Letter: Of fear and freedom

In his letter to the editor (“Charter Review Commission choices important,” Letters to the Editor, Sequim Gazette, Oct. 15, page A-12), Roger Fight could have been “forthcoming” by stating his chairmanship of the Clallam County Democrat Party.

Of fear and freedom

In his letter to the editor (“Charter Review Commission choices important,” Letters to the Editor, Sequim Gazette, Oct. 15, page A-12), Roger Fight could have been “forthcoming” by stating his chairmanship of the Clallam County Democrat Party.

Possibly, he sought to avoid stunning many readers with his Democrat worries about wasting tax dollars? More likely, Fight fears loss of tax dollars and union control. Freedom is not free.

If the Sequim initiatives (or any process) liberates workers from union membership, progressives will lose funds for their endless destructive wealth redistribution schemes, union dues for supporting progressive candidates, or for unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats destroying individual freedom, property rights and our free enterprise system.

Mr. Fight doesn’t disclose that without placement on the ballot as legally mandated, costs increase from $3,000 to approximately $30,000 for a special election. Instead, of adopting or allowing voters to vote, council members lawlessly declared the initiatives “illegal”—an authority no city official can claim.

Is Fight truthfully ignorant of this fact as he advances council members’ and progressives’ shameful promotion of this falsehood violating our democratic process?

In a Port O’Call advertisement, Fight’s recommended charter review candidates advertise as proponents of a “transparent process … and being responsive to the community.” Oops! This list includes three candidates (Councilmen Miller, Hays and Norma Turner) publicly opposing the transparency initiatives. Uh-oh!

Can we believe these candidates or Fight’s’ other listed candidates will be “responsive to the community” since these three “responsive” candidates ignored 654 initiative certified petition-signers and opposed a “transparent process” for contract negotiations? Uh-oh! Pinocchio?

Susan Shotthafer

Port Angeles

 

More in Letters to the Editor

Letters to the editor — July 8, 2020

Immunity for youths should be goal How ironic that as we celebrate… Continue reading

Letters to the editor — July 1, 2020

Questions remain with sewer project payment I’m writing in response to the… Continue reading

Letters to the editor — June 17, 2020

Armed groups should carry responsibility I believe it is time to discuss… Continue reading

Letters to the editor — June 10, 2020

A tale of two fiddlers Legend and history have it that Nero… Continue reading

Letters to the editor — June 3, 2020

Consider the source A recent letter about estimates of the death toll… Continue reading

Letters to the Editor — May 27, 2020

Heartening to see lunch giveaway I feel fortunate to live in Sequim… Continue reading

Letters to the editor — May 20, 2020

Predictions fair poorly How can pundits be so spectacularly wrong in their… Continue reading

Letters to the editor — May 6, 2020

Local nonprofit hurt by funding policy While Payroll Protection Plan relaunched this… Continue reading

Letters to the editor — April 29, 2020

Don’t stop now During this critical time for our community with the… Continue reading

Letters to the editor — April 22, 2020

Consider alternative to roundabout In the April 15 edition of the Sequim… Continue reading

Letters to the Editor — April 15, 2020

Roundabout isn’t solution for intersection An April 8 Sequim Gazette article states… Continue reading

Letters to the Editor – March 25, 2020

For our safety’s sake, limit visits to peninsula I live on the… Continue reading