Letters to the editor Oct. 7

Consequences of CI-128

The consequence of CI-128 is that Sen. Keith Regier won’t be able to tell you what to do with your body. 

— Jenny vanWestrop, Kalispell

Highly deceptive

Do not be fooled by the language of the pro-abortion CI-128. The pro-life movement does not place the rights of the unborn over that of the mother, but equal rights for both. If everything reasonable is done to save both mother and child and the child dies, that is not abortion. Along these lines, procedures that end ectopic pregnancies are not abortions. 

In Kalispell, there was a mother who had to have an emergency C-section when she was 20 weeks pregnant … an age when many babies wouldn’t make it. Still, it was right and proper to do the surgery. The mother and baby lived … great. But, if that baby had died, that would not be considered abortion. 

Vote no on highly deceptive pro-abortion CI-128.

— Dr. Annie Bukacek, Kalispell

Unintended consequences

There are those who want to do away with the current system of open Republican and Democrat primaries in June. The proponents of this initiative would like to do away with political parties and shift the focus to the persons running and that candidate’s individual beliefs. They think by grouping all the candidates into one non-partisan primary they will get more voters involved, and those voters by necessity will then study all the individual candidates and make an informed decision based on their research.  

In the real world most voters barely have time to understand the platform of the organized political parties, and then decide which one fits their own beliefs. At least the political parties have a platform you can verify. Changing the focus from political parties will remove the reason for primaries in the first place. Primaries are not necessary for a political party that only has one candidate. Primaries are needed when there are multiple candidates competing within the same party. This gives the individual voters a chance to decide which of those candidates best fits the platform of the political party they support.  Most importantly the voter should measure the actual results of the party when they are in power when considering a change in political parties.

Changing the Montana Constitution is a big deal.  The arguments for CI-126 are an attack on the party system of the State of Montana. Our current system already works fine. All political parties are currently represented on the November ballot. Beware of unintended consequences. We have all heard, “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it”.  

Vote no on CI-126.

— David Mosby, Kalispell