Letters to the Editor | Tuesday, Oct. 30, 2018

MJC strike would disrupt my life

I am a student at Modesto Junior College and I do not want any of the teachers on this campus to go on strike. It would affect me and many other students since we would not know where to go. Please do not let this happen. I don’t want my English teacher taken away. She helps me and all my classmates with whatever they need. The majority of us need this help.

Teachers need more respect

Re “Contract deadlock could mean strike at MJC, Columbia” (Front Page, Oct. 11): As I sit in silence at last, my children (both under age 5) are finally sound asleep. It is 11 p.m on a Friday. I am a 27-year-old, full-time employed, part-time student, full-time mother and wife. Trying to keep up with society and provide the best education for my 4-year-old, struggling to pay for a private preschool as tuition has increased due to wage increases they have granted their teachers, I sit puzzled, in amazement, that I am in jeopardy of my own education. Learning the sick politics behind the purpose for the strike at Modesto Junior College enrages me. For 2.5 months, I have sacrificed time away from my family, gave all my effort and experienced sleepless nights. Our community needs us.

This is a problem within our society. If we do not have teachers we respect and dignify, we have no future. We will have lazy, careless, bodies leading our children into the future. If the President thinks he is being fair, I do not want my children growing up in this community. The effect is detrimental and I will not stand silent.

No confidence in Soiseth ‘ticket’

Re “Bates only one who can fix City Hall” (Letters, Oct. 14): Amen to our wake-up call from former Turlock council member Steve Nascimento. He reminds us which council members (now candidates) were “on duty” during spending increases and the acrimony in city hall’s work environment: Bill DeHart, Gary Soiseth and Amy Bublak.

Here is another heads-up, this time from local campaign signs: Turlock firefighters support Nicole Larson, Soiseth and DeHart. Hmm. So, our firefighters support the old fiscal folly (DeHart and Soiseth), with the wish Larson joins the gravy train? What’s up with that?

Bottom line: Our city council needs tested, experienced candidates (Brad Bates and Forrest White) who served when civility reigned in City Hall and expense projections were rational. These men know how to negotiate contracts; they speak truth to power. They welcome smart ideas. They will hit the ground running. And we should welcome Andrew Nosrati, who knows how to respectfully say “no” to a leader’s irresponsible ideas.

Damrell fits in on this board

Frank Damrell likes to say county government is where the rubber meets the road. The actions of county government have a great impact on the quality of life and public safety in our community; our supervisors are instrumental to implementing the policies and funding that affect opportunities for growth and development in Stanislaus County.

If elected to represent District 4, Frank Damrell will be collaborative, cooperative and insightful in representing our district while strongly supporting the issues that matter most to his constituents. Frank will be an asset to the board of supervisors, and fellow members of the board will quickly find him to be a civil and respectful partner in interactions and deliberations.

The board of supervisors will benefit from Frank’s cooperation, civility and thoughtful decision-making. Our Board does good work, so let’s elect for them a great partner they can work with.

Harder’s crew not from our area

A recent visit from a person canvassing for Josh Harder got me to wondering why it is that of the three such visitors to my door none were local residents – the last being from Sacramento. Along with his previously shown lack of interest in voting and his absence from the water rally meeting in Sacramento, Harder shows disinterest, or perhaps disdain, for two subjects of great interest to his would-be constituents. At least his “ground troops” could be hired locally. But perhaps that hiring is done by the DNC.

Wouldn’t it be a novel idea if the candidates, both of whom are absentee “Valley” residents, would do some door-to-door politicking so that those of us unable to attend their closed door “debates” could get a close-up look at them?

My family is voting for Jeff Denham

Voters, this might be the most important vote you will make in your lifetime. We know this country is going through some tough times, but we are on the comeback. We have new tax cuts that will help all. A lot of regulations have been removed; Americans are once again going back to work.

I spent some time in local politics, so I understand you can’t please all the folks all the time. You try to take care of the matters that concern the majority. For me and the rest of the Neal family we will be supporting Jeff Denham because he has serviced us well. We don’t own a big ranch, but we know just how important water is to this valley. We have seen and heard where Jeff Denham stands on that subject.

As Christians, we know where Jeff stands on the moral issues. One theologian reminds us: “Your vote is recorded in eternity.” The other candidate we don’t know about him, he hasn’t voted much. The Neal family supports Jeff Denham.

Return debate to the Senate

The Senate rules historically allowed unlimited debate on the nominations of Supreme Court justices since it’s a lifetime position; to end debate, the votes of three-fifths of the Senate (or 60 senators) was required.

The Senate, due to Majority Leader Mitch McConnnell’s insistence, changed this rule and lowered the required votes to 51 to end debate. In his book, the end justifies the means.

Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh cleared the Senate only because of this rule change.

When 60 votes were necessary, there were negotiations over nominations, and less of a chance of nominees being from an extreme ideology from either side.

Why hasn’t there been a public outcry from citizens when the rule was changed? The end should not justify the means. We have been proud that our Constitution has brought us intact through some serious times, but changing the rules that allowed us to continue as a democratic nation is a dangerous thing. We don’t need extreme ideology from either side. Moderation is the safest path. We are in very dangerous waters.

This story was originally published November 1, 2018 at 9:33 AM with the headline "Letters to the Editor | Tuesday, Oct. 30, 2018."