I
don’t know about any other Tennesseans, but I, for one, feel so much safer
knowing that our state officials are taking care of us. If you don’t believe
they are, just check out State Senator Frank Niceley’s “fatherly” leadership.
Niceley’s
proposal would remove the arduous task of choosing Democratic and Republican
candidates for the U.S. Senate from you and me and place the task in much more
capable hands, caucuses in the state legislature. Oh, you didn’t realize that
this was such a terrible burden? Well, Niceley seems to think that we aren’t up
to the challenge. A poll showed that 93% of those asked opposed the bill, but
our senator said that 92% of us didn’t know that until early in the 1900’s
that’s the way things were done.
This
pol states that “we need a little history lesson,” and that his proposal is a
way to get the federal government under control. How’s that going to happen?
According to him, if enough small red state legislatures could choose the
candidates, “they could effectively control the U.S. Senate and through that
“get Washington under control.” I’m interested in who “they” is.
What
seems clear to me is that Niceley’s bill (SB471) is nothing more than a brazen
attempt to usurp the right to vote from all of us in Tennessee. This man
suggests such a thing is okay because too many of us are not only ignorant but
also apathetic. I can agree that the numbers of folks voting is low, but when
the choices offered include people like Niceley, there’s not much reason to get
out of the chair to choose.
I
am not apathetic and resent Niceley’s suggestion that I’m ignorant. No, I don’t
see eye-to-eye with the man, but that doesn’t mean I lack the capacity to
choose a person to support as senator. I’ve seen the workings of our state legislature
and sure don’t want them speaking for me as far as candidates for either party.
By the way, what if an Independent candidate wants to run? How does he or she
get on the ballot?
Our
state “leaders” have often decided that we should not have the right to choose
persons for leadership positions. For example, Tennesseans want a return to an
elected school superintendent. However, the state legislature refuses to allow
the change. Some leaders have said that appointed superintendents take the
politics out of education. So, the selection process is left to school boards,
and I’m pretty sure those individuals sit at the pleasure the districts that
elect them. The result is that a leader of the school system answers to a
handful of people instead of the public that he or she serves. Of course, we
voters would have to decide on a person who lives in the area and is familiar
with the “politics” of the area and the system instead of bringing in someone
from far away who has no stake in educational system. I suppose the legislature
thinks we voters aren’t as smart as some search firm that gets a wad of cash to
find superintendent candidates.
Few
of us are happy with our leaders. Their partisanship leads to fights, anger,
and the dreaded “gridlock.” Frank Niceley might think he and his cohorts are
better equipped to choose the “right” candidates, but I’m SURE the intent of
the founding fathers was to give the right to choose leaders to the people, not
the chosen few. Perhaps we can figure a way to choose a better candidate than
someone who wants gerrymandered control of elections. I, for one, am disgusted
with any person who thinks of himself as being above citizens who are ignorant
and apathetic. Of course, Niceley might be right that voters aren’t too smart;
they voted him in, didn’t they?
No comments:
Post a Comment