Letters on teaching voting, mandating voting, climate change

Should teach class on need to vote

For some years, younger people have not shown an interest in voting. A large portion of older people vote along party lines, the way they were taught by their parents. Since the parties have changed so much, these voting habits have led to the product we now have in our Legislature.

Because this year’s Legislature saw fit to do away with the old school-finance system and go to block grants for the schools to use as they see fit, I believe this is an opportunity for the high schools to teach a required subject on the need to vote.

This subject should cover how to decide whom to vote for. The students should learn that the candidates telling the voters bad things about their opponents aren’t what we’re looking for. We want to know what they plan to do if elected.

Pay attention to what they do when they get in office. If they don’t do what they said they would do, replace them in the next election. Continuing to vote in the same people time after time won’t fix the problem.

Our young people must be encouraged to make themselves aware of the issues and vote for the best-qualified candidate, not the person with the most money to run commercials slinging mud at his opponent.

Voting is a choice

Senate Bill 171 has been sold to Kansans on the false pretense of increasing voter participation. This argument is misguided and misleading.

Registered voters make two choices. The first choice is whether to cast a ballot. The second choice is what name they choose on that ballot. Collectively, both choices accurately represent the will of the electorate – so pressuring voters to vote in down-ballot races undermines the legitimacy of our elections.

The real problem is the lack of voter engagement in local politics; low voter turnout is simply a symptom. This bill doesn’t address the real problem at all; it simply hides it. It will make voter participation look higher by combining the elections, but most voters will still show up in November to vote for federal offices. Voters won’t be any more informed or engaged in local races than they were before just because we change the date they vote or the order on the ballot.

Voting is a privilege and a freedom. It should remain that way, and elected officials should respect the decision of voters even if that decision is to not cast a ballot.

Let’s address low voter participation by encouraging voter engagement, not trying to mandate it.

Politics of climate

President Obama is correct in stating that no qualified scientist disputes that “climate change” is a scientific and historically verified fact. However, the political working definition of “climate change” considers only the warming aspects.

I am an 86-year-old engineer from the computer industry whose fame and fortune were derived from the broad analytical skills that I acquired from my parents, educators, managers and mentors. I have followed the “global warming” political enterprise since former Vice President Al Gore invented it. I offer the following points supporting my observations and conclusions:

No federal funding is authorized for contrary research. And research on “climate cycles” has been done in Europe, and the result is available.

Both written and geologic histories establish beyond a reasonable doubt the existence and cause of at least three climate cycles with periods of roughly 1,300 years, 15,000 years and 105,000 years. It is very significant that there is scant evidence of adverse effects from the warmer periods, but abundant evidence of disastrous cold for centuries. The null of the last 105,000-year cycle left a layer of ice more than a mile deep along the eastern U.S.-Canada border and 1,000 feet deep over the Chicago area.

This story was originally published April 26, 2015 at 7:05 PM with the headline "Letters on teaching voting, mandating voting, climate change."