That is what I usually answer when crossing a border back into the United States. It is about the only time I DON'T have anything to state on a subject, a fact painfully acknowledged by many. Some on USAT's Board of Directors would heartily concur just about now.

In an OpEd piece two days ago I stated that it was "Time to Declare." But most of USAT's board thought not. I asked each board member to please state to this ezine's readers who they favor for president in the upcoming ITU elections. Now I know what a U.S. Customs Agent feels like. "Nothing to Declare." Oft repeated. While I don't see the wisdom in their decision to remain mute, I also don't see any value in torturing them indefinitely. So, I'm going to end my "campaign for transparency" with the following remarks...

The worst-kept secret in triathlon is that the United States will cast its country's vote for Les McDonald on April 27th upcoming. Though those casting the vote on behalf of USAT fully intend to do vote the "McDonald slate," and have so intended for quite some time, they will not admit to their intentions, nor defend them.

Four years ago our federation felt that the in-situ ITU regime was so abhorrent, the situation so unsustainable, that it single-handedly threw its hat--and its executive director--into the ring. USAT's Steve Locke ran for president, against Les McDonald, at his federation's political and financial expense. I understand why USAT might want to stand aside and let others run this time. But, in order to support McDonald against his several challengers, one must assume that USAT's board thinks the situation has materially changed for the better.

Is the ITU more fiscally responsible than four years ago? Has it done a better job in securing sponsors? Is ours a more respected world governing body than it was in 1996? Is the average ITU athlete richer than he or she was four years ago? And if so, is the federation responsible for the athletes' increased financial opportunties? What about duathlon, and long-distance racing? Has the ITU established a leadership role? And what about the state of the sport below the elite level? Is the ITU actively at work helping to build the base? Has its executive branch moderated its rhetoric? Is it now considered on-a-par with other federations with respect to its professional demeanor? Has it purged itself--or cleared itself--of any notion of improprieties with regard to voting irregularities? Is it any better at keeping itself out of legal jeopardy with its own strategic partners?

I do not mind if America's federation votes to keep McDonald, et al, in power. I simply believe that those who own the federation (you're an equity shareholder if you're a USAT annual member) ought to know why. Is it because McDonald is the best man for the job? Or is it--as some have speculated--because USAT has handicapped the field and suspects McDonald will win, and so does not want to incite the well-documented anger of this man? Or, is it because the likely challenge will come from Europe, and USAT feels than ANY candidate from North America is preferable to ANY candidate who might shift the power base off its continent? (Is America again engaging in sixty-year-old provincial paranoia: "He may be a son-of-a-bitch, but he's OUR son-of-a-bitch."?). Or, is this all just a quid pro quo? Is Les getting America's vote because he has granted the U.S. a ninth women's slot in the Sydney World Cup?

I don't know. You don't know. You might never know. But it seemed to me a reasonable request that you be given an explanation by those who represent you.

About USAT's board of directors: They're volunteers. They work hard. I honor their commitment to our sport. So I'm going to lay off. Having said that, I and many others have volunteered our time and money to make this a better sport. Because one volunteers his or her time does not mean he or she is absolved from any responsibility for doing a proper job. I do hope that at some point Americans will have a more open and accountable federation. Perhaps AFTER USAT's vote for McDonald we will be let in on the secret: What so dramatically changed in four years? Or was America simply terribly wrong in its opinion about the ITU four years ago?

Perhaps I'm the only one who's wrong here. Perhaps those members of the board who've chosen not to answer our query are correct in staying silent. In the spirit of fair play I feel it is only right to allow our readers an opportunity to show their support for the federation members who've taken this stand, so I list their email addresses below (from the USAT website, with updates and corrections), so that readers who are so inclined can lend them moral support. I also offer my email address so that--if you're so inclined--you may personally tell me what a nasty so-and-so I've been for taking USAT's board members to task.

Those board member responses we have received are listed below.
---

USAT BOARD OF DIRECTORS:

WESTERN REGION REPRESENTATIVES

John Duke
johnduke@multisports.com

Tim Becker
wendiotim@aol.com

---

CENTRAL REGION REPRESENTATIVES

Michael Highfield
(President)
highfield@cmplaw.com

Jack Weiss
(Treasurer)
ironjack@gte.net

---

EASTERN REGION REPRESENTATIVES

Katie Knight-Perry
(Secretary)
ironkids@gte.net

Fred Sommer
fred@triflorida.com

---

AT-LARGE REPRESENTATIVES

Sharron Ackles
(Vice President)
sharron@ironmankona.com

Ray Plotecia
imagectl@home.com

---

ATHLETE REPRESENTATIVES

Jim Riccitello
jimtraci@aol.com

JOSH DAPICE
JJD@stanfordalumni.org

Eric Schwartz
ESchwar55@aol.com

---

BOARD OF DIRECTOR RESPONSES

---

From John Duke: I feel personally it is time for a change. I believe in term limits in politics as I feel leaders tend to get tunnel vision when left in a particular position too long. Les has been a very controversial president for a long time. He has done a lot of things that I disagree with, but his singular vision has also helped deliver the sport a spot on the Olympic Program. As the sport moves to the next level in its maturity cycle, I feel it is time for fresh leadership at the helm. For that reason I feel Didier Lehenaff is the right person for the position of ITU president.

I want to reiterate this is my personal position, not necessarily that of the USA Triathlon Board of Directors.

---

From Jim Riccitello: I do not yet know who I would ask the board to vote for. I believe someone could do a better job than the current regime. However, I'm not sure how to tell who would do better. I will figure it out before I have to make my recommendation.

---

From Tim Becker: I respectfully decline to answer.

---

From Mike Highfield: As USAT President and as one of the four United States delegates to the Perth World Congress, whose collective responsibility it will be to cast our country's vote in this critical election, it would be inappropriate for me to comment publicly on this issue, and I will not do so.

---

From Ray Plotecia: Thanks for the opportunity to voice my opinions regarding the upcoming ITU elections.  As a board member, I do have input and can make recommendations to our delegates.  Before going ahead, however, your readers need to know something about me and what motivates my thinking.
 
I am a  pure age-grouper.  I race and I volunteer to do what I can for American-style multisport.  I do not make any money from this sport.  I am not a race director, personal trainer, or sports related journalist so I see myself as having no vested interest beyond the growth and well-being of my favorite pastime.
 
Only a small part of the activities of the ITU impinge directly upon age-group racing in the United States. I refer, of course, to the World Championships.  In that respect, I would want to elect a person that will ensure that there will always be a  draft-free, World Championships to which we can send an amateur team which will race for our country.
 
Most of ITUs activities affect our professionals.  While this is a small part of the day-to-day business of USAT since we have a huge grass-roots, amateur, racing population over which we have been granted stewardship, it is the most visible aspect of multisport.  What happens in Pro Worlds, World Cup, and the Olympics is what the general public sees.  It is essentially how our sport is advertised to the general public.  Our image as a sport is important.  It attracts or repels sponsorship, and also attracts new multisport athletes.  I would want to select a person who is committed to the fair and honest business practices that we all would expect from an International Governing Body for sport.  We need egalitarian treatment of all NGBs. I would want someone committed to the wholesome image of multisport that I myself perceive.  We want to attract kids and their parents to multisport, and ITU activities along these lines can make or break us in this respect.  Consequently and most importantly, I would want to have the ITU leadership take a very hard line stance on performance enhancing drugs, their detection, and enforcement.  I want our sport to be clean, I want to believe that performances are believable.  I don't want a Festina-like drug scandal to hurt us.  ITU leadership is in the best position to achieve these goals internationally and we as Americans will benefit from it.  This is the leadership that I want.
 
Ironman, both the race in Hawaii and the movement worldwide, is the first thing that comes to mind when you ask the average world citizen and most amateur athletes what they know about triathlon.  It is the enduring paradigm for our sport.  I want a leadership that is committed to working with WTC.  Together, those organizations can do wonders for our sport.
 
Finally, but most importantly, I am an American triathlete.  I am proud to be an American triathlete.  Our way of life in this country has given me so much opportunity to race, to meet new people in the sport, and to work for the betterment of that sport.  As such, I am looking for an ITU leadership whose thinking is consistent with, and favorable to the USA.  We need an ITU that will work with USAT to enhance our sport, keep it growing, and allow our draft-free, amateur racing to continue in this new millennium.
 
There are currently a myriad of candidates running for ITU office.  It would be unfair for me to make a selection at this time, without knowing what they all have to say.  Katherine Williams is publishing each of their platforms comments, one day at a time.  Until they all have had a chance to comment, I cannot choose. 
 
I believe that our delegates will have a closed-ballot election.  I assume this is done so that the final winning regime will bear no malice or ill-will toward those countries that may have voted against them.  I really do fear that if I, as a USAT board member, make recommendations publicly -- by actually naming names -- then maybe I will put my country in a bad position should my recommendations not be the winning ones.  You wouldn't want me to do that to my country.  You, being an unbiased journalist, are unconstrained by that concern.  Who would you pick, Dan?

Editors Note: I do not believe it would be fair for me to comment on any of the responses above. But Ray does ask me a question with his last sentence, so I'll reply. I suspect I would vote for Didier Lehenaff had I a vote to give.