AN "ITEM" OF INTEREST!

To The Editor:

I am a lifelong Lynner who has no interest in changing the rules of the electoral game. I am proud to have voted in primary and final elections over decades and do not like the idea of sitting on the sidelines while those elected to uphold laws blatantly disenfranchise the electorate.

The city charter calls for a preliminary election, and those elected to serve the citizenry should uphold, not undermine, the charter. This also raises the appearance of a conflict of interest, where councilors voting on the issue of canceling the preliminary election are directly involved and stand to benefit.

As a veteran, a homeowner and a taxpayer it disheartens me when any city official labels an election “a waste of time” and arbitrarily declares that the primary will be canceled. These officials took an oath of office in which they swore to uphold the laws of the land, which include the city charter.

If the goal is to save money at the expense of a primary or a final election, they maybe we should just appoint a dictator and dispense with allowing citizens to voice their opinion.

My vote should not have a dollar amount affixed to it. This fact alone should make us guarantee that both a primary and a final election takes place.

The primary gives the city an idea of where people stand and gives candidates an opportunity to work toward a victory. The primary allows the voters a voice and the final election gives voters the final say.

The fact that a voter turnout is disappearing should not be an opportunity for local officials to determine my right to vote is insignificant.

Choosing the people who will represent us in the years to come is a very important process that should not be altered to assure an incumbent’s re-election.

Elections, both primary and final, should be sacrosanct. A primary election should not be dismissed as an unnecessary exercise. If it was, just have the final election. I would think elected and appointed officials would encourage more participation than less involvement, but I guess this allows these insiders to maintain the status quo.

How many times in our city did the winner of the primary lose to an opponent in the final election? This change in our municipal electoral process is un-American. The format for elections, as long as I have been alive, is primary followed by a final election, and to disrespect this long-standing process is more than disturbing.

This is a most dangerous precedent. This may be an out-of-the-box viewpoint, but we know firsthand that in my lifetime, write-in candidates in the city have stepped forward and prevailed.

Please don’t be fooled by an attempt to have the final election only to save you a dollar. It could cost you a lot more in the long run.

Francis X. McElligott

Lynn