City Government

Gov. Candidates Weigh In On Constitutional Issues

Both Repub Guv. Butch Otter and Dem opponent Keith Allred responded to a GUARDIAN question about the three proposed Idaho constitutional amendments on the November 2 ballot.

In a nutshell the three proposals deal with the right of citizens to approve public debt at AIRPORTS, PUBLIC HOSPITALS, and CITY OWNED ELECTRICITY SYSTEMS. All three seek to eliminate the existing constitutional requirement for local government to seek approval of citizens before entering into debt.

To his credit, Candidate Allred stepped right up and gave us an unequivocal answer:

I am a strong supporter of voters’ ability to decide whether to support bonds that are funded with tax dollars. But when bonding does not implicate tax dollars, we should hold leadership of these entities accountable for the job we hired them to do, and allow them to make such decisions. I will be voting ‘Yes’ on the Constitutional amendments as proposed.

Otter’s camp gave us the usual political response:

The Governor has no official role in this process. His vote is no more or less important than any other citizen’s. It’s up to the people to decide on these issues – not the government. So Governor Otter does not want to unduly influence anyone’s views on ballot measures that he did not initiate or champion.

The GUARDIAN does not endorse candidates, but we are open in our editorial stance opposing measures which leave voters out of the governing process.

Comments & Discussion

Comments are closed for this post.

  1. Dear Editor, are you able to find the big money behind the idea of taking our rights away? I bet if you can link a few names that will really benifit from this scam it will build a nice head of steam for us.

  2. serendipity
    Sep 12, 2010, 9:52 am

    So Allred is in FAVOR of taking away voter rights to pass or reject bond issues that rely on government funds?

    EDITOR NOTE–That is the position his campaign sent the GUARDIAN in writing. By every definition the buildings, the bonds, the revenues from user fees ALL are indeed “public money” (government funds).

  3. So serendipity wants to vote twice on bond issues, once when we elected our representatives and again when you micromanage them? This is America, a representative republic not a direct democracy. I agree with Allred’s position on this.

    EDITOR NOTE–Your representatives were elected to “uphold the constitution,” not alter it to fit their personal agenda. They knew full well they were subject to “2/3 assent of the voters.” There have been no citizens asking to have their voting rights removed–only politicians. We have indeed elected the reps and they MUST conform to the rules which give the power of the purse to “we the people.”

  4. How amusing that Idahoans who are always ranting on about preserving constitutions, are against preserving Idaho’s constitution on these issues.
    I see these attempts to change the constitution on these matters as working hard to make room for rampant development at taxpayer expense, with no taxpayer vote.

    Follow the money?

Get the Guardian by email

Enter your email address: