Letters: Experience brings knowledge, history; Ballot questions are a bad idea
Editor’s note: The Centre Daily Times welcomes letters endorsing candidates in the May 18 primary election and will accept letters that are received by Monday. Letters are subject to editing, must be based on facts and should avoid attacks on other candidates.
Experience brings knowledge, history
Ron Filippelli and Cathy Dauler are excellent candidates for State College Borough Council. Having served with both of them on Borough Council and during various community projects, I understand their commitment to the effective governance of State College. Both understand the duties and responsibilities of the office within council-manger form of government. Both Cathy and Ron have served on the region-wide Council of Governments (COG). In short, their experience brings knowledge and history to the council. Their decisions as council members are grounded in an appreciation of the history and basis of the issues facing the borough. Importantly, they understand the budgetary constraints facing State College. Neither one is so grounded in an ideology that they cannot critically and impassionately address the issues facing the borough as it maps out its future. They have served the borough well in the past and they are volunteering to once again serve the borough well in the future.
Ballot questions are a bad idea
There are two important ballot questions coming up in the May 18 primary election.
These questions revolve around Pennsylvania’s legislative and executive branches and their dealing with disaster declarations and management. The legislature is asking you to approve their power grab — in disaster declaration and management — away from the executive branch, i.e., the governor. This is a bad idea. Disasters are fluid situations which usually affect many people and require quick action to control their effects. Think of earthquakes, floods, water scarcity and/or pollution, rampant gun violence, fracking run amuck, etc.
Considering that our legislature sits only less than 70 days per year, we don’t have time for it to act, let alone act effectively. Can you imagine the mayhem, inefficiencies and pain and suffering the General Assembly would cause people trapped in whatever disaster? We need a strong point person to coordinate disaster response. Disaster management by the General Assembly would be a unfeasible. Vote NO to both questions.
Speak out about attacks on votes
We as U.S. Citizens cannot be silent about the elections of 2020. We can all look at what is happening in states across the country. In particular I draw your attention to Arizona and what is taking place right now.
How would Pennsylvania residents react to our local election commission providing your actual voting ballot to a “private firm” under the guise of yet another recount being done?
My first reaction is real outrage that exactly what entity or court allowed my actual ballot to leave the custody of duly elected officials. What an invitation to mishandle ballots to then claim a “new result!” More so because the ballots in question in Arizona had already been recounted at least two times with the same results.
What I truly do not understand is why Arizona voters in that particular county have not objected to having their ballots removed from the custody of election officials. I would sincerely hope that if this were to happen in Centre County all of us would be shouting as loud as we could to not allow such a procedure to even be considered — nevermind actually happening.
Our vote is not only personal but a cornerstone of our democracy. Please do not continue to be silent. If this is allowed to continue, we all know that Pennsylvania would be another state under contention for recount.
The message should be loud and clear to any “wannabe” politicians unhappy with voting results to be a good loser and work to understand what the voters are looking for in a representative.
Speak out!
Penn State should require, not encourage, vaccinations
According to The Chronicle of Higher Education more than 200 U.S. colleges and universities now are requiring vaccinations for students returning in the fall, and the number appears to be growing. Included in this group are Rutgers and the Universities of Maryland, Michigan, and Massachusetts.
Penn State should do the same. “Encouraging” vaccinations is not sufficient.
Crevecoeur’s diverse experiences will help SCASD
Diversity is the essence of life. Our earth’s ecosystems must be diverse to perform the functions of nature. Communities benefit from diversity because members get more value from the community: garnering more dialogue, giving a broader voice for consumer needs, expanding creativity and problem-solving, increasing productivity, and resulting in higher overall happiness, upping the quality of life for all. Without diversity, the ecosystem or community is not functioning at its optimal performance. State College is fortunate to have an impressive array of diverse candidates running for public office this year. I am especially appreciative of the diverse experiences that Dr. Carline Crevecoeur brings to our current political scene. Her compassion as a doctor who looked after both the physical and emotional health of her patients, her experience living in another country, and her lived experiences as a woman of color, and a mother deeply involved in the education of her five children provide Carline with unique perspectives that are potentially very valuable to the school board. In addition, she possesses the skills and ability to make use of these experiences and perspectives as she “re-imagines” ways for the SCASD to provide the best education possible for all students. Our schools must provide the diverse environment, curriculum, and support needed for ALL students to flourish. That’s why Dr. Carline Crevecoeur will get my vote for SCASD school board on May 18.
Where’s the representation?
Whether an elected official agrees with their constituents, and whether they will work to implement requested changes, is a decision the official will make. However, I believe every official is required, and has an obligation, to meet with any and all of their constituents who follow protocol and common courtesy.
Once elected, an official is obligated to represent all of their constituents. This is what the word “representative” means and that is what they get paid for! Recently, citizens who reached out to Representative Stephanie Borowicz were turned away with no explanation. Appointments can’t be made and phone calls are not answered. How does that translate to representation?
I would like to know what other citizens think?