Dear Editor,
The simple truth about Prop 1;
It’s sole purpose is to give more of a voice to Democrat voters at the polls.
IF you want more Democrats to be elected to office, you need to vote yes.
IF you want to move Idaho away from paper ballots and hand counting, you need to vote yes.
However, IF you want to keep Idaho in Republican control and our elections simple and secure, you need to vote NO on Prop 1.
Sincerely,
Skip Brandt
Kooskia

To the Editor
Before 2011, Idahoans had a much larger voice in who their legislators were.  We were given one ballot listing all candidate hopefuls.  Voters chose candidates they felt would best represent them and their communities. Legislators collaborated and laws were moderate. As most Idahoans are moderate, reasonable people, it worked very well.  Elections changed in 2011 when HB351 passed.  Now party committee leaders choose candidates, not you nor I.  Legislation has moved further away from moderate to right extremism.
Proposition 1 ends Idaho's closed primary and creates a nonpartisan primary, opening elections to all voters regardless of party affiliation.  Candidates will need to clearly state their policies to earn your vote.  Mass out-of-state funded mailings will no longer be as effective.  Additionally, half of Idaho veterans are Independent voters and are currently denied the right to vote. (Veterans for Idaho Voters - https://www.v4iv.org/)
During the primary, voters receive one ballot listing candidates.  It is the candidates’ choice to list party affiliation.  Voters choose candidates best representing them and their communities.  ALL votes are counted and the top four candidates move to the general election. 
At the general election, voters rank candidates 1 to 4. (IdahoansforOpenPrimaries.org produced a video showing the process.) The candidate reaching 50% of votes wins.  ALL votes are counted and like all elections, there are winners and losers. 
To better understand the purpose of and process of vote tabulation, go to Veterans for Idaho Voters and Idahoans for Open Primaries (both are cross-partisan and independent groups). 
For 40 years Idaho leaders respected and listened to constituents.  Legislators collaborated and laws were well written by Idaho legislators, not written and funded by out-of-state organizations. It is time to “Go back and make Idaho Great again!”  Vote YES for Prop 1.
Vickie Fadness
Lewiston

To the Editor,
We’ve known Kathy Dawes for over 20 years, both as a well-loved and highly respected teacher in the Moscow School District and then as a tireless advocate in support of legislation and candidates in the best interest of Idahoans. She is thorough in learning about the situations or issues she works on, considers all reasonable solutions and follows through with action. 
She works well with others and is especially skillful at bringing people from all political perspectives together. She has worked with the national organization, Braver Angels, as a facilitator, to bring together people with very different beliefs in conversations about what matters to them most, a skill that the Idaho legislature sorely needs.
Kathy believes in supporting public education, voting rights for all Idahoans, and unlike her opponent, Brandon Mitchell, supports our reproductive and healthcare rights. Mitchell, on the other hand, agrees with the extreme legislation that limits our healthcare options and has forced many doctors out of our state.
We are supporting Kathie Dawes for Idaho House seat 6B. We need more legislators like her in our government.
Mac Cantrell and Janice Boughton, MD
Moscow, Idaho

To the Editor
Senator Hart asked me to make a specific suggestion how HJR 5 could be changed to be clearer.
The current problem with HJR 5 is that it is void for vagueness due to the term "US Citizen".
This is a term that has several meanings in law and can mean:
A native of any state of the Union.
A citizen of any State
A state of the Union
A member of the federal corporation known as the "United States" (see 28 U.S. Code § 3002 (15) )
and there are probably many others.  
Also see the attached pdf citizenship brief) which should enlighten any legislator of the issues involved here.
After a little more research, I now suggest that we simply add "citizen of Idaho" in addition to "US Citizen" to remove some of the ambiguity.
I know the intention is to omit illegal aliens from voting in our state and I fully support this purpose but it dis-enfranchises state citizens that do not wish to be federal citizens.
Yes you can be a state citizen and not be a US Citizen - I know people with non-US Citizen passports.
Also here are some related legal definitions:
Blacks Law Dictionary: 
federal citizen.  A citizen of the United States.
     Black’s Law Dictionary, Ninth Edition
federal citizen.  A citizen of the United States.
     Black’s Law Dictionary, Eighth Edition
federal citizen.  A citizen of the United States.
     Black’s Law Dictionary, Seventh Edition
Federal citizenship.
(not defined as such in Black’s Law Dictionary, Seventh Edition, Eighth Edition or Ninth Edition)
Federal citizenship.  Rights and obligations accruing by reason of being a citizen of the United States.  State or status of being a citizen of the United States.
     A person born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof is a citizen of the United States and of the State wherein he resides.  Fourteenth Amend., U.S. Const.
     See also Citizenship;  Naturalization.
-- Black’s Law Dictionary with Pronunciations, Sixth Edition,
   Centennial Edition (1891-1991)
 Federal citizenship.  Rights and obligations accruing by reason of being a citizen of the United States.  State or status of being a citizen of the United States.
     A person born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof is a citizen of the United States and of the State wherein he resides.  Fourteenth Amend., U.S. Const.
See also Citizenship;  Naturalization.
 - Black’s Law Dictionary with Pronunciations, Fifth Edition
 Federal citizenship.  (not defined in Black’s Law Dictionary, Fourth Edition)
Bouvier's law dictionary (common law):
CITIZEN, persons. One who, under the constitution and laws of the United States, has a right to vote for representatives in congress, and other public officers, and who is qualified to fill offices in the gift of the people. In a more extended sense, under the word citizen, are included all white persons born in the United States, and naturalized persons born out of the same, who have not lost their right as such. This includes men, women, and children.
2. Citizens are either native born or naturalized. Native citizens may fill any office; naturalized citizens may be elected or appointed to any office under the constitution of the United States, except the office of president and vice-president. The constitution provides, that " the citizens of each state shall be entitled to all the privileges and immunities of citizens in the several states." Art. 4, s. 2.
3. All natives are not citizens of the United States; the descendants of the aborigines, and those of African origin, are not entitled to the rights of citizens. Anterior to the adoption of the constitution of the United States, each state had the right to make citizens of such persons as it pleased. That constitution does not authorize any but white persons to become citizens of the United States; and it must therefore be presumed that no one is a citizen who is not white. 1 Litt. R. 334; 10 Conn. R. 340; 1 Meigs, R. 331.
4. A citizen of the United States, residing in any state of the Union, is a citizen of that state. 6 Pet. 761 Paine, 594;1 Brock. 391; 1 Paige, 183 Metc. & Perk. Dig. h. t.; vide 3 Story's Const. 1687 Bouv. Inst. Index, b. t.; 2 Kent, Com. 258; 4 Johns. Ch. R. 430; Vatt. B. 1, c. Id, 212; Poth. Des Personnes, tit. 2, s. 1. Vide Body Politic; Inhabitant.
Sanford “Sandy” Staab,
Kooskia