Dear Leary:
I found flaws within several items in your recent article on the democratic veto tax reform initiative:
1: First: U quoted McState McSenator McKay as saying that such democratic initiatives "trample on the bedrock notion of representative government", and yet just the opposite is true: our current form of indirectly representative government was established as a responsive solution to NON-representational monarchies and LESS-representational oligarchies. It is but a midway step on the social-evolutionary scale towards FULLY-representational government, namely DIRECT representation, which is the MOST representative form of government of ALL.
2: Second: Semi-Public Servant Susan Latvala was quoted as saying that the self-governing intitiative was a "dangerous, dangerous way to address the problem of property taxes", but history has shown us again and again that the exact opposite is true: that governing becomes more dangerous the farther away from the will of the people that it gets. In fact, the ability of 'We The People' to govern ourselves is supposed to be the governing principle upon which this nation stands, and that from which all others flow.
3: Susan does correctly perceive a danger to the situation. The danger is hypocrisy. The danger is when the government wants to pick and choose when to act in accordance with the will of the people. The danger is when elected or appointed government representatives want to adhere to democratic principles only when it suits their purposes. It is hypocritical ,for instance, to advocate democracy when it comes to deciding on property taxes, yet denouncing it as dangerous when it comes to property rights. It is hypocritical to advocate democracy when it comes to protecting the economy, yet denouncing it as dangerous when it comes to protecting the environment. It is hypocritical to advocate democracy in Pakistan, and yet undermine it in Palestine.
4: Susan does also ask the pertinent question: "Why even have elected officials?" Well, one should obtain public servants for the same reason one obtains private servants: to perform the duties and carry out the tasks according to the will of their employer.
I for one, look forward to the day when the public is able instruct, direct, and hold accountable public servants to the same degree that employees are able to do so with private ones.
Sincerely,
Jo Grunt
Precinct 242
