Why so selfish?
I am the youngest of 12 siblings. I’m now 71. There are three of us still alive and planning on seeing some more seasons. I’m already planning on the spring time planting of flowers and vegetables.
I guess that comes from our grandparents and parents being raised on the farm. In order to survive they had to be self-reliant and plan for each crop season. They also helped their neighbors in need when health or harvest complications arose unexpectedly.
In turn, they received that help back whenever needed. I think that neighborly attitude was shared around many farming communities and still is today.
When it came time to aid our country and our allies in time of distress and disputes, seven of us brothers stood up and served honorably in the military. It seemed right to preserve and protect our nation and its citizens from tyranny, just as our Founding Fathers had along with their colonial brothers. And many of them had even ultimately given their lives.
Yet with all that sacrifice, we stand here today at such internal strife over a tiny little piece of cloth and a common practice of vaccination, which most of them have received several times before in their lives. It protected and preserved their lives and those around them.
How selfish an act to disregard the health and well-being of your families, your friends, communities and first responders who show up to protect and provide medical treatment when you cry out for their help.
Mike Petrusky
Clarkston
Censure sets precedent
The vote to censure Rep. Priscilla Giddings was clearly divided along partisan lines: Democrats, RINOs, and puppets of Scott Bedke vs. the liberty legislators.
To the representatives who voted in favor of censuring Giddings for “conduct unbecoming,” beware of the precedent you’ve set for yourselves. We the citizens expect full discernment and equal justice for all of our elected officials. The spotlight will be on each one of you. Your actions going forward will be judged accordingly. We are expecting swift and immediate accountability when one of you falters. We shouldn’t have to wait very long, as some of you are of dubious character.
To the 19 legislators who voted against censure, thank you. You’ve taken a stand to defend our freedom. You’ve opposed the cancel culture that has permeated society and is now thriving in our Legislature. You’ve stood in defense against the character assassination on one of our most prized legislators. Her character, integrity and exemplary track record in serving her country speaks for itself.
Freedom of speech and the exercise thereof is an inalienable right guaranteed by our creator. It is one of the pillars in the framework of our Constitution.
It is our duty to elect representatives who serve the individual citizen and remove from office those who are representing big corporate interests. The corruption in Boise is reprehensible and the vote to censure clearly shows whose interests each of these legislators truly represent.
Steve Fioravanti
Bonners Ferry
Iacoboni is confused
Gabriel Iacoboni would like to have the city council members each represent a district. I think from this point Iacoboni gets somewhat confused. Idaho Code provides for numbering of the seats of the city council and when that seat is up for election, any city resident can run for that seat and any citizen can vote for that seat. The seat number does not represent a geographic district.
On the other hand, the city council can by ordinance establish districts. Those districts would have to be approximately equal in population, according to the most current U.S. census and each district shall be made up of one or more election precincts. Anyone elected from that district has to be a resident of that district. And only those living in the district can vote for the persons running from that district.
So what happens if no one runs for council in any one district? Well, the mayor appoints someone to fill that vacancy with the approval of the rest of the council.
Now with the mayor government, if council has a tie vote, the mayor gets to cast the deciding vote. Also if the council voted prior to the election to require a majority vote to win the district election, it could require a runoff election if no one gets a majority.
Sound complicated compared to the current “jumbled mess”? The question is: Does the current “jumbled mess” better represent the entire city or should it be changed to districts?
Ged W. Randall
Lewiston
