Michael Cathcart is in his second term on the Spokane City Council, the lone conservative on a progressive council. There, he’s officially non-partisan, though he’s running as a Republican for auditor.
When he announced his candidacy, he also announced he has the endorsement of the woman leaving the office, Democrat Vicky Dalton. We talked with Cathcart about his campaign.
This interview is lightly edited for clarity and length.
Michael Cathcart: I saw this opportunity as something that really does fit my experience and qualifications and efforts, not just the last six-and-a-half, seven years on council, but going back well before.
Government transparency and accountability have been very big through lines in my life and service on the city council and, at the end of the day, the auditor is the trust office. It's the office that builds that public trust and I really believe as somebody who is a fan or prefers more limited government, I really see the value and importance of public trust because what ends up happening if folks lose faith or confidence in government is either they disengage and they stop participating as we've seen with some voters. They might take things into their own hands in certain ways that can be very dangerous. Or what we often see is a kind of a run towards more government, perhaps in a different form or different way.
And so making sure that government is open, accessible and trustworthy is, I think, paramount, especially at the local level and so I see this as a great opportunity to do those things in that office.
You know, we can, reform some areas in some ways to make sure that we are approaching it with this transparency-first mindset. I just think there's a lot of really positive benefits that can come from serving in that role.
DN: So let's follow what you just said in terms of things that you think can be changed. Are there specifics that you want to talk about?
MC: First off, I will just say, because it's not a secret and I'm proud to have it, our current auditor, Vicky Dalton, has endorsed me in this race. She's crossed party lines to do so and I'm very grateful for her support. And I've got a lot of support from almost, not all, but almost every elected Republican as well and many, many community members across the board.
What I think we can do in that office is perhaps a little bit different than Vicky. I want to coordinate a bipartisan or nonpartisan group of folks to advise within the elections office how we can improve the observation process. I think that there are obviously limits at the state and local level that we have to abide by. But within that, are there things we can do in the office that would improve the observation, that would make it more meaningful? And having voices there from Democrat, Republican, independent, Libertarian, Green, whatever it might be, I think it's gonna be very, very important.
The auditor, at the end of the day, serves everybody, not just one party or one faction of folks and so making sure that we're getting that input so that they all feel comfortable with what is happening in that office, I think is gonna be very important.
Further, I am very excited to pursue a broadening of the post-election audits. I think there are options and ways that we can go about that. Some counties already do it. State law basically says that there's a floor, but it doesn't have a ceiling.
DN: Floor, as in what?
MC: In terms of the minimum that you have to do for post-election audits. You have to do kind of a bare minimum that looks at a local race and a state race, but we could add additional races to that. We could do a broadening of the batch audit process and so that's something I believe that will build a lot of confidence for folks and, at the end of the day, building confidence in the elections, I think is really important.
I see polls every once in a while that show a pretty significant number of folks just do not believe their vote counts and these are people who need and deserve to have their voice heard. I think if we can improve the system to add that confidence, they will then continue to participate, which I think is extremely important for our democracy.
Also, just opening up the entire process to the public to see from beginning to end how we handle the ballots, how we make it secure, how we do those things in a very transparent, very visible way, I think will do wonders for the public and building that confidence.
With Vicky having been there for 28 years, but approaching things in her way, I think it creates this opportunity to adjust a little bit and make sure that the people have full confidence, especially being a new auditor in that role in what's going on inside that office.
DN: Do you believe in your core that the state's vote-by-mail system is safe and in terms of ballots, all the ballots being counted and no more ballots being counted or whatever nefarious things we think about?
MC: I think that there are absolutely perceptions that it is not. That's what I want to address with a lot of the policies and reforms that I would be implementing.
But do I think at its core that it is corrupted, it's not working, it's fraudulent? No and I don't think the results bear that out either.
I think there are likely issues in the voter rolls, much of which would fall to the Secretary of State to oversee and modify. Certainly the auditor will have a role in working with the Secretary of State on that.
But on the actual process itself, you just look across the county at the folks who are winning elections and whatnot, it's just hard to believe that something is being done fraudulently when a Democrat is running the office and Republicans are largely winning many of the county races. So for me, that sort of shows it.
You can also look at the hand recounts that have been done that show very minimal to no discrepancies. So I think that there are a lot of positives.
But I will just say, too, I believe that folks who want to vote in a more in-person way should have some options to do that. Now, I can't necessarily implement that as the auditor, and that's not my job. My job is to execute the law as it's written and to do so faithfully and with integrity. But if we could get some ability to broaden some sort of, whether it's more voter service centers or poll sites or whatever you want to call them, and that people can come in and be in person because they feel more confident, I think that that is a really positive thing and that we should do it because the other part of it, too, is we have lost the civic camaraderie, I believe, that came with going to the polling places.
When I was a kid, I talk about this a lot, but when I was a kid, my dad would take me out of class every election day, we'd go down to the poll site in the gym and we would vote together and it really wasn't just about voting. It was also about learning what it means to be an informed voter. We would walk through the ballot together, talk about races, judges, for instance, if it just wasn't clear on what somebody stood for or who to vote for, whether it was okay to not vote in that race, that sort of conversation, which really, I think, has made me who I am today.
But also, you come in and there's the Republican and there's the Democrat running the table. And in my precinct, a very well-known Democrat, Sally Jackson, was the one who would always be running those and she would, she and the Republican, would get to know me by name. Every election, I came in with my dad and they would see me, they would know who I am. You would see your neighbors, you'd see the folks all around, your community and I think that helps sort of throw down your swords at the end of this fight and say, okay, you know, we are one community now, let's work together, move forward, at least until the next election.
I think having that camaraderie is an important piece. But the vote by mail, I don't want anybody to have a restriction on their ability to vote by mail, by absentee, whatever you want to call it. We have had the ability to do it for any reason since 1992 and I would not want to roll back the clock before that.
DN: Some would say, we just need in-person polling, and that's it. You're saying, no, we need a whole variety.
MC: I think we need options. I've got a neighbor who has some health issues and can't, wouldn't be able to always get to the polls and I just think about, we want to make sure that somebody like that has the option.
What about somebody who's just out of town? You know, I've heard stories from people in other states where they do have these really tight restrictions. They've had to apply three, four or five times to get permission from the government to vote absentee. I don't think it's any government's business why you want to vote by absentee. Whether it's a need or a want or what have you, that's your privacy, your issue and not for the government to decide. But we should have options for folks to be able to vote in the way that they think is the most secure for them.
