Letters to the Editor – Voter education, Electoral College, Social Security, Cowboys

Re: “Helping residents to action — Low turnout spurs The News’ initiative to inform, educate potential voters in N. Texas,” Tuesday news story.
I applaud your efforts but am curious as to the scope.
We have voids in voter education in our K-12 schools, in integration of legal immigrants and from the forgetfulness of the previously educated. I believe we have moved away from a few basic principles: 1. What do all elected officials have in common? They affirm to uphold the U.S. Constitution. 2. Why do we vote? Many would answer “to uphold my right.” That is true, but I believe the principled answer is to elect representatives who will diligently work with their elected peers toward common constitutional solutions.
Get smart opinions on the topics North Texans care about.
Or with:
By signing up you agree to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy
In Texas, we will be voting for president, vice president, a U.S. senator, representatives for the U.S. House as well as for senators, representatives for state offices and judges for the state’s courts. My curiosity comes as a very simple question: What explains to potential voters even the basic differences in roles between these offices?
If potential voters do not understand separation of powers, checks and balances, the enumerated powers of Congress, the Bill of Rights (especially amendments 9 and 10), and other amendments, should they vote?
Our nation, now a two-plus-century-old experiment in democracy, depends on an enlightened electorate.
Steve R. Upham, Richardson
Re: “Play by election rules,” by James Edward Geels and “This is not Democratic,” by Jan Neher, Sunday Letters.
Sunday’s letters to the editor had these two interesting letters about the issues with the Electoral College system used in U.S. presidential elections. Both pointed out problems with our current Electoral College but both wanted to stay with their position ― either stay with the current system to protect small states or change to just a popular vote like all other democracies in the world.
I think a compromise could be a solution that is fairer to both sides. Due to the winner-takes-all approach, which is not part of the U.S. Constitution, ballots cast for a minority candidate in a state are essentially discarded, thus not giving any voting representation.
Given that ours is a representative democracy, the winner-takes-all approach should be discarded. Instead, a state’s electoral votes should be proportionally divided among the candidates. Two states, Nebraska and Maine, already do this so a change to the U.S. Constitution is not required. If all states would do this, each side would get part (but not all) of what they are asking for.
Larry Chasteen, Richardson
A currently running political ad on television states that a candidate has suggested raising the retirement age for Social Security. Thank you! That is one possibility, and together with changes in the benefits subject to taxation and other amendments, there may be a Social Security program still around for my grandchildren. Without changes, it will be drastically reduced.
We have to start talking about this. Our Congress continues to kick it down to the next session, with no one taking a stand. Now is the time to make changes. The sooner it’s done, the better.
Surely everyone recognizes there are fewer people working and paying into the system. I am 69, still working and not taking Social Security yet. The future reductions will not affect my generation as much. It’s our children and grandchildren who will wonder why nothing was done when it was so obviously unsustainable.
How can we ever feel good about the state of the Social Security system we are leaving to future generations? Let’s demand that Congress make the needed changes.
Cindy Burr, Dallas/Casa View
Re: “Little lizard sparks big lawsuit from Paxton — AG says feds using endangered status to target oil, gas industry,” Tuesday Metro & Business story.
I was really impressed with information in this story that said the oil and gas companies have already been working to protect the 4% of the Permian Basin to save critical habitats. But then my happy face turned to a frown when Texas Land Commissioner Dawn Buckingham stated that the protection status would have a drastic impact with job loss and less revenue to the Permanent Universal Fund, which is supposed to help pay for our schoolchildren’s education.
I don’t think she is “watching” very well. Doesn’t she know that the great state of Texas doesn’t pay for education? We withhold it so that the powers that be can use it to push through their personal agendas. Someone needs to tell her.
Gail Hill, Garland
Re: “Too little, too late — Waiting until 4th quarter for Dak, CeeDee won’t cut it,” Monday SportsDay stories.
None of these postmortems of the Cowboys’ 28-25 loss mentioned the fateful decision on 4th-and-14 at 14:52 to forgo a probable field goal in favor of a longshot first-down attempt. Those three points left on the sideline turned out to be the difference in the final score.
The Cowboys have a great kicker in Brandon Aubrey, who kicked a team-record 65-yarder in the first quarter and an NFL-record 15th straight 50-plus-yarder in the second. Why he was not called to kick 56 yards is a mystery.
At Super Bowl LI, Tom Brady achieved the most improbable victory in the game’s history by rallying his Patriots from a 28-3 deficit with 17:12 to go.
On Sunday, Dak Prescott accounted for three touchdowns, but the Cowboys lacked the field goal. They had the kicker, but didn’t use him. Why did they roll the dice on that fourth-down play instead of playing the percentages?
Ken Ashby, Dallas
We welcome your thoughts in a letter to the editor. See the guidelines and submit your letter here. If you have problems with the form, you can submit via email at [email protected]