To the Editor,
How does our Congressional delegation think about the Proposition 1 initiative, called “Open Primary Initiative” that we will be voting on, in November?   Idaho Dispatch reports:
Congressman Russ Fulcher has said on X, “Ranked Choice Voting is a scam! Don’t fall for it.  Vote NO on Prop 1.”  
Senator Jim Risch said on X, “I do not support ranked choice voting.   This sounds like a solution looking for a problem that doesn’t exist.  The system we’ve got works. I’ve learned in life when you’ve got something like that, don’t mess with it.”
Senator Crapo’s office responded, “Senator Crapo does not support the Prop 1 initiative.”
Our Attorney General, Raul Labrador, is trying to show us, the Idaho people, the dangers of Prop 1, when he said, according to the Gem State Patriot, “The so-called ‘Open Primary Initiative’ has nothing to do with open primaries…” He also said, “The sponsors also buried ranked-choice voting in the initiative and again misrepresented the initiative to voters…”
We have a Constitutional simple system of voting.   Why change unless someone is trying to deceive us.  
The Alaska special election between Sarah Palin and Mary Peltola in 2022 shows how complicated and manipulative ranked choice voting is. Although Alaska implemented ranked choice voting in 2020, there is a strong movement underfoot to get rid of it in the next election, (Alaska Public Media).
Why would WE want to spend 25 to $40 million (according to Secretary Phil McGrane as reported in Mountain States Policy Center) just to implement ranked choice voting (Proposition 1) when we can use that money for our children’ schools?  Aren’t we looking to make our lives more simple, less complicated, and less open to manipulation?
Sherry Nuxoll
Cottonwood

To the Editor,
As I was manning the Republican Party booth at the Kamiah Border Days, I noticed that a surprising number of people knew little about the upcoming proposition #1 which contains two proposals, Open Primaries and Ranked Choice Voting.
Ranked Choice Voting has a bunch of problems I will simply list here.
* The idea has been endorsed by the Communist Party (see CPUSA.org) since 1900.
* This system does away with “no confidence” and un-pre-approved “write in” votes.  There is no way to cast either of these votes within this system.
This system so complicates the voting process that it has driven voter participation to very low levels where tried, costs a ton of money to implement, and will permanently do away with counting votes by hand.
It enforces “voting by consensus” in that it throws out votes to ensure a true majority winner making it very possible for the leading candidate to fail to be elected.  This favors mediocre candidates.
It literally destroys the “one man, one vote” concept.
* The initiative is 18 pages long.  Try understanding that before voting.
* Raul Labrador has challenged the constitutionality of the initiative but has been blocked by legal technicalities; otherwise it would not even be on the ballot.
* States and counties that have tried it have instantly regretted and rescinded the process.
As for the Open Primary issue, it allows non-party people to affect the party’s nominee of choice.  All this does is open the door for creating chaos for those that vote along party lines.
Vote NO on Prop #1 this November, or live to regret it.
Sanford Staab
Kooskia

To the Editor,
I have asked hundreds of constituents what issue is important to them. Consistently, they fear increased taxes and fear losing their homes if they can’t pay the taxes. I live in Lewiston, on retirement income and experience the same concerns.
In the Tribune, Friday 8/23 editor’s opinion it stated very clearly where the fault and solution reside. The Republican controlled legislature refuses to address amending the Homestead Exemption.  Additionally, in the 2024 session they shifted more of the burden from commercial real estate to private homes.
Those homeowners now pay 70% of all State property taxes.
Inflation and demand from people moving into the area has significantly increased the value of our homes. Our wages or retirement income are not keeping up with the rising cost of the things we buy or our property taxes.  And, the Homestead Exemption has not been increased to account for rising values, rising property taxes and stagnant wages.  The Homestead Exemption must be adjusted to account for these factors.
The Republican party platform Article 1 Section 2C states the tax structure “should be fair and balanced”? It is NOT. But, they are mute on this issue, and their prior inaction speaks mounds. 
Elect me and I will act to increase the Homestead Exemption to adjust for property value growth and inflation.  My position Paper #2 uses county, state and federal research to support my position.
VOTE November 5^thand VOTE VICKIE.
Vickie Nostrant
Lewiston