Re: "Majority enough for school bond elections?" (TNT, 2-15).
The article describing how the Legislature is considering putting to a vote changing the state constitution to allow a simple majority vote to decide school bond proposals brings to mind some questions.
Since the state constitution states that “It is the paramount duty of the state to make ample provision for the education of all children residing within its borders,” why are votes required to fund schools since it is directed as a responsibility of the Legislature? The Supreme Court has ordered the Legislature to do as the constitution requires.
Even if the state constitution allowed for a direct vote, why is one person’s “no” vote valued greater than another’s “yes”? I thought we had equal rights in a democracy.
Never miss a local story.
When I add all those who have no children, their children are grown, they send their children to private schools and those who have been convinced all taxes are a form of theft, we have more than the 40 percent needed to block the will of the majority.
That some of those in these catagories are willing to vote to tax themselves for the benefit of others and the society as a whole is to be admired but cannot be relied upon to surmount this unreasonable and undemocratic barrier.
Just as we don’t vote to fund our level of police protection, why do we think funding of decent school facilities for our children’s education should be allowed to be subject to the whims or grudges of voters?