A+ A A-

Electorate rarely speaks as clearly as it did on background checks

To the editor,
An open letter to Senator Ayotte:
In view of your recent vote regarding background checks for some persons seeking to purchase firearms, I am moved to seek your views on this important question: what is your understanding of the proper role of an elected official in a representative democracy?
Our Constitution provides the people with a voice and allows no sovereign agent to dictate to us his or her personal views. I realize that sometimes this can place a burden on our representative to act against her party's or her own preferences, but that comes with the office.
The electorate often does not come to a well-defined view on many issues. But sometimes, they do. Sometimes, they speak with a substantial majority that transcends party, region and demographics. It is at such times that I see three options for our elected representative: 1. vote the will of the majority regardless of personal preference; 2. persuade the electorate that your opposing viewpoint is correct, or 3. resign.
Perhaps you have another view of your role as a senator representing the people of New Hampshire. If that is so, please take the time to respond so that I can understand the rationale behind your recent vote.
Regardless of one's view on the issues of background checks, it seems to me that all New Hampshire voters have an interest in knowing that their elected officials hear them when they speak in substantial majority. To accept otherwise opens the door to dictatorial governance.
Louis R. Lieto
Groton
 
The Laconia Daily Sun - All Rights Reserved
Privacy Policy
Powered by BENN a division of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Login or Register

LOG IN