LD 30 Senate Candidates = Jackasses
After reading “Senate Showdown” (Sept. 23) and the quotes attributed to Todd Camenisch and Frank Antenori, I’ve decided that my vote will not be cast for either of these jackasses. They are prime examples of what’s wrong with American politics and politicians.
A. Roy Olson
Citizens Should Preserve Their Power by Voting No on 401
The Weekly made “no recommendation” on Proposition 401, the Tucson City Charter amendments (“The 2010 Tucson Weekly Endorsements,” Oct. 7). I think the voters should be very leery of these proposed changes for two reasons.
First, it was not a product of an appointed citizens’ committee. The mayor and three council members sent a package developed by a coalition of special interests to the voters.
Second is the overall thrust. These proposed changes move decision-making away from the citizens and/or toward those wishing to exert influence more expediently. Consolidating power in an appointed city manager while weakening the role of the mayor and council in key personnel decisions, giving determination of future mayor/council salary adjustments to the Legislature, and replacing the two-year election cycle with one all-inclusive election every four years should be red flags.
Ruth Beeker
Why’d the ‘Weekly’ Skip Dallesandro?
I was glad to see that the Weekly endorsed Todd Camenisch for Senate in Legislative District 30, as he will do much for the state. Frank Antenori has proven to be fiercely anti-education and out of step with Arizona’s needs.
However, I was disappointed to see that your staff skipped the important LD 30 House seat, which has Andrea Dalessandro as a highly qualified Democrat running against two Republicans running in lock-step with Antenori in their efforts to damage Arizona’s infrastructure and harm our most vulnerable populations.
Laurie Soloff
This article appears in Oct 21-27, 2010.
Re: Tucson Weekly’s “no recommendation” on Proposition 113: Below is additional information from Media Matters (http://mediamatters.org/research/201001290…)
on the so-called federal “card-check” legislation. This may encourage voters to vote “no”on 113 because of the continued potential for abuse of secret ballots by employers:
‘Rep. George Miller (D-CA), chairman of the House Committee on Education and Labor and a leading proponent of the Employee Free Choice Act, has addressed the “myth” that the bill eliminates the secret ballot:
MYTH: The Employee Free Choice Act abolishes the National Labor Relations Board’s “secret ballot” election process.
FACT: The Employee Free Choice Act does not abolish the National Labor Relations Board election process. That process would still be available under the Employee Free Choice Act. The legislation simply enables workers to also form a union through majority sign-up if a majority prefers that method to the NLRB election process. Under current law, workers may only use the majority sign-up process if their employer agrees. The Employee Free Choice Act would make that choice — whether to use the NLRB election process or majority sign-up — a majority choice of the employees, not the employer.”