As a general rule, candidates often receive questions from groups seeking answers for voters, and sometimes from citizens and voters themselves.
Below, a lightly-curated list of questions received with my answers following. Feel free to reach out to my competitors and ask for their answers to these same questions. It is reasonable to expect them to provide similar content or, really, any content at all. I think you will conclude that even if you don't agree with me entirely, they are telling you nothing about their plans or priorities.
I am a calm, honest, funny, serious, vision- and mission-oriented leader who currently manages people, money, offices, and software. A 30-year educator and state employee, I understand how to make systems work. The work of the Secretary of State is - most days - nonpartisan, and a stable descriptor of my career is that I daily and consistently have and do help people without regards to my needs - rather I help the person in front of me, without judgment. Helping clients without judgment is a fundamental principle of counseling and is a principle I easily apply to customer-facing roles.
I’m ready on day one to fill the role as Secretary.
(note: original question asked in a portal with character limit restrictions. Some abbreviations in the original answer have been edited, and a couple of concepts were expanded.)
1. implement vote tabulation methods other than first-past-the-pole. Different polling methods provide two demonstrable effects: increased range of viewpoints of potential candidates and increased voter participation numbers.
2. prosperity: address lingering concerns, despite rollout of new portal (“FirstStop”). (see the next question); & implement modern voting mechanisms. There are modern voting methods that encourage politicians to appeal to nonbase voters, increase political negotiation, and reduce toxicity in political decision making.
3. address the damage to voter confidence exacted by “the big lie” and its proponents.
(note: original question asked in a portal with character limit restrictions. Some abbreviations in the original answer have been edited.)
First, I've provided information in my own words about how provisional ballots and the county canvassing boards work.
Second, here is some good information on the concept from a national perspective.
I have lived in states with a 30-day registration requirement, a state with same-day registration, and now North Dakota. I like not registering to vote. Here's the best thing: the government does not have a record of your party affiliation.
Motor Voter is a Democratic initiative begun during the Clinton administration and it is, functionally, what we have. Most people in North Dakota have an ID or a drivers license and the obtaining of a license if your de facto voter registration. Moreover, if you have voted in one of the last four elections (primary/general/primary/general) your name - even without a drivers license - is retained in the voter file.
Finally and in response to the botched elements of the new voter laws the Republican legislators voted into place in 2016, every person at a polling place is entitled at a minimum to a provisional ballot. If there are questions about your authenticity or qualifications to cast a vote, you can still vote. Your ballot is held in an embargoed status and you are given instructions how to "cure" your ballot before the votes you've recorded are added to the total count.
These steps make voter registration unnecessary. I participated in a panel of candidates early in the campaign season and when asked, I indicated my thoughts. I was the only candidate who stated "I'm a hard 'no.'"
There is much more that is right in our current system than is wrong.
I am running against two men who are pledging “election integrity,” promising to invoke an unspecified governmental action to fix a problem they cannot define.
Can we improve? Sparse precincts might benefit from deployment of additional dropboxes; and generally identifying opportunities for no-fault absentee ballots balanced with cautious oversight is prudent stance for the Secretary.
(note: original question asked in a portal with character limit restrictions. Some abbreviations in the original answer have been edited.)
Added info, June 2022. I have to start with a bit of wonkiness: about 13 days after the election, a panel of people - leaders in the R and the D party and local, election officials - gather in every county. In North Dakota, that means 53 separate panels. Across the country, that means roughly 2200 panels. When anyone suggests that the system can be cheated, I say with confidence "no, it cannot." It's conceivable one or two or even a few of the panels could make corrupt decisions. I don't find that likely, but it's possible. But to coordinate this localized and multiple, separate groups of people of good will - just not a reasonable belief.
Here's my take - I saw three canvassing boards with three different levels of structure. None were wrong, but it's clear the Secretary of State's office has failed to give training and roleplaying opportunities to the professionals who manage these processes. I look forward to stepping into the obvious void the lack of leadership in this office has allowed to develop.
The current Secretary of State webpage details procedure and safety features of our current voting and data management systems. Admittedly it’s not a easy read and this document competes w/ voices asserting - without proof - that problems exist. The Secretary must be ready to soberly and calmly explain vote protocols. (We can reformat the info in this pdf into a usable and informative website, and I will.) The false impression of rampant fraud will require me specifically to cultivate relationships w/ loudest voices in other party. I anticipate their patriotic assistance as we confront this threat to democracy.
(note: original question asked in a portal with character limit restrictions. The abbreviation "SoS" was changed to read "Secretary of State.")
I am unaware of any allegations of fraud in North Dakota in the 2020 election. I served on my county’s canvassing board and am aware of one instance of an improper vote, a charge that was forwarded to the sheriff’s department for investigation and which, based on what I know, was an honest mistake on the part of the individual. I think our county auditors will consistently do the right thing when it comes to our elections.
I know there are voices in Washington, DC, who want us to believe our neighbors in North Dakota are dishonest and would treat ballots without care and in conflict with the law. I am not one of those voices.
Stopping the suggestion – the lie – that there was widespread fraud and using that lie to identify people whose right to vote is curtailed is exactly the reason I am running. The ability to vote for our leaders is a critical thing in a democracy, and I cannot stand idly by while some Americans are in jeopardy of losing that right.
(Edited from the first time I provided the whole of this answer). The most recent number I've seen is approximately 470 suspicious/report filed situations where an auditor questions if an election law violation occurred. Studies indicate that about 13 – 20 instances of prosecutable fraud occur nationally during an election cycle (end edited section), a cycle in which about 300,000,000 ballots are cast. I simply do not believe there was widespread fraud in the election.
In North Dakota, we use paper ballots that are counted by an electronic scanner. Again, I served on my county’s canvassing board. I had the chance to observe a ‘test deck’ that was sent through the scanner/counter, a test deck that was then confirmed by a manual count. Those of us (an even mixture of Republicans and Democrats invited by our county auditor) had the chance to submit test ballots, with info not known to the county auditor until these were submitted so we could see how our ballots influenced the counting. The machine counted those accurately.
A paper ballot system is maintained and I have seen those ballots rechecked during a recall vote. We have fair elections in North Dakota and paper ballots are retained, as you suggested in your question. I am worried my competitors are eager to restrict voting rights because of a false allegation of elections in North Dakota that are not fair, allegations I cannot support.
I was in college when a Japanese consortium purchased Rockefeller Center in New York, and I recall the debates at that time whether a foreign business should be prevented from doing so. Congress has had sufficient time to change the law and has not acted. The company you are referencing has the legal right to the purchase.
I am concerned about other parts of the process that is occurring. It is concerning to me that a petition for a public vote was dismissed without further consideration. There are things that are legal that still erode public confidence, and my view-as-citizen (which could be different from my view as authority) is denying the petition was a least a political mistake. A petition completed in good faith has been denied for reasons I don't entirely understand. My opinion: the question should be on a ballot. I lack the belief the Stop Fufeng group would turn out a majority, which also provides clarity to policy makers. Denying the vote makes the council look undemocratic and adds fuel to any assertion that backroom decision making is occurring.
The acquisition of farmland by the City of Grand Forks is permissible under current Century Code regulations. The Secretary of State does not write or vote on bills, but I do think there will be conversation in the next legislative session about that law that gives incorporated cities that right. I do not understand how the council can waive tax obligations in order to attract a business when they must have a vote to add a new tax to our bill – this seems a little sneaky, but there is information I do not have. Personally, I have expressed my concern to my city council person – who seldom votes as I would wish him to – and I have discussed the matter with a council members I consider my friends.
Ultimately, representative democracy involves leaders making decisions that I as a citizen will either agree with or will disagree with, and then their next election our job is to hold them accountable. I am concerned there is some sneakiness about the formation of this deal, a sneakiness that concerns me, and I think my city council rep is a party to this. I will work harder this time to defeat the person who represents my ward.
To specifically answer your question, there is nothing illegal about the company purchasing the farmland.
Copyright © 2023 Jeffrey Powell for Secretary of State - All Rights Reserved.
We use cookies to analyze website traffic and optimize your website experience. By accepting our use of cookies, your data will be aggregated with all other user data.