Comments on: Gov. Candidates Weigh In On Constitutional Issues

By: serendipity

serendipity — Tue, 14 Sep 2010 04:13:12 +0000

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?

By: ericn1300

ericn1300 — Sun, 12 Sep 2010 21:52:58 +0000

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.”

By: serendipity

serendipity — Sun, 12 Sep 2010 15:52:54 +0000

Dave,
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).

By: Zippo

Zippo — Sat, 04 Sep 2010 05:09:58 +0000

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.