To the editor:
I was so passionately in accord with Jane Ann Morrison’s Saturday column (“Voters deserve chance to choose ‘None’ over inferior candidates”) that I could barely contain myself in my frenzy to get stationed at a computer to fashion this response. With all due respect to former Clark County Commissioner Bruce Woodbury, I happen to have a “substantial, direct and personal interest” in seeing that “None of These Candidates” is never removed from Nevada’s election ballots.
Without disclosing either my political party or my political leanings, I can safely say – without naming any candidates who will appear on the Nov. 6 ballot – that I have already firmly entrenched in my mind a resolute determination to vote for “none” in many races.
I will never reward incompetency by being forced to hold my nose and vote for a listed candidate if I feel “none” is more deserving of my vote. That’s what freedom is all about. That is what the American way is all about.
If necessary, I will interject myself in all efforts that would decertify my right to vote for “none” on any election ballot here in Nevada.
Mark H. Ladenson
To the editor:
Jane Ann Morrison’s Saturday column was very interesting. I did not understand why anyone would be interested in removing “None of These Candidates” from the ballot. She explains it very explicitly.
I am someone who – after doing my homework on what the candidates stand for and their backgrounds – has often checked “None of These Candidates.” Given that campaigning today has become a matter of running the opposition through the mud and never providing specific plans for a brighter future, there should always be the option to protest. Protesting by way of the ballot is the only way most of us have.
If they do not want people checking “None of These Candidates,” then the political parties had better wise up and search for better candidates.
Jim Rideout Sr.
In the classroom
To the editor:
In response to Jim Hayes’ Saturday letter regarding education and funding:
Mr. Hayes argues that “Nevada has never shown a sincere interest in supporting education.” If that is so, Nevada has spent a great deal of money (with very little return) for not having any interest.
I would submit that there are very few institutions that have shown less interest in supporting education than teacher unions. Their reason for being seems to be squeezing as much tax money as possible from us to provide excessive union leader salaries, kicking back political contributions to the Democratic Party and protecting incompetent teachers who do harm to their students and to the good name of the majority of good teachers in the system.
There is, however, a real point in Mr. Hayes’ letter that needs to be made and understood. Teachers often appear to absorb the entire blame for our terrible educational results. But they are not the sole cause of those results. Sharing the blame should be an influx of illegal aliens who don’t speak English; a surplus of bad parents who are too busy or uninterested in their children’s education; and too much government intervention, causing increased legal and regulatory expense.
Fixing one of these problems will not significantly improve the system. They all need to be dealt with if we are truly to return to a superior education experience for our children.
John B. Alvord