Kelly Cushing: Elections: It’s quantity not quality in voting
Let Democracy thrive by changing city council elections to even years. I recently read Bob Yates’ monthly newsletter in which he vehemently opposes the proposal to change the city council election from odd- to even-year election cycles. In his objection, he wrote, “Maybe the motive here really is to get more people to vote in city council elections, under the belief that quantity is better than quality.” The context here suggests the councilman disagrees with increasing voter turnout (increasing quantity) and rather, prefers only “quality” votes be cast. I have just one question: How exactly is a “quality” vote defined?
According to the National Civic League, older, affluent white voters have a significantly higher turnout in local elections compared to lower income minorities. Research also shows when local policy is disproportionately influenced by older, affluent white voters it leads to poorer outcomes for minorities. So the motive here is indeed “quantity,” or in other words, a more representative democracy. Any suggestion to favor “quality” of votes over “quantity” of votes is elitist, anti-democratic and reeks of voter suppression.
It’s no secret voter turnout for odd year local elections is poor. Research shows that voter turnout during even year local elections is double that of off-cycle elections. Baltimore’s voter turnout increased from 13% to 60% when making the change. Los Angeles saw a 400% increase, along with a more representative electorate, in terms of race, age and class.
Abraham Lincoln evoked the principles of human equality when he famously described democracy as a government “of the people, by the people, for the people.” He didn’t say of the “quality” people, by the “quality” people, for the “quality” people. Go register to vote and vote for even year local elections, so our elected leaders best represent our community.
Kelly Cushing
Boulder
Babette André: Airport: Roundtable must drop political motives
RMMA’s Noise Roundtable was conceived to be an open discussion to find ways to reduce aircraft noise over residential property that was foolishly built too close to the airport. It has become a mini-bureaucracy of paid officials who have built a $96,000 war chest for limiting and/or closing the airport. Its recent vote to up the “dues” of voting members is a useless effort to fund consultant studies to tell us what we already know.
Neighbors have a right to complain and they also have the right to read their title documents before buying within the noise contours.
Airport admin, the FAA and user pilots have served as “free” consultants over the past two years. Voluntary safety procedures and awareness have been implemented to the best of aircraft overflight ability.
Yet, the paid members build a larger agenda to spend our money without acknowledging that the airport has addressed the concerns and has modified procedures for noise abatement. We don’t need more consultants. The roundtable should be made of volunteer citizens without underlying political motives.
We live under several flight paths two miles north of the airport and see and hear much improvement.
Babette André & Joe McGowan
Broomfield
James O’Neill: Gun control: Acknowledge the price of assault weapons
Rocky Mountain Gun Owners Must Acknowledge the Price of Their Position.
The locally elected representatives of the Town of Superior enact rational gun restrictions supported by their constituents and gun “rights” organizations swoop in with legal challenges to negate the will of the people. It happens time and time again. Rocky Mountain Gun Owners and other defenders of the Second Amendment must acknowledge that their unbending rejection of rational gun restrictions comes at the potential price of continued mass shootings and the death of hundreds of innocent people.
Assigning this price to the actions of these groups may seem harsh, but the evidence shows that it is clearly the case. If they wish to continue with their blind interpretation of the Second Amendment that is their right, however they should recognize and admit that the cost is the mass killing of innocent people.
Assault weapon bans work. They have been effective in other countries and were effective in the U.S. between 1994 and 2004. Assault weapons, high capacity magazines and .223 ammunition specifically designed for extreme lethality belong only with the military and a “well regulated militia” — the National Guard. There are plenty of gun owners, including me, who support aggressive regulation of these weapons.
I have had many discussions with the other side whose arguments quickly fall apart when debated until finally they draw upon their fundamental argument that these weapons are needed to protect against government tyranny. In the end their best argument against gun restrictions is that they need them to come after us. Think about that the next time you see one of those “Come and Take it” flags or stickers. In the meantime let’s recognize the price our society is paying for their twisted interpretation of the constitution.
James O’Neill
Lafayette
Jim Welker: Gas: U.S. can solve its own problems
On election day in 2020 the average price of gas in the U.S. was $2.12. Now it is more than double that.
Joe Biden campaigned against the fossil fuel industry. As president he has implemented those policies.
The large increase in the cost of gas and diesel fuel affects things we buy in the stores, is the basis of the high inflation problem and is very hard on middle and low income people.
The U.S. is sitting on very large amounts of oil, natural gas and coal reserves — enough where we can become an exporter again.
Immediately, President Biden should change his policies on fossil fuels. He should do everything he can to permit and encourage the oil and gas companies to explore, produce and transmit these products efficiently.
Jim Welker
Loveland
