly secret Aug. 7 court ruling.
Cronin claims that Eads’ whatever-it-was was not official until Aug 7 when a judge ruled on a case apparently filed by Republicans in the confusion as to who was being replaced when they filed the challenge.
Conflicting newspaper reports in the days after the filing deadline resulted in the Republicans originally challenging the “replacement” based on erroneous-at-the-time reports by Richard Borreca in the Honolulu Star-Bulletin that Eads was the one that “needed” replacing
But DePledge’s report at the time that it was indeed Caldwell that was being replaced turned out to be the correct one.
Caldwell was eliminated for filing for a second office-Honolulu County Council- at the same time he was still running for his House seat. Cronin ruled Caldwell’s verbal withdrawal wasn’t sufficient and when Caldwell filed “in writing” the next day Cronin’s subsequent ruling left him not running for anything.
The Republicans challenged the date of the Caldwell withdrawal saying it happened the day of the filing deadline, July 22, and in a ruling that flies in the face of the actual law Cronin ruled that the withdrawal came the day after the filing deadline and a “three day replacement” rule let the Democrats put Choy on the ballot- and do it via telephone on a Saturday after Cronin had ruled that Caldwell’s withdrawal via telephone was not sufficient.
But, it appears the Republican case or perhaps one from Honolulu County Clerk Denise Decosta, either on her own or as a reaction to the Republican challenge in the Eads matter (the article doesn’t make it clear who filed for the court ruling), went to court and in an August 7 ruling Eads was “officially” not on the ballot, which Cronin appears to be interpreting as a “disqualification”.
There was no explanation of how a candidate who never officially filed could be disqualified.
Therefore the state is claiming that Decosta’s ruling a few days after the filing deadline that Eads filing was incomplete wasn’t official” until the Aug. 7 ruling and therefore- get this- the Democrats had three days from Aug 7 to pick Choy (again).
And therefore, supposedly, the date of Caldwell’s withdrawal is moot because now Choy is replacing Eads.
Borreca is obviously psychic.
Actually though, the law requires that county clerks go to circuit court for these rulings and though we have some reason to believe it was Decosta who filed for the Aug 7 ruling, she refused to get a court ruling for the one she made that disqualified Caldwell.
This all means that, Cronin and the state is contending, it doesn’t matter when Caldwell withdrew for purposes of the actual Republican challenge saying that the withdrawal took place Tuesday July 22 and therefore the clock ran out on Friday- and therefore the Democrats missed the three day deadline.
And since Caldwell is not challenging when his withdrawal actually took place- even though he would be eligible to run for council if it had been “official” on July 22 instead of the 23rd- Cronin’s ruling in that case that is wasn’t official until the 23rd is for all intent and purpose now irrelevant.... and so it’s legality is no longer a question
In another odd yet relevant tidbit, today it was reported that, in trying to justify his contrary to law ruling in the Caldwell withdrawal, Cronin cited a state “Candidate Information Sheet” we exclusively reported on a week or so ago.
The sheet contains erroneous “written withdrawal required” information but contains a disclaimer that says the pamphlet may not be in compliance with the law and to check the actual law if need be
Cronin’s list of dirty deeds grows. So far he has:
-Failed to register to vote, a requirement for his job, until this month after being hired in February. He said he was too busy and always intended to take the required 30 seconds to complete, stamp and put the form in the mail. He declared himself the “De Facto” Elections Chief when the lack of voter registration came light.
-Ruled that Caldwell’s withdrawal had to be in writing despite past practices of the clerk’s and elections’ offices, and the clerk’s assurance to Caldwell that his withdrawal was official. Caldwell’s oral withdrawal was followed by a call by Decosta’s office to Cronin’s office saying he’d withdrawn. Cronin’s ruling came despite the fact that the law itself does not call for a written withdrawal except under for “health reasons”.
-Sent the ballots to the printer without the legally required review by non-partisan and party observers. Cronin said it was all ok because they turned out to be accurate- and has parsed rulings and manipulated the courts to keep them correct.
-Was severely chastised and reversed by a hearings officer for picking a known-to-be-remarkably-hackable Hart InterCivic election system- a firm he reportedly has had ties to- at a cost almost three times that of a competing bid. Cronin blamed the procurement laws rather than take responsibility
-Was reported here, in an exclusive report, to have been a defendant in a suit regarding keeping blacks off the ballot in 1988 when he was a lawyer for the Wisconsin elections office. After two lower court rulings apparently said he had acted so negligently or purposefully that he had to stand civil trial, a US appeals court ruled he had immunity from the suit- the type of immunity that all officials have for decisions in their official capacity.
We probably left out something. Perhaps the most egregious thing in all this is that the Elections Commission has given him a clean bill of health and is not even considering firing him.
--------------------#-------------
The replacement candidate, Isaac Choy, is the same one that was named in the Kirk Caldwell mess on July 26. But in a “that was our story and we were sticking to it but this one is much better” spiel from self declared “De Facto” Elections Chief Kevin Cronin, it is now Chrystn Eads- who never filed completed papers- that was “disqualified” to put Choy on the ballot.
And that didn’t happen until a formerly secret Aug. 7 court ruling.
Cronin claims that Eads’ whatever-it-was was not official until Aug 7 when a judge ruled on a case apparently filed by Republicans in the confusion as to who was being replaced when they filed the challenge.
Conflicting newspaper reports in the days after the filing deadline resulted in the Republicans originally challenging the “replacement” based on erroneous-at-the-time reports by Richard Borreca in the Honolulu Star-Bulletin that Eads was the one that “needed” replacing
But DePledge’s report at the time that it was indeed Caldwell that was being replaced turned out to be the correct one.
Caldwell was eliminated for filing for a second office-Honolulu County Council- at the same time he was still running for his House seat. Cronin ruled Caldwell’s verbal withdrawal wasn’t sufficient and when Caldwell filed “in writing” the next day Cronin’s subsequent ruling left him not running for anything.
The Republicans challenged the date of the Caldwell withdrawal saying it happened the day of the filing deadline, July 22, and in a ruling that flies in the face of the actual law Cronin ruled that the withdrawal came the day after the filing deadline and a “three day replacement” rule let the Democrats put Choy on the ballot- and do it via telephone on a Saturday after Cronin had ruled that Caldwell’s withdrawal via telephone was not sufficient.
But, it appears the Republican case or perhaps one from Honolulu County Clerk Denise Decosta, either on her own or as a reaction to the Republican challenge in the Eads matter (the article doesn’t make it clear who filed for the court ruling), went to court and in an August 7 ruling Eads was “officially” not on the ballot, which Cronin appears to be interpreting as a “disqualification”.
There was no explanation of how a candidate who never officially filed could be disqualified.
Therefore the state is claiming that Decosta’s ruling a few days after the filing deadline that Eads filing was incomplete wasn’t official” until the Aug. 7 ruling and therefore- get this- the Democrats had three days from Aug 7 to pick Choy (again).
And therefore, supposedly, the date of Caldwell’s withdrawal is moot because now Choy is replacing Eads.
Borreca is obviously psychic.
Actually though, the law requires that county clerks go to circuit court for these rulings and though we have some reason to believe it was Decosta who filed for the Aug 7 ruling, she refused to get a court ruling for the one she made that disqualified Caldwell.
This all means that, Cronin and the state is contending, it doesn’t matter when Caldwell withdrew for purposes of the actual Republican challenge saying that the withdrawal took place Tuesday July 22 and therefore the clock ran out on Friday- and therefore the Democrats missed the three day deadline.
And since Caldwell is not challenging when his withdrawal actually took place- even though he would be eligible to run for council if it had been “official” on July 22 instead of the 23rd- Cronin’s ruling in that case that is wasn’t official until the 23rd is for all intent and purpose now irrelevant.... and so it’s legality is no longer a question
In another odd yet relevant tidbit, today it was reported that, in trying to justify his contrary to law ruling in the Caldwell withdrawal, Cronin cited a state “Candidate Information Sheet” we exclusively reported on a week or so ago.
The sheet contains erroneous “written withdrawal required” information but contains a disclaimer that says the pamphlet may not be in compliance with the law and to check the actual law if need be
Cronin’s list of dirty deeds grows. So far he has:
-Failed to register to vote, a requirement for his job, until this month after being hired in February. He said he was too busy and always intended to take the required 30 seconds to complete, stamp and put the form in the mail. He declared himself the “De Facto” Elections Chief when the lack of voter registration came light.
-Ruled that Caldwell’s withdrawal had to be in writing despite past practices of the clerk’s and elections’ offices, and the clerk’s assurance to Caldwell that his withdrawal was official. Caldwell’s oral withdrawal was followed by a call by Decosta’s office to Cronin’s office saying he’d withdrawn. Cronin’s ruling came despite the fact that the law itself does not call for a written withdrawal except under for “health reasons”.
-Sent the ballots to the printer without the legally required review by non-partisan and party observers. Cronin said it was all ok because they turned out to be accurate- and has parsed rulings and manipulated the courts to keep them correct.
-Was severely chastised and reversed by a hearings officer for picking a known-to-be-remarkably-hackable Hart InterCivic election system- a firm he reportedly has had ties to- at a cost almost three times that of a competing bid. Cronin blamed the procurement laws rather than take responsibility
-Was reported here, in an exclusive report, to have been a defendant in a suit regarding keeping blacks off the ballot in 1988 when he was a lawyer for the Wisconsin elections office. After two lower court rulings apparently said he had acted so negligently or purposefully that he had to stand civil trial, a US appeals court ruled he had immunity from the suit- the type of immunity that all officials have for decisions in their official capacity.
We probably left out something. Perhaps the most egregious thing in all this is that the Elections Commission has given him a clean bill of health and is not even considering firing him.
--------------------#-------------
Sunday, July 27, 2008
EVERY DOG THINKS HE HAS HIS DAY
EVERY DOG THINKS HE HAS HIS DAY: Well it looked bad for the home team yesterday when we spewed hydrophobic froth and foam over the Honolulu County Clerk regarding “replacing” Chrystn Eads on the ballot for the 24th state House district race
As our “correction” stated we read only a “breaking news” piece and failed to read regular edition version of the story by the Honolulu Advertiser’s Derrick DePledge regarding the musical chairs fiasco originally caused by Ann Kobayashi’s run for mayor of Honolulu, which we also cited tangentially this week.
Unlike the “breaking news” piece we cited, the “regular newspaper” version of DePledge’s story stated in so many words and unequivocally that the “replacement” candidate- who, as we heard today, is Isaac Choy- was to replace Rep. Kirk Caldwell due to his “withdrawal” from his House race.
Although Caldwell he had previously filed for re-election to his 24th district seat he also filed to take Kobayashi’s now open seat on the Honolulu Council to avoid giving former Honolulu Councilperson Duke Bainum a “free ride” in November.
The problem is that apparently he never officially and in writing withdrew from his House race before filing to run for council.
But strangely that “regular” article is apparently no longer in the Advertiser archives today and has been replaced with one updated yesterday evening that is similar to the original “breaking news” piece in not making it crystal clear if it was Caldwell or Eads that was being “replaced”.
Clear as mud? Not yet? Good. Because adding to the ambiguity is that the “breaking news” piece we cited was timelined at 8:36 a.m. Saturday, well after the Advertiser- and presumably the regular news article- went to press.
Oh, and one more slap to the face in this Chinatown “she’s my sister, she’s my daughter, she’s my sister, she’s my daughter” routine: DePledge did assure us in an email after we posted yesterday morning that it was indeed his understanding that it was Caldwell that was being replaced, not Eads.
Unambiguously and unequivocally unclear yet?
Wait. Because unfortunately we also didn’t turn to the other Honolulu newspaper before penning our correction, and evidently they didn’t get the same memo that DePledge did.
Star-Bulletin’s political reporter Richard Borreca seems to tell us that indeed the replacement was for Eads who, according to the clerk that first accepted her petition twenty minutes after the deadline, didn’t get her papers filed in time.
We finally did get to read yesterday’s Star-Bulletin’s “breaking news” after Doug White at Poinography linked to it and our piece early yesterday evening and said, as we did, that the replacement was for Eads.
Here’s the pertinent part of the take from DePledge in today’s ’Tiser:
The state Office of Elections informed the party on Friday that it had until yesterday afternoon to pick a replacement for Caldwell. The elections office determined that Chrystn Eads, an aide to Mayor Mufi Hannemann, had not properly completed her paperwork when she tried to file for Caldwell's seat before the Tuesday deadline.
It’s pretty clear that DePledge thinks that the clerk says that the one being replaced is Caldwell. He apparently tells us that although the Clerk’s rejection of Eads’ paperwork was for Caldwell’s 24th district House seat, it was Caldwell’s withdrawal that allowed the party to pick a replacement, not Eads’
But Borreca seemingly says the opposite in today’s paper as he did yesterday afternoon at 4:30 p.m. in that Star-Bulletin “breaking news” story. Today, as yesterday, he maintains that:
...State Democratic party members picked Choy to fill the vacancy left when state elections officials ruled that Chrystn Eads was not a valid candidate for office in the 24th state House district of Manoa.
Party officials started meeting Friday afternoon after getting word from Kevin Cronin, chief elections officer, that Eads, an assistant to Mayor Mufi Hannemann, did not have enough signatures on her nomination petition by the required deadline.
Cronin said in a notice to the party that Caldwell withdrew his candidacy for the state House on July 23.
"These events create a vacancy for the state House seat," Cronin said in a letter to the Democrats.
Cronin failed to return phone calls to the Star-Bulletin asking for comment....
Now Borreca might be seen to be dancing around and not being sure himself when he says Choy was picked “to fill the vacancy left when state elections officials ruled that Chrystn Eads was not a valid candidate”. Still, it doesn’t leave much more wiggle room than DePledge did in his differing take.
But the real kicker is that, if the Eads saga was not absurd enough, the replacement of Caldwell is also apparently another shell game..
The actual state law says:
In case of death, withdrawal, or disqualification of any party candidate after filing, the vacancy so caused may be filled by the party. The party shall be notified by the chief election officer or the clerk in the case of a county office immediately after the death, withdrawal, or disqualification.
But state law also prohibits someone from running for two offices at the same time.
There’s a whole brouhaha over when Caldwell actually withdrew from his house race because he supposedly gave a “verbal” withdrawal on Tuesday- as he filed his incomplete paperwork for Council before the 4:30 p.m. deadline- but didn’t put it in writing until Wed. morning the 23rd - as Cronin corroborates according to all reports.
The allegedly “illegal” final signature- by a staff member in the Clerk’s office after the deadline- on Caldwell’s Council filing aside, he couldn’t have filed legally for Council until he first withdrew from his 24th district House race... a contest he had legally filed for previous to last week. That would have made the Democratic Party’s naming a of replacement out of the question because the law says “withdrawal... after filing” (emphasis added) triggers allowing for a replacement.
Caldwell is quoted everywhere as saying his official withdrawal letter did not get sent until after the deadline. If that’s so his filing for Council would have been invalid and presumably the Clerk’s office cannot accept an invalid filing.
Oh and one more potential “twist”- local races in Hawai`i are non-partisan and state law is silent on exactly how a “withdrawn” candidate’s party might be determined in the event something like this happens in the future in a local election.
And guess what- that “event” might actually have occurred on Kaua`i as Councilperson Mel Rapozo withdrew from his previously filed council race to run for Mayor but it isn’t clear how, when or even if he did so.
Hawai`i Republicans’ heads are spinning over this one as one would expect and you can actually hear the gnashing teeth and see the steam-emanating ears as you read Republican House Rep. Lynn Flannigan’s op-ed piece on it all in today’s Star-Bulletin.
Therefore we think we apologize for getting it wrong, then right, then wrong, then right again, wrong again and right again. And we seek forgiveness from anyone who was additionally confused by relying on our bewilderment based on everyone else’s uncertainty... or for today’s continued confusion, confarnit.
Maybe we can take solace in the fact that no one seems to know how to play this game..
There’s an old journalism school joke about rookie reporter Finnegan. He comes back from covering a town council meeting and hands his editor a detailed 1500 word chronology about how the new bridge that had been previously cut from the budget was revived at the beginning of the 12 hour meeting but was killed hours later. Then miraculously, after massive public testimony in support, it was passed at the very end of the meeting.
The editor, citing the standard need for a brevity in news writing, tells the cub correspondent to cut it down. After another hour of work Finnegan comes back with a 700 word piece and the editor sends him back to cut more. He comes back later with a 300 word piece and the editor sends him back for an even shorter rewrite.
Finnegan finally comes back with his last version which reads:
“On again, off again, on again- Finnegan.”
Finnegan had it easy....
As our “correction” stated we read only a “breaking news” piece and failed to read regular edition version of the story by the Honolulu Advertiser’s Derrick DePledge regarding the musical chairs fiasco originally caused by Ann Kobayashi’s run for mayor of Honolulu, which we also cited tangentially this week.
Unlike the “breaking news” piece we cited, the “regular newspaper” version of DePledge’s story stated in so many words and unequivocally that the “replacement” candidate- who, as we heard today, is Isaac Choy- was to replace Rep. Kirk Caldwell due to his “withdrawal” from his House race.
Although Caldwell he had previously filed for re-election to his 24th district seat he also filed to take Kobayashi’s now open seat on the Honolulu Council to avoid giving former Honolulu Councilperson Duke Bainum a “free ride” in November.
The problem is that apparently he never officially and in writing withdrew from his House race before filing to run for council.
But strangely that “regular” article is apparently no longer in the Advertiser archives today and has been replaced with one updated yesterday evening that is similar to the original “breaking news” piece in not making it crystal clear if it was Caldwell or Eads that was being “replaced”.
Clear as mud? Not yet? Good. Because adding to the ambiguity is that the “breaking news” piece we cited was timelined at 8:36 a.m. Saturday, well after the Advertiser- and presumably the regular news article- went to press.
Oh, and one more slap to the face in this Chinatown “she’s my sister, she’s my daughter, she’s my sister, she’s my daughter” routine: DePledge did assure us in an email after we posted yesterday morning that it was indeed his understanding that it was Caldwell that was being replaced, not Eads.
Unambiguously and unequivocally unclear yet?
Wait. Because unfortunately we also didn’t turn to the other Honolulu newspaper before penning our correction, and evidently they didn’t get the same memo that DePledge did.
Star-Bulletin’s political reporter Richard Borreca seems to tell us that indeed the replacement was for Eads who, according to the clerk that first accepted her petition twenty minutes after the deadline, didn’t get her papers filed in time.
We finally did get to read yesterday’s Star-Bulletin’s “breaking news” after Doug White at Poinography linked to it and our piece early yesterday evening and said, as we did, that the replacement was for Eads.
Here’s the pertinent part of the take from DePledge in today’s ’Tiser:
The state Office of Elections informed the party on Friday that it had until yesterday afternoon to pick a replacement for Caldwell. The elections office determined that Chrystn Eads, an aide to Mayor Mufi Hannemann, had not properly completed her paperwork when she tried to file for Caldwell's seat before the Tuesday deadline.
It’s pretty clear that DePledge thinks that the clerk says that the one being replaced is Caldwell. He apparently tells us that although the Clerk’s rejection of Eads’ paperwork was for Caldwell’s 24th district House seat, it was Caldwell’s withdrawal that allowed the party to pick a replacement, not Eads’
But Borreca seemingly says the opposite in today’s paper as he did yesterday afternoon at 4:30 p.m. in that Star-Bulletin “breaking news” story. Today, as yesterday, he maintains that:
...State Democratic party members picked Choy to fill the vacancy left when state elections officials ruled that Chrystn Eads was not a valid candidate for office in the 24th state House district of Manoa.
Party officials started meeting Friday afternoon after getting word from Kevin Cronin, chief elections officer, that Eads, an assistant to Mayor Mufi Hannemann, did not have enough signatures on her nomination petition by the required deadline.
Cronin said in a notice to the party that Caldwell withdrew his candidacy for the state House on July 23.
"These events create a vacancy for the state House seat," Cronin said in a letter to the Democrats.
Cronin failed to return phone calls to the Star-Bulletin asking for comment....
Now Borreca might be seen to be dancing around and not being sure himself when he says Choy was picked “to fill the vacancy left when state elections officials ruled that Chrystn Eads was not a valid candidate”. Still, it doesn’t leave much more wiggle room than DePledge did in his differing take.
But the real kicker is that, if the Eads saga was not absurd enough, the replacement of Caldwell is also apparently another shell game..
The actual state law says:
In case of death, withdrawal, or disqualification of any party candidate after filing, the vacancy so caused may be filled by the party. The party shall be notified by the chief election officer or the clerk in the case of a county office immediately after the death, withdrawal, or disqualification.
But state law also prohibits someone from running for two offices at the same time.
There’s a whole brouhaha over when Caldwell actually withdrew from his house race because he supposedly gave a “verbal” withdrawal on Tuesday- as he filed his incomplete paperwork for Council before the 4:30 p.m. deadline- but didn’t put it in writing until Wed. morning the 23rd - as Cronin corroborates according to all reports.
The allegedly “illegal” final signature- by a staff member in the Clerk’s office after the deadline- on Caldwell’s Council filing aside, he couldn’t have filed legally for Council until he first withdrew from his 24th district House race... a contest he had legally filed for previous to last week. That would have made the Democratic Party’s naming a of replacement out of the question because the law says “withdrawal... after filing” (emphasis added) triggers allowing for a replacement.
Caldwell is quoted everywhere as saying his official withdrawal letter did not get sent until after the deadline. If that’s so his filing for Council would have been invalid and presumably the Clerk’s office cannot accept an invalid filing.
Oh and one more potential “twist”- local races in Hawai`i are non-partisan and state law is silent on exactly how a “withdrawn” candidate’s party might be determined in the event something like this happens in the future in a local election.
And guess what- that “event” might actually have occurred on Kaua`i as Councilperson Mel Rapozo withdrew from his previously filed council race to run for Mayor but it isn’t clear how, when or even if he did so.
Hawai`i Republicans’ heads are spinning over this one as one would expect and you can actually hear the gnashing teeth and see the steam-emanating ears as you read Republican House Rep. Lynn Flannigan’s op-ed piece on it all in today’s Star-Bulletin.
Therefore we think we apologize for getting it wrong, then right, then wrong, then right again, wrong again and right again. And we seek forgiveness from anyone who was additionally confused by relying on our bewilderment based on everyone else’s uncertainty... or for today’s continued confusion, confarnit.
Maybe we can take solace in the fact that no one seems to know how to play this game..
There’s an old journalism school joke about rookie reporter Finnegan. He comes back from covering a town council meeting and hands his editor a detailed 1500 word chronology about how the new bridge that had been previously cut from the budget was revived at the beginning of the 12 hour meeting but was killed hours later. Then miraculously, after massive public testimony in support, it was passed at the very end of the meeting.
The editor, citing the standard need for a brevity in news writing, tells the cub correspondent to cut it down. After another hour of work Finnegan comes back with a 700 word piece and the editor sends him back to cut more. He comes back later with a 300 word piece and the editor sends him back for an even shorter rewrite.
Finnegan finally comes back with his last version which reads:
“On again, off again, on again- Finnegan.”
Finnegan had it easy....
Tuesday, August 19, 2008
CHASIN’ THE CHICKENS AGAIN
CHASIN’ THE CHICKENS AGAIN: Well thanks to Ian Lind’s posting of the actual filings in the latest Dance of the Headless Chicken court case, at the risk of turning into a 24/7 “All Kevin Cronin All the Time” blog, we do have more news to clarify and supplement yesterday’s review of the latest Cronin machinations.
Yesterday we reported on the old switcheroo someone pulled in getting an Aug 7 court ruling that Chrystn Eads was “disqualified” from the House race for Kirk Caldwell’s old state house seat and that he was citing her case now as the reason for allowing replacement candidate Isaac Choy to run- this after Choy had been chosen to replace Caldwell causing the Republican Party to sue saying the replacement was outside the three day window for replacement candidates.
We wondered who filed the suit heard on Aug 7- how did it get into court? We hypothesized it might have been the Republicans or the Honolulu County Clerk.
But we should have know because the filer was none other than Cronin himself.
We have no inside info as to why Cronin did so but the only reason would be that he was ready to be reversed on the Caldwell decision pegging his date of withdrawal to when the elections office received his withdrawal in writing the day after the filing deadline, not his verbal withdrawal before the deadline.
To review the actual law again HRS 11-117 says nothing about written withdrawals except in cases of “ill health”
It says:
§11-117 Withdrawal of candidates; disqualification; death; notice. (a) Any candidate may withdraw not later than 4:30 p.m. on the day immediately following the close of filing for any reason and may withdraw after the close of filing up to 4:30 p.m. on the twentieth day prior to an election for reasons of ill health. When a candidate withdraws for ill health, the candidate shall give notice in writing to the chief election officer if the candidate was seeking a congressional or state office, or the candidate shall give notice in writing to the county clerk if the candidate was seeking a county office. The notice shall be accompanied by a statement from a licensed physician indicating that such ill health may endanger the candidate's life.
Despite this as we reported exclusively earlier an official state produced Candidate Fact Sheet says that, the law be damned, ALL withdrawals must be in writing.
The fact sheet says
Candidates may withdraw for any reason not later than the day immediately following the deadline to file nomination papers. To withdraw, the candidate must submit a written notice to the Chief Election Officer (for state and federal office candidacy) or to the appropriate City/County Clerk (for county office candidacy). (HRS Section 11-117).
Yesterday we weren’t quite sure how the news reports regarding the fact sheet fit into it all. But an examination of Cronin’s filings to have Eads’ “withdrawal” re-trigger Choy’s placement on the ballot puts the false fact sheet at the heart of his case for dating Caldwell’s withdrawal.
Cronin goes to great lengths to use the fact sheet to justify his decision, even getting the Ballot Operations Section Head of the Office of Elections, Lori Tomczyk, to file an affidavit saying that all candidates got the fact sheet, even Caldwell
Cronin uses the fact sheet that misrepresents the law as the sole legal justification for his decision in the Caldwell-withdrawal-date decision he made last month and, even though this was a filing for summery judgment in court the actual citation of the relevant law- HRS 11-117- is nowhere in the brief, only many mentions of the “fact sheet”.
Oh and by the way the fact sheet says on it’s cover
This Fact Sheet is intended for informational purposes only and should not be used as an authority on the Hawaii election law and candidate deadlines... Consult the Hawaii Revised Statutes and other sources for more detailed and accurate requirements.
Cronin, under fire for the Caldwell ruling and knowing that the actual law says nothing about withdrawals being in writing in all circumstances, knew he was vulnerable if a ruling on it ever got before a judge.
Just the fact that Caldwell wasn’t challenging his ruling wasn’t enough because there was an outstanding Republican Party-filed suit contesting the “in writing” decision. And if a judge read the actual law he was pretty sure to overrule Cronin- overrule him in a case that was high profile, one for which Cronin has been under continual fire in the press and the blogs and only one of the myriad of Cronin’s actions that have put the elections chief’s job in jeopardy.
What to do, what to do?. How could he make his Caldwell decision go away?
Easy- by essentially suing himself to put the situation with Eads before a judge and getting an official ruling on her case without anyone to challenge it (because no one knew) and fait accompli allowing the Democrats to re-select Choy based on Eads case, not Caldwell’s... all before anyone knew about the done deal.
We had suspected that maybe in the early confusing days after the filing deadline- when the chickens were all first decapitated- someone filed a case thinking it was Eads who was being replaced by Choy rather than Caldwell due to erroneous press reports.
Eads, for those who don’t remember, did not get her papers filed with enough signatures until after the 4:30 p.m., July 22 deadline but was allowed by Honolulu County Clerk Denise Decosta to collect signatures and file at 4:50 p.m.- an action that Decosta said constituted a non-filing in a decision she made that week.
But Cronin, seeing a little wiggle room revived the filing, saying essentially that the clerk’s mistaken action in accepting the papers late constituted a filing.
And so he went to court to challenge the filing, got a ruing on Aug 7, wrote to the Democratic Party Chair Brian Schatz- who had earlier used his influence to get Decosta to accept Eads filing- who then re-selected Choy to be the replacement candidate, this time for Eads.
And that, Cronin claims, makes his Caldwell decision irrelevant, so moot.
This is sure to cause Republican’s heads to explode when they realize that Schatz’s phone call to Decosta at the 4:30 July 22nd filing deadline asking her to “err on the side of inclusion” and allow Eads to go outside, gather signatures and then file her papers, ended up assuring the Democrats would have a candidate in the race for a House seat in a Democratic stronghold district which otherwise would go to the only person left in the race, a Republican.
Cronin is claiming that even though Eads filing was not legal and should by all reason be adjudged to have never happened, because of Decosta’s error in accepting it- at Schatz’s request- Eads had to be “disqualified” for the office she never qualified for.
The file contains no briefs from anyone but Cronin and his brief goes into convoluted detail as to supposed legal reasons why no one needed to be notified or allowed to challenge it.
Even though Decosta had ruled the filing wasn’t complete, Cronin now says it wasn’t “officially” not filed until he got a ruling from the court – a ruling that re-opened the door for Schatz’s Democratic Party to re-insert Choy’s name on the ballot without having to deal with the actual law in the Caldwell decision.
We’re not sure what’s contained in it but, as reported today in an article about an appeal of a recent administrative hearings officer’s ruling blasting Cronin for selecting an overpriced, second-rate-security election system from Hart InterCivic :
The Republican Party filed another suit Aug. 8 alleging that Cronin and the Office of Elections improperly allowed Democrat Isaac Choy to stand as a state House candidate for the 24th District (Manoa).
We haven’t seen that suit but fear it will spur another chapter in the Hawai`i Shyster Chronicles... making the three main mayoral-wannabe dunces and 15 or so clueless council would-be-clowns on Kaua`i very happy we suspect..
Don’t worry- we’ll get to you
Yesterday we reported on the old switcheroo someone pulled in getting an Aug 7 court ruling that Chrystn Eads was “disqualified” from the House race for Kirk Caldwell’s old state house seat and that he was citing her case now as the reason for allowing replacement candidate Isaac Choy to run- this after Choy had been chosen to replace Caldwell causing the Republican Party to sue saying the replacement was outside the three day window for replacement candidates.
We wondered who filed the suit heard on Aug 7- how did it get into court? We hypothesized it might have been the Republicans or the Honolulu County Clerk.
But we should have know because the filer was none other than Cronin himself.
We have no inside info as to why Cronin did so but the only reason would be that he was ready to be reversed on the Caldwell decision pegging his date of withdrawal to when the elections office received his withdrawal in writing the day after the filing deadline, not his verbal withdrawal before the deadline.
To review the actual law again HRS 11-117 says nothing about written withdrawals except in cases of “ill health”
It says:
§11-117 Withdrawal of candidates; disqualification; death; notice. (a) Any candidate may withdraw not later than 4:30 p.m. on the day immediately following the close of filing for any reason and may withdraw after the close of filing up to 4:30 p.m. on the twentieth day prior to an election for reasons of ill health. When a candidate withdraws for ill health, the candidate shall give notice in writing to the chief election officer if the candidate was seeking a congressional or state office, or the candidate shall give notice in writing to the county clerk if the candidate was seeking a county office. The notice shall be accompanied by a statement from a licensed physician indicating that such ill health may endanger the candidate's life.
Despite this as we reported exclusively earlier an official state produced Candidate Fact Sheet says that, the law be damned, ALL withdrawals must be in writing.
The fact sheet says
Candidates may withdraw for any reason not later than the day immediately following the deadline to file nomination papers. To withdraw, the candidate must submit a written notice to the Chief Election Officer (for state and federal office candidacy) or to the appropriate City/County Clerk (for county office candidacy). (HRS Section 11-117).
Yesterday we weren’t quite sure how the news reports regarding the fact sheet fit into it all. But an examination of Cronin’s filings to have Eads’ “withdrawal” re-trigger Choy’s placement on the ballot puts the false fact sheet at the heart of his case for dating Caldwell’s withdrawal.
Cronin goes to great lengths to use the fact sheet to justify his decision, even getting the Ballot Operations Section Head of the Office of Elections, Lori Tomczyk, to file an affidavit saying that all candidates got the fact sheet, even Caldwell
Cronin uses the fact sheet that misrepresents the law as the sole legal justification for his decision in the Caldwell-withdrawal-date decision he made last month and, even though this was a filing for summery judgment in court the actual citation of the relevant law- HRS 11-117- is nowhere in the brief, only many mentions of the “fact sheet”.
Oh and by the way the fact sheet says on it’s cover
This Fact Sheet is intended for informational purposes only and should not be used as an authority on the Hawaii election law and candidate deadlines... Consult the Hawaii Revised Statutes and other sources for more detailed and accurate requirements.
Cronin, under fire for the Caldwell ruling and knowing that the actual law says nothing about withdrawals being in writing in all circumstances, knew he was vulnerable if a ruling on it ever got before a judge.
Just the fact that Caldwell wasn’t challenging his ruling wasn’t enough because there was an outstanding Republican Party-filed suit contesting the “in writing” decision. And if a judge read the actual law he was pretty sure to overrule Cronin- overrule him in a case that was high profile, one for which Cronin has been under continual fire in the press and the blogs and only one of the myriad of Cronin’s actions that have put the elections chief’s job in jeopardy.
What to do, what to do?. How could he make his Caldwell decision go away?
Easy- by essentially suing himself to put the situation with Eads before a judge and getting an official ruling on her case without anyone to challenge it (because no one knew) and fait accompli allowing the Democrats to re-select Choy based on Eads case, not Caldwell’s... all before anyone knew about the done deal.
We had suspected that maybe in the early confusing days after the filing deadline- when the chickens were all first decapitated- someone filed a case thinking it was Eads who was being replaced by Choy rather than Caldwell due to erroneous press reports.
Eads, for those who don’t remember, did not get her papers filed with enough signatures until after the 4:30 p.m., July 22 deadline but was allowed by Honolulu County Clerk Denise Decosta to collect signatures and file at 4:50 p.m.- an action that Decosta said constituted a non-filing in a decision she made that week.
But Cronin, seeing a little wiggle room revived the filing, saying essentially that the clerk’s mistaken action in accepting the papers late constituted a filing.
And so he went to court to challenge the filing, got a ruing on Aug 7, wrote to the Democratic Party Chair Brian Schatz- who had earlier used his influence to get Decosta to accept Eads filing- who then re-selected Choy to be the replacement candidate, this time for Eads.
And that, Cronin claims, makes his Caldwell decision irrelevant, so moot.
This is sure to cause Republican’s heads to explode when they realize that Schatz’s phone call to Decosta at the 4:30 July 22nd filing deadline asking her to “err on the side of inclusion” and allow Eads to go outside, gather signatures and then file her papers, ended up assuring the Democrats would have a candidate in the race for a House seat in a Democratic stronghold district which otherwise would go to the only person left in the race, a Republican.
Cronin is claiming that even though Eads filing was not legal and should by all reason be adjudged to have never happened, because of Decosta’s error in accepting it- at Schatz’s request- Eads had to be “disqualified” for the office she never qualified for.
The file contains no briefs from anyone but Cronin and his brief goes into convoluted detail as to supposed legal reasons why no one needed to be notified or allowed to challenge it.
Even though Decosta had ruled the filing wasn’t complete, Cronin now says it wasn’t “officially” not filed until he got a ruling from the court – a ruling that re-opened the door for Schatz’s Democratic Party to re-insert Choy’s name on the ballot without having to deal with the actual law in the Caldwell decision.
We’re not sure what’s contained in it but, as reported today in an article about an appeal of a recent administrative hearings officer’s ruling blasting Cronin for selecting an overpriced, second-rate-security election system from Hart InterCivic :
The Republican Party filed another suit Aug. 8 alleging that Cronin and the Office of Elections improperly allowed Democrat Isaac Choy to stand as a state House candidate for the 24th District (Manoa).
We haven’t seen that suit but fear it will spur another chapter in the Hawai`i Shyster Chronicles... making the three main mayoral-wannabe dunces and 15 or so clueless council would-be-clowns on Kaua`i very happy we suspect..
Don’t worry- we’ll get to you
Saturday, August 2, 2008
ISN’T THAT FLEA BAG DEAD YET?:
ISN’T THAT FLEA BAG DEAD YET?: Well it’s all over- except it isn’t.
In case anyone hadn’t heard Honolulu County Clerk Denise Decosta “disqualified” Kirk Caldwell from the Manoa Council race based on the decision we highlighted yesterday by State Election Chief Kevin Cronin.
Ian Lind did a masterful job - with one typo- in analyzing the whole thing this morning and the articles in the two Honolulu newspapers presented their version of the facts, with the Star-Bulletin even publishing a surprisingly accurate and on-point editorial about Cronin’s shenanigans and incompetence.
We won’t recount that and readers can review our and Ian’s posts over the past few days for a catch up.
But there are numerous ways that the leads in the papers proclaiming that, since Caldwell won’t challenge the ruling it’s all over, are probably anything but accurate prognostications..
Because the ruling by Cronin- upon which Decosta said she was forced to based hers- flies in the face of the actual law
HRS 11-117 says:
A candidate may withdraw not later than 4:30 p.m. on the day immediately following the close of filing for any reason and may withdraw after the twentieth day prior to an election for reasons of ill health. When a candidate withdraws for ill health, the candidate shall give notice in writing to the chief election officer if the candidate was seeking a congressional or state office, or the candidate shall give notice in writing to the county clerk if the candidate was seeking a county seat.
So a written withdrawal is required only for reasons of health. Apparently Cronin “erred” in the matter of law by saying Caldwell’s post-filing, written withdrawal was the only “official” way to withdraw
Cronin’s ruling was that Caldwell’s verbal withdrawal from his state house race before filing for county council was insufficient even though the Decosta’s office accepted it and apparently the state did too because they noted it on the official list after a phone call from the clerk’s office..
And another problem may be that Decosta was not really allowed to make the decision.
In a letter of challenge by Honolulu attorney Amy Mizono says
The Clerk must file a circuit court complaint whenever an objection “may” warrant disqualification
The elections statute requires the Clerk to file a complaint with the circuit court for a determination of an objection whenever the objection “may" warrant disqualification of a candidate. $ 12-8 (e), Haw. Rev. Stat. As such, the Clerk is not designed to be the final arbiter of whether a generally meritorious objection merits disqualification. Rather, the Clerk is charged with the statutory obligation to seek final determination in the circuit court whenever an objection "may" reasonably warrant disqualification.
So not only is the content of self-described “de facto” Election Chief Cronin’s decision wrong but Decosta- who in her “ruling” described a loosey-goosy deadline as the clerk’s office’s past policy - wasn’t even legally able to make the determination that the mainstream press has swallowed as the “final say” on the matter.
Perhaps the most insane part of yesterday’s events is Caldwell’s statement that he won’t challenge it all since he actually spurred the challenge by getting one of his own people to challenge his candidacy, supposedly in the public interest of sorting all this out. And now when we really need a ruling to avoid stupidity and confusion from reigning, he’s suddenly happy to leave “F” part of the SNAFU intact.
But for now, unless someone challenges it, Cronin’s head-scratching “what orifice did you pull that out of” determination is the “de facto” law of the land
And what concerns us on Kaua`i is how this late Friday afternoon series of events could effect our own mayor's race.
We’ll have to wait for Monday to ask County clerk Peter Nakamura but we’re not sure how this new requirement for a written withdrawal- submitted BEFORE filing for another office- will effect Councilperson and mayoral candidate Mel Rapozo.
Rapozo originally pulled papers for council on February 6 and officially filed them on Feb 22. But then he pulled papers for mayor on July 7 and filed them on July 22, the final day to file.
The question is did Rapozo withdraw in writing and did he do so before he flied for mayor?
The documents should be public information and should have date and time of receipt stamped. And if Rapozo is to stay in the Mayor’s race the Clerk should have two chronologically-successive, stamped documents, the first being Rapozo’s official written withdrawal from his council race and the next his filing for the mayor’s race.
Although the “official” list shows a “(w)” for withdrawn after Rapozo’s name on the list of council candidates, so did Caldwell’s name for his house race on the evening of July 22 after his verbal withdrawal. His “in writing” withdrawal- the one Cronin says is the only official one- came in July 23.
It seems that by law this has to go to circuit court and Decosta is required by law to file the case.
But if she doesn’t and Cronin’s and her decisions are allowed to stand- and the press plays dead as they did today- we can just imagine the game of chicken that will occur at the filing deadline for the next election
It’s 4:25 p.m.- five minutes to filing deadline Lined up at the counter stand multiple candidates with multiple filings for multiple offices and multiple withdrawal letters wagging and shoving their papers under the noses and screaming for attention from elections’ office staff while jostling each other and jockeying for positions both at the clerk’s desk and in elective office... all the while craning their necks to see what office or offices the other ones are filing for and withdrawing from.
When the music stops and they scramble for seats precisely at 4:30 p.m. they may have to figure out which office they finally wound up running for.
Conversation outside the clerk’s office at 4:31 p.m. Filing deadline day, July 2010
PNN- What’d ya’ll get?”
Candidate A- Oh! Look- State House!- just what I always wanted. I didn’t even know I filled out those papers. What’d you get?
Candidate B- (looking at paper) Prosecutor? I’m not even a lawyer.
Candidate C- Well you’d better go to law school quick because I thought I had prosecutor but wound up with county council because I didn’t get my mayor withdrawal in first.
Candidate D – Darn I got so confused I submitted the wrong withdrawal letter and now I’m not running for anything. But apparently I am somehow now entered in next year’s Brown Bags to Stardom.
Candidate E- Aw damnit- I wound up with Mayor- I’m gonna be sick
Candidate D – Oh good. If you’re sick then you can withdraw for health reasons and name me as your replacement. Lemme look in my wallet...
Candidate C Wait a minute Would you take an appointment to the planning commission and two other appointments for your cronies to be named later?
Candidate B- I’m out. All I got is all these filing and withdrawal papers and oh, look... the clerk’s office’s time stamp.
Candidate A- That’s ok guys- I’ll just make sure you all get appointed judges.
Head of the Chamber of Commerce- When you guys sort it all out gimme a call. I gotta know who to bribe next year.
In case anyone hadn’t heard Honolulu County Clerk Denise Decosta “disqualified” Kirk Caldwell from the Manoa Council race based on the decision we highlighted yesterday by State Election Chief Kevin Cronin.
Ian Lind did a masterful job - with one typo- in analyzing the whole thing this morning and the articles in the two Honolulu newspapers presented their version of the facts, with the Star-Bulletin even publishing a surprisingly accurate and on-point editorial about Cronin’s shenanigans and incompetence.
We won’t recount that and readers can review our and Ian’s posts over the past few days for a catch up.
But there are numerous ways that the leads in the papers proclaiming that, since Caldwell won’t challenge the ruling it’s all over, are probably anything but accurate prognostications..
Because the ruling by Cronin- upon which Decosta said she was forced to based hers- flies in the face of the actual law
HRS 11-117 says:
A candidate may withdraw not later than 4:30 p.m. on the day immediately following the close of filing for any reason and may withdraw after the twentieth day prior to an election for reasons of ill health. When a candidate withdraws for ill health, the candidate shall give notice in writing to the chief election officer if the candidate was seeking a congressional or state office, or the candidate shall give notice in writing to the county clerk if the candidate was seeking a county seat.
So a written withdrawal is required only for reasons of health. Apparently Cronin “erred” in the matter of law by saying Caldwell’s post-filing, written withdrawal was the only “official” way to withdraw
Cronin’s ruling was that Caldwell’s verbal withdrawal from his state house race before filing for county council was insufficient even though the Decosta’s office accepted it and apparently the state did too because they noted it on the official list after a phone call from the clerk’s office..
And another problem may be that Decosta was not really allowed to make the decision.
In a letter of challenge by Honolulu attorney Amy Mizono says
The Clerk must file a circuit court complaint whenever an objection “may” warrant disqualification
The elections statute requires the Clerk to file a complaint with the circuit court for a determination of an objection whenever the objection “may" warrant disqualification of a candidate. $ 12-8 (e), Haw. Rev. Stat. As such, the Clerk is not designed to be the final arbiter of whether a generally meritorious objection merits disqualification. Rather, the Clerk is charged with the statutory obligation to seek final determination in the circuit court whenever an objection "may" reasonably warrant disqualification.
So not only is the content of self-described “de facto” Election Chief Cronin’s decision wrong but Decosta- who in her “ruling” described a loosey-goosy deadline as the clerk’s office’s past policy - wasn’t even legally able to make the determination that the mainstream press has swallowed as the “final say” on the matter.
Perhaps the most insane part of yesterday’s events is Caldwell’s statement that he won’t challenge it all since he actually spurred the challenge by getting one of his own people to challenge his candidacy, supposedly in the public interest of sorting all this out. And now when we really need a ruling to avoid stupidity and confusion from reigning, he’s suddenly happy to leave “F” part of the SNAFU intact.
But for now, unless someone challenges it, Cronin’s head-scratching “what orifice did you pull that out of” determination is the “de facto” law of the land
And what concerns us on Kaua`i is how this late Friday afternoon series of events could effect our own mayor's race.
We’ll have to wait for Monday to ask County clerk Peter Nakamura but we’re not sure how this new requirement for a written withdrawal- submitted BEFORE filing for another office- will effect Councilperson and mayoral candidate Mel Rapozo.
Rapozo originally pulled papers for council on February 6 and officially filed them on Feb 22. But then he pulled papers for mayor on July 7 and filed them on July 22, the final day to file.
The question is did Rapozo withdraw in writing and did he do so before he flied for mayor?
The documents should be public information and should have date and time of receipt stamped. And if Rapozo is to stay in the Mayor’s race the Clerk should have two chronologically-successive, stamped documents, the first being Rapozo’s official written withdrawal from his council race and the next his filing for the mayor’s race.
Although the “official” list shows a “(w)” for withdrawn after Rapozo’s name on the list of council candidates, so did Caldwell’s name for his house race on the evening of July 22 after his verbal withdrawal. His “in writing” withdrawal- the one Cronin says is the only official one- came in July 23.
It seems that by law this has to go to circuit court and Decosta is required by law to file the case.
But if she doesn’t and Cronin’s and her decisions are allowed to stand- and the press plays dead as they did today- we can just imagine the game of chicken that will occur at the filing deadline for the next election
It’s 4:25 p.m.- five minutes to filing deadline Lined up at the counter stand multiple candidates with multiple filings for multiple offices and multiple withdrawal letters wagging and shoving their papers under the noses and screaming for attention from elections’ office staff while jostling each other and jockeying for positions both at the clerk’s desk and in elective office... all the while craning their necks to see what office or offices the other ones are filing for and withdrawing from.
When the music stops and they scramble for seats precisely at 4:30 p.m. they may have to figure out which office they finally wound up running for.
Conversation outside the clerk’s office at 4:31 p.m. Filing deadline day, July 2010
PNN- What’d ya’ll get?”
Candidate A- Oh! Look- State House!- just what I always wanted. I didn’t even know I filled out those papers. What’d you get?
Candidate B- (looking at paper) Prosecutor? I’m not even a lawyer.
Candidate C- Well you’d better go to law school quick because I thought I had prosecutor but wound up with county council because I didn’t get my mayor withdrawal in first.
Candidate D – Darn I got so confused I submitted the wrong withdrawal letter and now I’m not running for anything. But apparently I am somehow now entered in next year’s Brown Bags to Stardom.
Candidate E- Aw damnit- I wound up with Mayor- I’m gonna be sick
Candidate D – Oh good. If you’re sick then you can withdraw for health reasons and name me as your replacement. Lemme look in my wallet...
Candidate C Wait a minute Would you take an appointment to the planning commission and two other appointments for your cronies to be named later?
Candidate B- I’m out. All I got is all these filing and withdrawal papers and oh, look... the clerk’s office’s time stamp.
Candidate A- That’s ok guys- I’ll just make sure you all get appointed judges.
Head of the Chamber of Commerce- When you guys sort it all out gimme a call. I gotta know who to bribe next year.
Tuesday, October 25, 2011
ALL AROUND THE MULBERRY BUSH
ALL AROUND THE MULBERRY BUSH: Sometime you've gotta wonder what's up when it comes to our state judiciary.
No, we're not talking about the scandal plagued sheriff’s division or the "we be's" who populate the offices and act as if they own the process, if not the judges themselves. No, it's not the probation department that thinks that "field work" is going hunting and fishing on weekends.
If you want to know what plaguing our state's courts just look at the actual rulings of some of the men and women wearing the robes.
Today's decision by the newly reinvigorated Hawai`i Intermediate Court of Appeals (ICA) overturning 5th Circuit Court Judge Randall Valenciano's ruling that allowed the Republican party to "replace" a candidate for the 14th House District who intentionally filed and withdrew just before the deadline, is a case in point detailing how politics often rules the courthouse roost.
The problem is that rather than sort out what the law really is trying to say, they simply shirked that responsibility and disqualified the original candidate for not completing his application.
As Mina Morita- the one who then held the 14th district seat at the time and eventually won reelection- said at the time:
Simply put, Hamman did not file nomination papers for the District 14 House race by the close of the filing deadline because he withdrew on July 19. And, there was no way he could because he filed his nomination papers for the Senate race and a person cannot run in more than one race. The Republicans did not have a candidate qualified for the ballot for the District 14 House race at the close of the filing deadline, therefore, no candidate vacancy exists to allow Harry R. Williams to run as a legitimate candidate.
We went a little further in explaining the way the law leaves room for interpretation, citing Hawai`i Revised Statutes (HRS) 11-117 and 118 as well as Hawai`i Administrative Rule (HAR) Chapter 3-173-1 to explain the mess and in addition mentioned that it wasn't the first time the ambiguity in the law had caused a musical chairs brouhaha at the filing deadline. Two years previously, in the case of Kirk Caldwell, the same lack of clarity squeezed him out of candidacy in any election as the "resign to run" law did its dirty work.
We won't bore you by repeating the technical explanation here again, but we will say that in between the Caldwell and Morita fiascoes, the legislature sat around with their thumbs up their butts, kow-towing to the churches, who had their noses in proximate climes over civil unions.
And as if to reiterate that inaction isn't just a mistake at the Capitol but is a carefully planned result of the Hawai`i legislative committee system, remedial bills weren't even scheduled for a hearing during the session following the Morita-Hamman mess.
Now we haven't seen the decision yet, but if the press reports are correct, the ICA didn't bother to tell the legislature to get its act together and clarify the law - as the appellate courts are wont to do on occasion- so we don't have to go through this again in 2012. Instead they decided the case based on a lack of sufficiency in the application itself, virtually saying "we won't touch this political football" even to say the law is unclear on process thus leaving the matter flapping in the wind.
So when the legislature fails to act again this January and the filing deadline comes around next year, expect yet another debacle consisting of candidates waving competing sections of law at each other and the chief elections officer. And don't worry- we'll be here with the distinctly unsatisfying chance to once again say "we told you so."
No, we're not talking about the scandal plagued sheriff’s division or the "we be's" who populate the offices and act as if they own the process, if not the judges themselves. No, it's not the probation department that thinks that "field work" is going hunting and fishing on weekends.
If you want to know what plaguing our state's courts just look at the actual rulings of some of the men and women wearing the robes.
Today's decision by the newly reinvigorated Hawai`i Intermediate Court of Appeals (ICA) overturning 5th Circuit Court Judge Randall Valenciano's ruling that allowed the Republican party to "replace" a candidate for the 14th House District who intentionally filed and withdrew just before the deadline, is a case in point detailing how politics often rules the courthouse roost.
The problem is that rather than sort out what the law really is trying to say, they simply shirked that responsibility and disqualified the original candidate for not completing his application.
As Mina Morita- the one who then held the 14th district seat at the time and eventually won reelection- said at the time:
Simply put, Hamman did not file nomination papers for the District 14 House race by the close of the filing deadline because he withdrew on July 19. And, there was no way he could because he filed his nomination papers for the Senate race and a person cannot run in more than one race. The Republicans did not have a candidate qualified for the ballot for the District 14 House race at the close of the filing deadline, therefore, no candidate vacancy exists to allow Harry R. Williams to run as a legitimate candidate.
We went a little further in explaining the way the law leaves room for interpretation, citing Hawai`i Revised Statutes (HRS) 11-117 and 118 as well as Hawai`i Administrative Rule (HAR) Chapter 3-173-1 to explain the mess and in addition mentioned that it wasn't the first time the ambiguity in the law had caused a musical chairs brouhaha at the filing deadline. Two years previously, in the case of Kirk Caldwell, the same lack of clarity squeezed him out of candidacy in any election as the "resign to run" law did its dirty work.
We won't bore you by repeating the technical explanation here again, but we will say that in between the Caldwell and Morita fiascoes, the legislature sat around with their thumbs up their butts, kow-towing to the churches, who had their noses in proximate climes over civil unions.
And as if to reiterate that inaction isn't just a mistake at the Capitol but is a carefully planned result of the Hawai`i legislative committee system, remedial bills weren't even scheduled for a hearing during the session following the Morita-Hamman mess.
Now we haven't seen the decision yet, but if the press reports are correct, the ICA didn't bother to tell the legislature to get its act together and clarify the law - as the appellate courts are wont to do on occasion- so we don't have to go through this again in 2012. Instead they decided the case based on a lack of sufficiency in the application itself, virtually saying "we won't touch this political football" even to say the law is unclear on process thus leaving the matter flapping in the wind.
So when the legislature fails to act again this January and the filing deadline comes around next year, expect yet another debacle consisting of candidates waving competing sections of law at each other and the chief elections officer. And don't worry- we'll be here with the distinctly unsatisfying chance to once again say "we told you so."
Sunday, August 3, 2008
PNN REQUEST FOR DOCUMENTS
PNN REQUEST FOR DOCUMENTS: The following email was sent at 3:10 p.m. Sunday August 2. 2008.
To: Kaua`i County Clerk Peter Nakamura
From: Andy Parx- Editor, Parx News Net
RE: Request for documentation of filing sufficiency for candidate Mel Rapozo in the Special Mayoral Election, 2008.
Dear Mr. Nakamura,
As you probably know, this week the Chief Elections Officer of the State of Hawai`i Kevin Cronin ruled that withdrawals of filings for electoral office are unofficial unless submitted in writing.
That ruling is available at http://ilind.net/misc%20/2008/choy-ruling.pdf
I am requesting inspection of the documentation of Councilman Mel Rapozo’s time-stamped, written withdrawal from the 2008 county council election Rapozo filed on 2/22/08 and his 7/22/08, time-stamped filing for the office of mayor in the special mayoral election of 2008.
I am requesting your review of records for the sufficiency of Mr. Rapozo’s mayoral petition in light of Mr. Cronin’s .ruling as well as the ruling of Honolulu County Clerk Denise Decosta, available at http://ilind.net/misc%20/2008/caldwell-ruling.pdf , in the case of Rep. Kirk Caldwell’s multiple filings for State house and Honolulu county council.
Please email or call me at 332-7878 as soon as your office is able to locate the two documents and/or make a determination on this matter.
If necessary for action, please consider this an official challenge as to validity and/or sufficiency of Mr. Rapozo’s mayoral filing.
Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter,
Andy Parx,
Editor Publisher, Parx News Netcc: Readers of got windmills? at http://parxnewsdaily.blogspot.com/
To: Kaua`i County Clerk Peter Nakamura
From: Andy Parx- Editor, Parx News Net
RE: Request for documentation of filing sufficiency for candidate Mel Rapozo in the Special Mayoral Election, 2008.
Dear Mr. Nakamura,
As you probably know, this week the Chief Elections Officer of the State of Hawai`i Kevin Cronin ruled that withdrawals of filings for electoral office are unofficial unless submitted in writing.
That ruling is available at http://ilind.net/misc%20/2008/choy-ruling.pdf
I am requesting inspection of the documentation of Councilman Mel Rapozo’s time-stamped, written withdrawal from the 2008 county council election Rapozo filed on 2/22/08 and his 7/22/08, time-stamped filing for the office of mayor in the special mayoral election of 2008.
I am requesting your review of records for the sufficiency of Mr. Rapozo’s mayoral petition in light of Mr. Cronin’s .ruling as well as the ruling of Honolulu County Clerk Denise Decosta, available at http://ilind.net/misc%20/2008/caldwell-ruling.pdf , in the case of Rep. Kirk Caldwell’s multiple filings for State house and Honolulu county council.
Please email or call me at 332-7878 as soon as your office is able to locate the two documents and/or make a determination on this matter.
If necessary for action, please consider this an official challenge as to validity and/or sufficiency of Mr. Rapozo’s mayoral filing.
Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter,
Andy Parx,
Editor Publisher, Parx News Netcc: Readers of got windmills? at http://parxnewsdaily.blogspot.com/
Saturday, July 26, 2008
A SCHNAUZER IS A SCHNAUZER IS A SCHNAUZER
A SCHNAUZER IS A SCHNAUZER IS A SCHNAUZER: We were going to leave it alone- after all we don’t live in Honolulu and don’t even know who the heck Chrystn Eads is other than “an aide to Honolulu Mayor Mufi Hannemann” much less where exactly the 24th House district is.
We were happy just to have the legislature rid of an obstructionist party hack and go-fer like House Majority Leader Kirk Caldwell, whose resignation was a well placed cog in Tuesday’s vaudevillian amateur hour.
Yes, we enjoyed laughing about the dance of the headless chickens that apparently was staged at 4:30 filing deadline when Eads was allowed to submit her paperwork at ten-to-five, even though the deadline is apparently pretty strict, according to state law.
But now for another kick in the face we find out in this morning’s Honolulu Advertiser’s “breaking news” that another wrinkle- heck, let’s call it a bend, fold, spindle and mutilation- has been added and apparently Eads “was told yesterday that her paperwork was voided because it was incomplete.” according to the article.
And- get this- even though there was no actual official “filing” since it was “voided”, the County Clerk is apparently going to allow “the party's House District 24 council (to) name (a) replacement, although others believe it will come from top party officials and insiders.”
In case anyone was wondering the law, according to the article says "in cases of withdrawal, death or disqualification of a party candidate after filing, the vacancy may be filled by the party. The party must notify the chief elections officer 72 hours after the vacancy occurs.”
So let’s get this straight. They are saying that she didn’t get in her papers in time so there was no official filing. Yet the Democratic Party is going to be allowed to name a “replacement” because she was disqualified after filing. But if indeed she legally “filed” – a prerequisite for a “replacement” how is she being disqualified?
Talk about having your cake and eating it too. It’s like being kicked out of a club you’re not a member of.
Actually we’d been considering the case for a couple of days and it seems that if the procedures do not allow for a looser deadline based on the fact that she was there 40 minutes before the deadline but could not get her papers until a few minutes before the cut-off time, there’s something wrong- something inherently exploitable by anyone bent on taking advantage of it..
If indeed this strict policy is in effect then it leaves it wide open for allowing the Clerk and/or the Clerk’s office’s employees a wide latitude for- ahem, shall we say- “directed incompetence”.
Seems like they’re actually allowed- heck, maybe encouraged- to screw someone they don’t want to see on the ballot if they’re coming in at the last minute.
How? Well like by having no one at the counter. “Sorry we’re all out to lunch- be back at 4:31” Or like by taking their sweet little time serving someone else filing papers. Or by notifying another candidate for the office who has already filed and letting dozens of his or her supporters jam the office with requests for some of the other multiple services the Clerk’s office provides.
When one goes to vote on election day and gets there just at the closing deadline, if there is a line the doors close behind them, not in their face. It prevents any potential mischief or shenanigans
But apparently, according to their policy it’s ok for the Clerk to play these little games.
While no one in the press has suggested this was the case with Eads, who knows? Those in attendance- and seemingly it was practically a media luncheon according to multitudinous accounts- haven’t been especially forthcoming with their observations as to exactly why it too almost 40 minutes to “serve” Eads.
With all the press and observers you’d think someone would have brought this up, especially if indeed there was any intentional delays preventing her from filing on time.
Whatever happens from here, the way the situation played out makes the label of Keystone Kops that’s been thrown about in the Honolulu press quite charitable.
-------------
Correction: It appears we interpreted the vagaries of the “breaking news” without reading the published article. Apparently what was reported was that the given reason for the “party replacement was not Eads’ non-filing, but Caldwell’s supposed withdrawal- although there are similar problems there too. We regret the error.
We were happy just to have the legislature rid of an obstructionist party hack and go-fer like House Majority Leader Kirk Caldwell, whose resignation was a well placed cog in Tuesday’s vaudevillian amateur hour.
Yes, we enjoyed laughing about the dance of the headless chickens that apparently was staged at 4:30 filing deadline when Eads was allowed to submit her paperwork at ten-to-five, even though the deadline is apparently pretty strict, according to state law.
But now for another kick in the face we find out in this morning’s Honolulu Advertiser’s “breaking news” that another wrinkle- heck, let’s call it a bend, fold, spindle and mutilation- has been added and apparently Eads “was told yesterday that her paperwork was voided because it was incomplete.” according to the article.
And- get this- even though there was no actual official “filing” since it was “voided”, the County Clerk is apparently going to allow “the party's House District 24 council (to) name (a) replacement, although others believe it will come from top party officials and insiders.”
In case anyone was wondering the law, according to the article says "in cases of withdrawal, death or disqualification of a party candidate after filing, the vacancy may be filled by the party. The party must notify the chief elections officer 72 hours after the vacancy occurs.”
So let’s get this straight. They are saying that she didn’t get in her papers in time so there was no official filing. Yet the Democratic Party is going to be allowed to name a “replacement” because she was disqualified after filing. But if indeed she legally “filed” – a prerequisite for a “replacement” how is she being disqualified?
Talk about having your cake and eating it too. It’s like being kicked out of a club you’re not a member of.
Actually we’d been considering the case for a couple of days and it seems that if the procedures do not allow for a looser deadline based on the fact that she was there 40 minutes before the deadline but could not get her papers until a few minutes before the cut-off time, there’s something wrong- something inherently exploitable by anyone bent on taking advantage of it..
If indeed this strict policy is in effect then it leaves it wide open for allowing the Clerk and/or the Clerk’s office’s employees a wide latitude for- ahem, shall we say- “directed incompetence”.
Seems like they’re actually allowed- heck, maybe encouraged- to screw someone they don’t want to see on the ballot if they’re coming in at the last minute.
How? Well like by having no one at the counter. “Sorry we’re all out to lunch- be back at 4:31” Or like by taking their sweet little time serving someone else filing papers. Or by notifying another candidate for the office who has already filed and letting dozens of his or her supporters jam the office with requests for some of the other multiple services the Clerk’s office provides.
When one goes to vote on election day and gets there just at the closing deadline, if there is a line the doors close behind them, not in their face. It prevents any potential mischief or shenanigans
But apparently, according to their policy it’s ok for the Clerk to play these little games.
While no one in the press has suggested this was the case with Eads, who knows? Those in attendance- and seemingly it was practically a media luncheon according to multitudinous accounts- haven’t been especially forthcoming with their observations as to exactly why it too almost 40 minutes to “serve” Eads.
With all the press and observers you’d think someone would have brought this up, especially if indeed there was any intentional delays preventing her from filing on time.
Whatever happens from here, the way the situation played out makes the label of Keystone Kops that’s been thrown about in the Honolulu press quite charitable.
-------------
Correction: It appears we interpreted the vagaries of the “breaking news” without reading the published article. Apparently what was reported was that the given reason for the “party replacement was not Eads’ non-filing, but Caldwell’s supposed withdrawal- although there are similar problems there too. We regret the error.
Monday, August 11, 2008
DIGGIN’ UP THE YARD
DIGGIN’ UP THE YARD: Our statement yesterday- based on various press reports- that Chief Elections Officer Kevin Cronin had no election experience in Wisconsin turns out to be wrong.
And one of the experiences he had was being sued for violating the voting rights of 80 black people in the town of Blackwell, Wisconsin in 1987 while he was legal counsel for the Wisconsin state elections board from 1983 to 1988.
The town sued Cronin apparently for giving them the advice not to allow them to vote, allegedly in violation of the Civil Rights Act of 1983, and the Voting Rights Act of 1965, the 14th and 15th amendments and Wisconsin state law..
According to filing in the US Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit argued Feb. 25, 1987.and decided May 29, 1987 these were some of the facts.
The plaintiffs filed this action purporting to represent themselves and a class consisting of Blackwell Job Corps Center members who were denied their right to vote either because they were Black or because they were job corps members. The plaintiffs contended in their complaint that at a Blackwell polling place on November 6, 1984, they were asked by the defendant Henkel whether they intended to reside in Blackwell in the future. Those who did not answer in the affirmative were considered non-residents and ineligible to vote. Some apparently were not permitted to vote at all, while others were permitted to vote only in the presidential election. The plaintiffs assert that this action of Henkel and other Blackwell election officials violated the laws of Wisconsin, the 14th and 15th Amendments to the United States Constitution, the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act.
The Town and Henkel filed a third-party complaint against Cronin, an attorney for the State Election Board, wherein they alleged that Cronin advised a member of the Town Election Board that any person who indicated to election officials that he did not consider himself a resident of Wisconsin was ineligible to vote and should not receive a ballot. The third-party complaint further alleged that Blackwell election officials, acting upon this advice, refused to permit certain members of plaintiffs' class to vote. While the third-party complaint also named Nicolet National Forest as a defendant by reason of the fact that it administers the Job Corps Center at Blackwell, Nicolet was subsequently dismissed and there is no issue raised in the present appeals regarding that dismissal.
Though two lower courts would not dismiss the case against Cronin the US Court of Appeals, in a very complicated rationale and convoluted ruling found that Cronin had immunity in the case and so he could not be sued.
In overturning the lower courts rulings the Appeals Court 7th said:
(T)he Town and Henkel contend that Cronin forfeited his qualified immunity by violating clearly established Wisconsin election law, Wis.Stats. Sec. 6.92 et seq. In Wisconsin, when a voter is challenged as to residence, he is to be placed under oath and asked whether he intends to make his home in the ward in which he is seeking to vote. If notwithstanding the answer given, the vote is still challenged, the voter may take an oath that, among other things, he is a resident of the ward. He may then submit a ballot under challenge which is retained separately from unchallenged ballots. The fact that Cronin's advice did not include all of the implementing details under the Wisconsin statutes is plainly insufficient to permit a finding that Cronin violated clearly established Wisconsin election laws.
We do not mean to imply in so stating that had Cronin violated a Wisconsin election law, under the facts of this case, it would have constituted a violation of clearly established federal law. Cronin would forfeit his qualified immunity for liability under federal law by violating state law only if the violation of state law provided the basis for the federal cause of action. Davis v. Scherer, 468 U.S. 183, 104 S.Ct. 3012, 3020 n. 12, 82 L.Ed.2d 139 (1984). We need not and do not address that issue in this case.
For the reasons stated, pursuant to the order issued in this case by this court on February 26, 1987, the cross-appeal of defendants and third-party plaintiffs Town of Blackwell and Jennie Henkel is dismissed for lack of appellate jurisdiction and the district court's denial of third-party defendant Kevin B. Cronin's motion to dismiss is REVERSED and REMANDED with instructions to dismiss him. Costs are taxed to defendants, third-party plaintiffs Town of Blackwell and Jennie Henkel.
In other developments and updates to yesterday’s column, the first reported- by Larry Geller at Disappeared News today- is an interesting California analysis of the Hart InerCivic voting machines that Cronin chose spurring an administrative ruling that he royally screwed up
It’s really scary to read how hackable the Hart system is and it’s clear that anyone reading what they found in California would not and could not have approved the Hart system unless they were either dumb or corrupt or both.
And Hawai`i is using those machines this November as it stands now.
Second is an interesting paragraph in an article at Wing-Nut-Central, the Hawai`i Reporter, by Republican Robert R. Kessler who says he filed two challenges to House candidate Isaac Choy’s eligibility as the Democratic replacement for Kirk Caldwell. He notes that although Cronin ruled that only Caldwell’s written withdrawal was official Cronin’s determinations may depend on what he ate for breakfast- or, for the cynical, who buttered his toast.
According to Kessler, Cronin wrote the following regarding the reporting of the replacement within the three day window the law requires.
“I authorized the Democratic Party of Hawaii to inform me of the name of the individual the Party appointed to fill the vacancy by email, fax or telephone no later than 4:30 p.m. on Saturday, July 26, 2008. The Democratic Party so informed me timely.”
All deadlines are apparently not created equal.
Maybe that can be explained by another interesting paragraph from a July 30 article in Honolulu Weekly.
In a piece by Travis Quezon on the “dance of the headless chickens” that occurred in Honolulu on and after candidate filing deadline called “You call this democracy?; Insiders' edge helps Democrats pull a fast one on Hawai`i voters” Travis tells us that:
“In a 2002 court decision involving then-governor Ben Cayetano petitioning for a writ that directs then-Chief Election Officer Dwayne Yoshina to wave time limits mandated under HRS §11-118, the court acknowledges that the election officer has discretion to waive any or all of the law’s requirements in “special circumstances.”
We haven’t been able to track down the case to which Quezon is referring yet but if that’s the law of the land it could go a long way toward explaining the arbitrary and capaciousness of Cronin’s rulings.
And one of the experiences he had was being sued for violating the voting rights of 80 black people in the town of Blackwell, Wisconsin in 1987 while he was legal counsel for the Wisconsin state elections board from 1983 to 1988.
The town sued Cronin apparently for giving them the advice not to allow them to vote, allegedly in violation of the Civil Rights Act of 1983, and the Voting Rights Act of 1965, the 14th and 15th amendments and Wisconsin state law..
According to filing in the US Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit argued Feb. 25, 1987.and decided May 29, 1987 these were some of the facts.
The plaintiffs filed this action purporting to represent themselves and a class consisting of Blackwell Job Corps Center members who were denied their right to vote either because they were Black or because they were job corps members. The plaintiffs contended in their complaint that at a Blackwell polling place on November 6, 1984, they were asked by the defendant Henkel whether they intended to reside in Blackwell in the future. Those who did not answer in the affirmative were considered non-residents and ineligible to vote. Some apparently were not permitted to vote at all, while others were permitted to vote only in the presidential election. The plaintiffs assert that this action of Henkel and other Blackwell election officials violated the laws of Wisconsin, the 14th and 15th Amendments to the United States Constitution, the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act.
The Town and Henkel filed a third-party complaint against Cronin, an attorney for the State Election Board, wherein they alleged that Cronin advised a member of the Town Election Board that any person who indicated to election officials that he did not consider himself a resident of Wisconsin was ineligible to vote and should not receive a ballot. The third-party complaint further alleged that Blackwell election officials, acting upon this advice, refused to permit certain members of plaintiffs' class to vote. While the third-party complaint also named Nicolet National Forest as a defendant by reason of the fact that it administers the Job Corps Center at Blackwell, Nicolet was subsequently dismissed and there is no issue raised in the present appeals regarding that dismissal.
Though two lower courts would not dismiss the case against Cronin the US Court of Appeals, in a very complicated rationale and convoluted ruling found that Cronin had immunity in the case and so he could not be sued.
In overturning the lower courts rulings the Appeals Court 7th said:
(T)he Town and Henkel contend that Cronin forfeited his qualified immunity by violating clearly established Wisconsin election law, Wis.Stats. Sec. 6.92 et seq. In Wisconsin, when a voter is challenged as to residence, he is to be placed under oath and asked whether he intends to make his home in the ward in which he is seeking to vote. If notwithstanding the answer given, the vote is still challenged, the voter may take an oath that, among other things, he is a resident of the ward. He may then submit a ballot under challenge which is retained separately from unchallenged ballots. The fact that Cronin's advice did not include all of the implementing details under the Wisconsin statutes is plainly insufficient to permit a finding that Cronin violated clearly established Wisconsin election laws.
We do not mean to imply in so stating that had Cronin violated a Wisconsin election law, under the facts of this case, it would have constituted a violation of clearly established federal law. Cronin would forfeit his qualified immunity for liability under federal law by violating state law only if the violation of state law provided the basis for the federal cause of action. Davis v. Scherer, 468 U.S. 183, 104 S.Ct. 3012, 3020 n. 12, 82 L.Ed.2d 139 (1984). We need not and do not address that issue in this case.
For the reasons stated, pursuant to the order issued in this case by this court on February 26, 1987, the cross-appeal of defendants and third-party plaintiffs Town of Blackwell and Jennie Henkel is dismissed for lack of appellate jurisdiction and the district court's denial of third-party defendant Kevin B. Cronin's motion to dismiss is REVERSED and REMANDED with instructions to dismiss him. Costs are taxed to defendants, third-party plaintiffs Town of Blackwell and Jennie Henkel.
In other developments and updates to yesterday’s column, the first reported- by Larry Geller at Disappeared News today- is an interesting California analysis of the Hart InerCivic voting machines that Cronin chose spurring an administrative ruling that he royally screwed up
It’s really scary to read how hackable the Hart system is and it’s clear that anyone reading what they found in California would not and could not have approved the Hart system unless they were either dumb or corrupt or both.
And Hawai`i is using those machines this November as it stands now.
Second is an interesting paragraph in an article at Wing-Nut-Central, the Hawai`i Reporter, by Republican Robert R. Kessler who says he filed two challenges to House candidate Isaac Choy’s eligibility as the Democratic replacement for Kirk Caldwell. He notes that although Cronin ruled that only Caldwell’s written withdrawal was official Cronin’s determinations may depend on what he ate for breakfast- or, for the cynical, who buttered his toast.
According to Kessler, Cronin wrote the following regarding the reporting of the replacement within the three day window the law requires.
“I authorized the Democratic Party of Hawaii to inform me of the name of the individual the Party appointed to fill the vacancy by email, fax or telephone no later than 4:30 p.m. on Saturday, July 26, 2008. The Democratic Party so informed me timely.”
All deadlines are apparently not created equal.
Maybe that can be explained by another interesting paragraph from a July 30 article in Honolulu Weekly.
In a piece by Travis Quezon on the “dance of the headless chickens” that occurred in Honolulu on and after candidate filing deadline called “You call this democracy?; Insiders' edge helps Democrats pull a fast one on Hawai`i voters” Travis tells us that:
“In a 2002 court decision involving then-governor Ben Cayetano petitioning for a writ that directs then-Chief Election Officer Dwayne Yoshina to wave time limits mandated under HRS §11-118, the court acknowledges that the election officer has discretion to waive any or all of the law’s requirements in “special circumstances.”
We haven’t been able to track down the case to which Quezon is referring yet but if that’s the law of the land it could go a long way toward explaining the arbitrary and capaciousness of Cronin’s rulings.
Friday, July 23, 2010
BACK ON THE CHOPPING BLOCK
BACK ON THE CHOPPING BLOCK: We’ve spent the last day or so chuckling over the latest kafuffle caused by the same vague Hawai`i election laws that cause another “dance of the headless chicken” that surrounded the Kirk Caldwell affair last election- a matter we spent in inordinate amount of bandwidth on after the filing deadline in 2008.
It was the first of the numerous bizarre dust-ups caused by the then-new Chief Elections Officer Kevin “King” Cronin who thankfully has skulked back into the hole from whence he came after numerous Louis XIV-style “L'État, c'est moi" decisions.
But leave it to the legislature to fail to try to figure out how to write clear laws or the elections bureau to write clear administrative rules in the interim and now we have a whole new dance to enjoy.
As many have heard by now some slimy little Republican, David Hamman, a Princeville locksmith tried, apparently successfully, to game the system by filing and withdrawing his papers to challenge Representative Mina Morita in the 14th House District actually admitting he did it to extend the deadline so the party could pick a “candidate” after the filing deadline.
We put the word candidate in quotes because the definition of just what that may be is the bone of contention according to Morita who has blogged twice on the subject.
Apparently Scott Nago, the new Chief Elections Officer, is as challenged as his predecessor and okayed the switcheroo and today the Republicans did name a replacement, Harry R. Williams, a Kapa`a contractor.
But it comes down to whether Hamman was ever a candidate for the house because after withdrawing he filed his papers to run for the vacating seat of former State Senator and now Lt. Governor candidature Gary Hooser.
HRS 11-117 says
Withdrawal of candidates; disqualification; death; notice. (a) Any candidate may withdraw not later than 4:30 p.m. on the day immediately following the close of filing for any reason...
On receipt of the notice of death, withdrawal, or upon determination of disqualification, the chief election officer or the clerk shall inform the chairperson of the political party of which the person deceased, withdrawing, or disqualified was a candidate.
And HRS 118 says:
Vacancies; new candidates; insertion of names on ballots. (a) In case of death, withdrawal, or disqualification of any party candidate after filing, the vacancy so caused may be filled by the party....
(b) If the party fills the vacancy, and so notifies the chief election officer or clerk not later than 4:30 p.m. on the third day after the vacancy occurs... the name of the replacement shall be printed in an available and appropriate place on the ballot,
But Hawaii Administrative Rule (HAR) Chapter 3-173-1, defines “candidate” as “an individual who has qualified for placement on the ballot.”
And in Hawai`i no one may be a candidate for two offices.
Under the law apparently only Mina’s party- the Democrats- can file in 5th Circuit Court to overrule Nago’s decision but the point is that with two years to do so, neither the legislature or the elections bureau even attempted to change the law or rules to deal with the ambiguities and write some election laws that are clear and not wide open for manipulation and abuse with loopholes you could drive a Superferry through.
In an email today Morita said she is “still looking at all my options and working with the party” and as of press time we haven’t heard anything about a court filing. But unless and until the election laws regarding election filing deadlines gets a good hard look and some much needed clarifications and indeed changes are made we’ll be right back here in 2012.
It was the first of the numerous bizarre dust-ups caused by the then-new Chief Elections Officer Kevin “King” Cronin who thankfully has skulked back into the hole from whence he came after numerous Louis XIV-style “L'État, c'est moi" decisions.
But leave it to the legislature to fail to try to figure out how to write clear laws or the elections bureau to write clear administrative rules in the interim and now we have a whole new dance to enjoy.
As many have heard by now some slimy little Republican, David Hamman, a Princeville locksmith tried, apparently successfully, to game the system by filing and withdrawing his papers to challenge Representative Mina Morita in the 14th House District actually admitting he did it to extend the deadline so the party could pick a “candidate” after the filing deadline.
We put the word candidate in quotes because the definition of just what that may be is the bone of contention according to Morita who has blogged twice on the subject.
Apparently Scott Nago, the new Chief Elections Officer, is as challenged as his predecessor and okayed the switcheroo and today the Republicans did name a replacement, Harry R. Williams, a Kapa`a contractor.
But it comes down to whether Hamman was ever a candidate for the house because after withdrawing he filed his papers to run for the vacating seat of former State Senator and now Lt. Governor candidature Gary Hooser.
HRS 11-117 says
Withdrawal of candidates; disqualification; death; notice. (a) Any candidate may withdraw not later than 4:30 p.m. on the day immediately following the close of filing for any reason...
On receipt of the notice of death, withdrawal, or upon determination of disqualification, the chief election officer or the clerk shall inform the chairperson of the political party of which the person deceased, withdrawing, or disqualified was a candidate.
And HRS 118 says:
Vacancies; new candidates; insertion of names on ballots. (a) In case of death, withdrawal, or disqualification of any party candidate after filing, the vacancy so caused may be filled by the party....
(b) If the party fills the vacancy, and so notifies the chief election officer or clerk not later than 4:30 p.m. on the third day after the vacancy occurs... the name of the replacement shall be printed in an available and appropriate place on the ballot,
But Hawaii Administrative Rule (HAR) Chapter 3-173-1, defines “candidate” as “an individual who has qualified for placement on the ballot.”
And in Hawai`i no one may be a candidate for two offices.
Under the law apparently only Mina’s party- the Democrats- can file in 5th Circuit Court to overrule Nago’s decision but the point is that with two years to do so, neither the legislature or the elections bureau even attempted to change the law or rules to deal with the ambiguities and write some election laws that are clear and not wide open for manipulation and abuse with loopholes you could drive a Superferry through.
In an email today Morita said she is “still looking at all my options and working with the party” and as of press time we haven’t heard anything about a court filing. But unless and until the election laws regarding election filing deadlines gets a good hard look and some much needed clarifications and indeed changes are made we’ll be right back here in 2012.
Wednesday, December 2, 2009
DAT’S ONE DEAD PUPPY
DAT’S ONE DEAD PUPPY: Once upon a time a man named Kevin took over operations of a public cesspool after the previous overseer had done too good a job of keeping the stink away from our noses. The new guy quickly named himself King of the Dung Heap and decided that, with no experience, he would start digging around, flailing way at the pipes with a dull pickaxe and digging a deeper hole in his own warped image, leaving a messy open sewage pit- know as the current state of the state elections bureau.
So the resignation (thanks to Larry Geller for the apparent only posting of the letter) of Chief Elections Officer Kevin “King” Cronin comes with no element of sorrow- only a sense of dismay and disgust at the prospect of cleaning up his mess.
Our coverage of the, to be chartable, “foibles” of this arrogant boob has been extensive from the first inking of screw-ups to come with his having “forgot” to file to vote upon appointment, through his arrogant assent to royal “I am the state” status with his “because I said so” rulings in the Kirk Caldwell fiasco at the filing deadline- as we beat to death here, here, here, here, here and here- followed by our two takes on his “reckless disregard (for) procurement laws” in choosing to issue a long term contract for an expensive. inferior set of voting machines, which led to our still exclusive report regarding his part in a race discrimination suit in his only previous job semi-related to elections which occurred during his tenure in Wisconsin.
But perhaps the most annoying and ultimately arrogant thing in his resignation letter is this statement, as reported extensively by some media outlets without mention of his screw ups – most notably on the “that’s-what-passes-for-News-Now” conglomeration of TV stations- was how “smoothly” the 2008 elections ran.
Seems no one remembers the absurdly confusing changes and the unneeded “check box”
for party selection in the primary that more than likely led to unnecessarily voided votes and an unusual (see second entry)- and later found to be manipulated- number of spoiled ballots and overvotes.
Then of course there was Cronin’s “rules are for suckers” debacle as we examined a few times and, although there are finally new, or we should say some, administrative rules up for approval- after Cronin was forced to provide them when he lost yet another law suit resulting from his egotism and pomposity- it’s anyone’s guess if they will actually fix the underlying problems over the potential for neighbor island vote flipping and other issues resulting from his penchant for pulling rulings out his, uh, ear.
We were calling for Cronin’s resignation last August and now that it’s come a year and a half too late it’s particularly unsatisfying given the absolute mess he left and, the not just the lack of any shovel but, a concerted effort by the governor and legislature to deny use of any implement to dig our way toward conducting an election in less than a year.
We’ll probably have moments when we wish we still had the prince of prevarication to kick around but today isn’t one of them.
--------------
We’ve got some real- and outside- world things to take care of tomorrow and Friday so we’ll dispense with our agoraphobic activities until Monday unless we get some 28 hour days.
So the resignation (thanks to Larry Geller for the apparent only posting of the letter) of Chief Elections Officer Kevin “King” Cronin comes with no element of sorrow- only a sense of dismay and disgust at the prospect of cleaning up his mess.
Our coverage of the, to be chartable, “foibles” of this arrogant boob has been extensive from the first inking of screw-ups to come with his having “forgot” to file to vote upon appointment, through his arrogant assent to royal “I am the state” status with his “because I said so” rulings in the Kirk Caldwell fiasco at the filing deadline- as we beat to death here, here, here, here, here and here- followed by our two takes on his “reckless disregard (for) procurement laws” in choosing to issue a long term contract for an expensive. inferior set of voting machines, which led to our still exclusive report regarding his part in a race discrimination suit in his only previous job semi-related to elections which occurred during his tenure in Wisconsin.
But perhaps the most annoying and ultimately arrogant thing in his resignation letter is this statement, as reported extensively by some media outlets without mention of his screw ups – most notably on the “that’s-what-passes-for-News-Now” conglomeration of TV stations- was how “smoothly” the 2008 elections ran.
Seems no one remembers the absurdly confusing changes and the unneeded “check box”
for party selection in the primary that more than likely led to unnecessarily voided votes and an unusual (see second entry)- and later found to be manipulated- number of spoiled ballots and overvotes.
Then of course there was Cronin’s “rules are for suckers” debacle as we examined a few times and, although there are finally new, or we should say some, administrative rules up for approval- after Cronin was forced to provide them when he lost yet another law suit resulting from his egotism and pomposity- it’s anyone’s guess if they will actually fix the underlying problems over the potential for neighbor island vote flipping and other issues resulting from his penchant for pulling rulings out his, uh, ear.
We were calling for Cronin’s resignation last August and now that it’s come a year and a half too late it’s particularly unsatisfying given the absolute mess he left and, the not just the lack of any shovel but, a concerted effort by the governor and legislature to deny use of any implement to dig our way toward conducting an election in less than a year.
We’ll probably have moments when we wish we still had the prince of prevarication to kick around but today isn’t one of them.
--------------
We’ve got some real- and outside- world things to take care of tomorrow and Friday so we’ll dispense with our agoraphobic activities until Monday unless we get some 28 hour days.
Sunday, August 10, 2008
UNTRAINABLE
UNTRAINABLE: When we heard that the 2000 elections Florida fiasco was spurring election balloting reform we thought maybe there would finally be a universal, impeccable criterion for casting and counting the vote- maybe even (gasp) a national standard.
But the dolts in Congress instead thought that electronics and technology was the answer and so decided to promote the use of the most easily compromised of all balloting techniques- computers.
Then the states followed suit selecting big-black-opaque-box methodologies rather than the obviously superior paper ballots and optical scanners.
The latter is the method endorsed universally by international election observers and national organizations like FairVote and The League of Women Voters (LWV) - not to mention standardized school-test providers- as the most accurate, transparent and untamperable technology of all.
Not only was a national standard not on the table but some of the individual states’ elections bureaus seemed as though they never gave a thought to how to run an accurate, fair and verifiable election.
Inquiring minds wanted to know- “who are these idiots who don’t get it - where do they come from”? Who were these people who were ignoring all the protests over a lack of a verifiable paper trial and potential electronic hacking- not to mention the absurd use of outside, contracted, propriety systems rather than transparent in-house arrangements?.
Now we know. They apparently come from Wisconsin and their name is Kevin Cronin, the new Hawai`i Chief Elections Officer .
Today an administrative hearings officer tore Cronin a new one- or more accurately widened the one that was originally augered by a slew of other self-induced orifice expanding procedures- finding that Cronin used “a ‘reckless disregard” for state procurement laws (and) attempted to manipulate both the data and the facts in order to justify the award of a contract” to Hart InterCivic to conduct our next election, according to today’s Honolulu Advertiser.
The article says that Cronin, who reportedly had previous business ties to elections equipment provider Hart “was unqualified to do the cost analysis” and according to the administrative ruling his conclusions were “incomplete, inaccurate, unreliable and misleading”, in approving Hart’s bid of $52.8 million over an $18.1 million bid by Election Systems & Software (ES&S) to provide election equipment.
The judge called Cronin’s decision "clearly unreasonable." according to the article.
The shenanigans of King Cronin- who last month claimed he was still the “de facto” Elections Chief when it was found he didn’t comply with the requirements for the job in not registering to vote in Hawai`i - have reached the point where lunatics like racist Ken Conkin and Republican stalwart State Senator Sam Sloam sound like reasonable, sane people in calling for him to be fired.
Cronin has apparently succeeded in doing something no one in the islands has been able to do- bring the Democrats and Republicans together.
But let’s remember how this “new” chief elections officer came to the office.
Arguably Dwayne Yoshina administered Hawai`i elections as flawlessly as could be expected for a decade.
But in the election when Hawai`i switched from the old punch cards to the new optical scan of paper ballots, horror of horrors, they took until way after midnight to get the count right what with the use of new equipment- mostly because the usual election observers and the staff were not yet experienced with the new system so kept asking for reviews and safeguards to make sure everything was accurate and all the new procedures were being followed.
This was described to us by a source at the elections bureau- one who we know to be of impeccable integrity- who was “at the podium” in the vote counting center in the State House chamber with Yoshina that night as his assistant-in-charge.
Well the media blew a gasket. “How dare Yoshina keep us waiting” they whined. In the days after the election the actual results were give short shrift compared to the recriminations over the delays that inconvenienced the reporters from the papers and TV news outlets.
And, sensing political gain, joining them in their sniveling and taking up the battle cry was gubernatorial loser Linda Lingle who called for Yoshina’s head.
Then, after a long somewhat ugly battle where all the pols distanced themselves from Yoshina, Lingle was elected four years later and they finally had the wherewithal to replace all the election commissioners with enough anti-Yoshina-ites to force him out by refusing to renewing his contract.
And who did they pick as a permanent replacement? Some government lawyer from Wisconsin who had not only never been involved with Hawai`i elections and was unfamiliar with our election laws and procedures but had never even been involved in any elections anywhere.
And they picked a guy who makes the words “arbitrary and capricious decision making” sound like a compliment..
Cronin’s imperial administration has become the biggest laughing stock in Honolulu and across the state- and that’s hard to do considering the usual band of connected, appointed baboozes that head up many of our state government entities.
Perhaps the “tearing of a new one” we referred to earlier helped facilitate the extraction of some of Cronin’s other rulings of late, such as the one that held that all withdrawals from election races had to be in writing despite the fact that the actual law doesn’t require it and in fact denotes the singular circumstances- for health reasons- under which a written withdrawal is necessary.
Or his order to print the ballots while challenges were still pending and failing to let anyone examine them beforehand, both of which are violations of state law.
As we detailed* quite a few times the candidate withdrawal ruling threw the Honolulu County Clerk’s office into turmoil since it called into question whether a replacement candidate for Kirk Caldwell was selected in the “three day window”- as a lawsuit filed by the Republican Party this week claims- and therefore in fact who would be on the ballots... which were already printed.
Through the Kaua`i and State LWV we often worked with Yoshina and many in his office as observers and never had a complaint about his running anything but a fair and transparent election.
Dwayne bent over backwards to integrate all observers into the process and no one we ever heard from left the tabulation centers without all reasonable concerns being addressed.
Yet political hacks like Lingle and some in the legislature-especially the leadership at the time- couldn’t leave well enough alone. They had to bring in an inexperienced pompous ass from 4000 miles away to do things as wrong as he could for as long as he could and then, rather than acknowledge mistakes, defend them and claim the privilege to make more.
And the big winner in all this? Well let’s just say don’t expect to hear much about Rex “got Porn?” Johnson this week.
---------
*Correction and Note: We reported in error last week that only withdrawals after the filing deadline could spur a replacement but, though the wording in HRS 11-118 was a little unclear, we did misinterpreted the plain meaning. Strangely enough no one pointed out our mistake. We regret the error.
But the dolts in Congress instead thought that electronics and technology was the answer and so decided to promote the use of the most easily compromised of all balloting techniques- computers.
Then the states followed suit selecting big-black-opaque-box methodologies rather than the obviously superior paper ballots and optical scanners.
The latter is the method endorsed universally by international election observers and national organizations like FairVote and The League of Women Voters (LWV) - not to mention standardized school-test providers- as the most accurate, transparent and untamperable technology of all.
Not only was a national standard not on the table but some of the individual states’ elections bureaus seemed as though they never gave a thought to how to run an accurate, fair and verifiable election.
Inquiring minds wanted to know- “who are these idiots who don’t get it - where do they come from”? Who were these people who were ignoring all the protests over a lack of a verifiable paper trial and potential electronic hacking- not to mention the absurd use of outside, contracted, propriety systems rather than transparent in-house arrangements?.
Now we know. They apparently come from Wisconsin and their name is Kevin Cronin, the new Hawai`i Chief Elections Officer .
Today an administrative hearings officer tore Cronin a new one- or more accurately widened the one that was originally augered by a slew of other self-induced orifice expanding procedures- finding that Cronin used “a ‘reckless disregard” for state procurement laws (and) attempted to manipulate both the data and the facts in order to justify the award of a contract” to Hart InterCivic to conduct our next election, according to today’s Honolulu Advertiser.
The article says that Cronin, who reportedly had previous business ties to elections equipment provider Hart “was unqualified to do the cost analysis” and according to the administrative ruling his conclusions were “incomplete, inaccurate, unreliable and misleading”, in approving Hart’s bid of $52.8 million over an $18.1 million bid by Election Systems & Software (ES&S) to provide election equipment.
The judge called Cronin’s decision "clearly unreasonable." according to the article.
The shenanigans of King Cronin- who last month claimed he was still the “de facto” Elections Chief when it was found he didn’t comply with the requirements for the job in not registering to vote in Hawai`i - have reached the point where lunatics like racist Ken Conkin and Republican stalwart State Senator Sam Sloam sound like reasonable, sane people in calling for him to be fired.
Cronin has apparently succeeded in doing something no one in the islands has been able to do- bring the Democrats and Republicans together.
But let’s remember how this “new” chief elections officer came to the office.
Arguably Dwayne Yoshina administered Hawai`i elections as flawlessly as could be expected for a decade.
But in the election when Hawai`i switched from the old punch cards to the new optical scan of paper ballots, horror of horrors, they took until way after midnight to get the count right what with the use of new equipment- mostly because the usual election observers and the staff were not yet experienced with the new system so kept asking for reviews and safeguards to make sure everything was accurate and all the new procedures were being followed.
This was described to us by a source at the elections bureau- one who we know to be of impeccable integrity- who was “at the podium” in the vote counting center in the State House chamber with Yoshina that night as his assistant-in-charge.
Well the media blew a gasket. “How dare Yoshina keep us waiting” they whined. In the days after the election the actual results were give short shrift compared to the recriminations over the delays that inconvenienced the reporters from the papers and TV news outlets.
And, sensing political gain, joining them in their sniveling and taking up the battle cry was gubernatorial loser Linda Lingle who called for Yoshina’s head.
Then, after a long somewhat ugly battle where all the pols distanced themselves from Yoshina, Lingle was elected four years later and they finally had the wherewithal to replace all the election commissioners with enough anti-Yoshina-ites to force him out by refusing to renewing his contract.
And who did they pick as a permanent replacement? Some government lawyer from Wisconsin who had not only never been involved with Hawai`i elections and was unfamiliar with our election laws and procedures but had never even been involved in any elections anywhere.
And they picked a guy who makes the words “arbitrary and capricious decision making” sound like a compliment..
Cronin’s imperial administration has become the biggest laughing stock in Honolulu and across the state- and that’s hard to do considering the usual band of connected, appointed baboozes that head up many of our state government entities.
Perhaps the “tearing of a new one” we referred to earlier helped facilitate the extraction of some of Cronin’s other rulings of late, such as the one that held that all withdrawals from election races had to be in writing despite the fact that the actual law doesn’t require it and in fact denotes the singular circumstances- for health reasons- under which a written withdrawal is necessary.
Or his order to print the ballots while challenges were still pending and failing to let anyone examine them beforehand, both of which are violations of state law.
As we detailed* quite a few times the candidate withdrawal ruling threw the Honolulu County Clerk’s office into turmoil since it called into question whether a replacement candidate for Kirk Caldwell was selected in the “three day window”- as a lawsuit filed by the Republican Party this week claims- and therefore in fact who would be on the ballots... which were already printed.
Through the Kaua`i and State LWV we often worked with Yoshina and many in his office as observers and never had a complaint about his running anything but a fair and transparent election.
Dwayne bent over backwards to integrate all observers into the process and no one we ever heard from left the tabulation centers without all reasonable concerns being addressed.
Yet political hacks like Lingle and some in the legislature-especially the leadership at the time- couldn’t leave well enough alone. They had to bring in an inexperienced pompous ass from 4000 miles away to do things as wrong as he could for as long as he could and then, rather than acknowledge mistakes, defend them and claim the privilege to make more.
And the big winner in all this? Well let’s just say don’t expect to hear much about Rex “got Porn?” Johnson this week.
---------
*Correction and Note: We reported in error last week that only withdrawals after the filing deadline could spur a replacement but, though the wording in HRS 11-118 was a little unclear, we did misinterpreted the plain meaning. Strangely enough no one pointed out our mistake. We regret the error.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
