Editor,

After just voting, I can’t bare to face another election without expressing my frustration on two issues. I know I’m not the only one. First, without exception, everyone I speak with — including writers, teachers and English professors — have the same description of voting for “initiative measures.” You read them over about 25 times to be sure you understand — from the convoluted wording — exactly what “yes” or “no,” “repeal” or “maintain,” or whatever ambiguous wording is used actually means. 

Next, in each typical lengthy description of the issue we’re voting on, they include one irrelevant point which changes the entire meaning of the measure. The broader implications of this one point are so abhorrent it cancels out any benefits we might experience from the rest of the initiative. Why can’t the lone, irrelevant point be in a separate measure?

I can see initiative writers high-fiving and rolling on the floor laughing as they share my letter, toasting with wine. Just saying….. 

Lucy Jeanne

Rainier

Recommended for you

(0) comments

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.