Standing up to a bully
EDITOR: What is the matter with you people (“The dangerous bluster of Donald Trump,” Editorial, Thursday)? Are you so used to the schoolyard bully that you are willing to keep turning the other cheek no matter how bad you get hurt?
It is time to stand up to the bullies of the world. Stand up to them and take back your schoolyard, your lives and your country.
Where are police?
EDITOR: Surely if two armed men were waving their guns around and shouting threats in your living room or office, threatening your children or your staff, you would call the cops, and these men would be constrained and removed one way or another.
How can it be that we are unable to restore law and order when two such men are threatening the well-being of half the people on the planet?
Danger of primaries
EDITOR: Over the years, I have found an issue that is complex and formidable, yet few seem to understand how dire the consequences will be if we do nothing to change it. Our elections have been manipulated not by foreign governments but by our own political parties.
I’m speaking about primary elections. There is no provision for the role of political parties in the United States Constitution, as Alexander Hamilton and James Madison, respectively, wrote specifically about the dangers of domestic political factions.
In 1901, a primary system was put in place in Florida. This was to prevent other parties from entering the race in any meaningful way. George Washington (two terms, ran under no party), warned of the ruination of democracy if this very thing happened. It’s apparent that Washington’s insight was correct once again in the latest of many elections.
The current system is unconstitutional regardless of the opinion of the U.S. Supreme Court. We need to eliminate the primaries altogether if independent candidates are to have a fair chance. Until the gates to utopia are opened, the Democrats’ vision of America is as delusional as the Republicans’ vision.
A needed change
EDITOR: As a former Santa Rosa school board member, I’m glad the district has voted, finally, to do the right thing and move to district elections.
However, I take exception with Board President Jenni Klose’s comments that the change came after “examining compliance with the California Voting Rights Act for some time” and not because of pending litigation.
Soon after my joining the board, we briefly formed a subcommittee under the direction of legal counsel to review the subject. We were basically told that going to district elections was inevitable. This was approximately seven years ago. When I brought up the topic over the years, the only board member who agreed was Ron Kristof; the others were vehemently against it, arguing that constituents would actually be less well served.
I doubt that equal representation ever weighed heavily on the board. It was more about protecting their elected positions. Otherwise why wait so long?
Kudos to attorney Kevin Shenkman. The $30,000 in fees he will likely seek from the district, no doubt leading to the board’s silence at their meeting, was well earned.
Change is good. It’s inevitable. Some may not be able to see it right now, but that’s OK. The rest of us can.