Reader comments
Plenty of election spending

Page:
1
2
Next >

Wait a minute | 2:28 a.m. Oct. 31, 2007

Too bad that wasn't spent on the students and teachers!

Bob G | 4:48 a.m. Oct. 31, 2007

With all the squabbles about money, everyone is forgetting about the children of Utah getting a good education at a reasonable cost. The present system is riddle with fraud and corruption that is stealing more from the education system than the vouchers would do. The only way to fix a broken system is to make some drastic changes, from the top down and nobody seems to care about the real issue here. If money was such a concern why isn't the public education system being fixed? The vouchers offer parents an alternative to put their children in an enviornment to get a much better education. That is the real issue, quality of education. Parents should get much more for their childrens education than the proposed $3000. The tax based system has been a failure and slap in the face of the americans paying their hard earned taxes to force illegal foreign nationals on the public school system that has all but destroyed any hopes a decent public education. If these anti-voucher individuals want to save money for education then get the illegals out of our schools, they are not a part of the american people nor are they citizens.

Anonymous | 5:51 a.m. Oct. 31, 2007

The teachers throughout the nation are scared....they may actually have to compete (provide a superior product)instead of stay placidly complacent.

Comments continue below

Proud Mother | 6:26 a.m. Oct. 31, 2007

Too bad that all the money spent for the campaign wasn't put into the schools for our children. $5.5 million could go far to help educate our children.

Mark | 6:31 a.m. Oct. 31, 2007

Tiffany,sure would have been nice if you'd just directly stated how much each campaign raised. Now I have to pull out those rusty public school math skills. Let's see, 5.5 total - 1.2 PCE extra is 4.3, which means UTPS raised 2.15 mill, PCE raised 3.35. and so many other questions now. Of the 2 mill contributed by the "UEA", how much of that was actually from the NEA. And 82% of PCE's money came from instate (almost all from Byrne), I'm curious how much UTPS money was from Utahns. Inquiring minds want to know, reporters can't be bothered to tell us...

Layton Rad | 7:05 a.m. Oct. 31, 2007

It is too bad that the UEA used its influence at parent teacher conferences to force a vote on the law that the legislature and the governor created to benefit the students and parents of this great state. If anyone is too blame for the extra costs of a public campaign about the referendum it is the big union of the UEA. It would be law now if it wasn't for them. Also, it is interesting that the anti voucher folks are the ones getting money from outside the state.

Chuck | 7:08 a.m. Oct. 31, 2007

There is still hidden money out there. Just one for instance: PCE gave lots of money to legislators last year, who are now spending it to push R1, but they don't have to report it until next April!

Robert | 8:01 a.m. Oct. 31, 2007

Why are people in favor of giving public funds to private businesses?

Much better education | 8:04 a.m. Oct. 31, 2007

I'm voting for vouchers, because I want my kids to have free cookies.

I realize what everyone assumes, if I can get my kids away from the unwashed masses, and get to keep a little cash for myself, what's the problem?

And what illegal immigrant is going to try for state funds. Keep my kids away from the gangsters too. What parent of a gangster is going to send him to a private school? What private school is going to accept a gangster? My young white daughters will be safe.

Hey, this is the only way for me to legally segregate my children with the state paying and I'm all for it.

(My kids will be eating State Bought Oreos with my "choice" money away from the riff-raff. Few people are afraid to tell the honest truth. I tell it like it is. Does the DMN have the courage to print the truth? We whall see.)

Instereo | 8:09 a.m. Oct. 31, 2007

So the PCE starts their campaign by saying how much the NEA/UEA has spent but now we find out that PCE has outspent them. PCE spends these huge amounts of money from a few donars but UTPS comes from thousands of donars. Most people don't want vouchers even if a few do. Layton Rad is mostly right it would be law if the UEA hadn't stepped up. What he didn't get right is it wasn't just the UEA, it was the state superentendents, principals, PTA, NCAAP, and 10 other groups who all contributed. Vochers were not a local home grown issue. It was an issue from out of state that was introduced here because national interests thought they could get it passed here because Utah is so RED. Again it wasn't just the UEA that said it was wrong, do did many republicans. People in Utah aren't going to roll over and let big money buy them. They can think for themselves. I did and I already voted against referendum 1.

kcatch9 | 8:10 a.m. Oct. 31, 2007

Regardless of how much money was spent on either side of the issue, I hope that those who read this will take the time to read the actual bill and decide for themselves which side they will vote for.

I for one am not in agreement with Bob G. I don't think that the current system is riddled with fraud or corruption to the extent that he claims it is. Even if it is, I don't think that "drastic measures" are needed to repair what is broken. I do, however, believe that, as in any "system," there will be some changes made to make things better.

My personal opinion is that this law that is currently up for debate is not the answer. It gives public money to private institutions with ambiguous accountability. It will also be readily accessible to those that need it least and almost completely inaccessible to those that it would benefit most.

I will be voting against referendum 1.

CR | 8:24 a.m. Oct. 31, 2007

Layton

The Referendum belongs to the people of Utah. I for one am damn glad that we did so.

Once again a Parents for Choice (PCE)paid for goon is blaming the union It wasn't the UEA who bought and purchased HB 148, it was PCE. It wasn't the UEA who pushed this flawed legislation through, even when the majority of Utahns were against it.

Our state constitution give us the right to be equal with the legislature. They wouldn't listen so the people took matters into their own hands.

Considering the reputation of the UEA, an organization of Utah teachers, and that of Patrick Byrne who called public school supporters bigots it would seem this issue would be over. Byrne is bad news. Just check out the net and one can see how Mr. Byrne is controversial, and dis-liked, just like PCE.

Eric | 8:25 a.m. Oct. 31, 2007

The UEA did not force any of the 145,000 signatures on the petition and according to all the polls, the voucher referendum is going to fail. Give the good people of Utah more credit, they are not influenced by outside contributions, they are influenced by what they are seeing in the schools their children attend. They appreciate the teachers and what they are contributing to their children's education.

re:Layton Rad and Anonymous | 8:26 a.m. Oct. 31, 2007

No teacher in Layton "forced you against vouchers" at Parent Teacher Conferences. The Union and district administration told all teachers to completely stay away from the subject.

If this happened, report the teacher to the school administration or the district today.

Anon: Teachers are not afraid. Voucher or not, we will still wake up in the morning, like we do every morning, and prepare, show up, and teach "your" children. That's what great about our country. All students have a right to an education. We don't kick out the difficult students like in other countries. I do provide a superior product. You are welcome in my classroom anyday.

You do have a right to your opinion, though. I hope vouchers pass, and all of your dreams come true.

No matter what, though. I'll still be here with a smile, because I have the most rewarding job in the world.

(And my reward isn't Oreos).

Jerry | 8:44 a.m. Oct. 31, 2007

Robert,

I have children in Alpine School District. We hate it. We hate the math program. We hate being treated poorly. We hate how the district is run. Last Friday my kids carved pumpkins in math class.

I pay taxes and I don't see why I should have to pay twice to educate my child. I'm not a bad person for being unhappy with the district and school. I'm not a bad person for not wanting to pay twice.

Voucher Truth | 9:31 a.m. Oct. 31, 2007

I pay taxes for a public transportation system that I do not use...yet, I do not ask the government to help pay for the cost of my private vehicle. I also have the option to send my mail through the U.S. Postal Service, or I can pay a premium and have it sent by UPS or FedEx. Once again, I don't ask the government to subsidize the cost. Vouchers come down to one's viewpoint on society & education. Do you believe in improving schools for ALL children, or do you simply want to isolate YOUR children and put them into a sheltered, protected environment (that they will probably rebel against at some point anyway). This is an elitist proposal that will encourage segregation of our youth. Vouchers were never intended to offer a universal bail-out from public schools that may have challenges, but are far from failing. Vouchers should be limited to low income students that attend under performing public schools. Vote NO on vouchers!

Steve | 9:34 a.m. Oct. 31, 2007

In response to Eric, I have heard many reports of unethical name gathering for the petition. I even talked to one person who thought he was signing FOR vouchers when he signed the petition. They may not have "forced" people to sign, but there were plenty who didn't know what they were signing.

WC | 9:57 a.m. Oct. 31, 2007

Sad that the vast majority of money spent against vouchers has to come from Teachers fighting to save public education. What won't teachers do to help children. Work for no money - work in horrible conditions with over crowded classrooms. All so the "moral" majority in this state can continue to reproduce like rabbits. Great. I don't know if teachers are saints or enablers.

Roscoe | 10:02 a.m. Oct. 31, 2007

To Jerry,

Wow, that's a lot of hate. It sounds like you should be making some changes. What are you waiting for? Is it going to take a voucher before you take some responsibility and improve your situation?

Michaelitos | 10:03 a.m. Oct. 31, 2007

Jerry,
How do you figure that you pay taxes twice? As a part of the community, you are obliged to contribute to educating our children, to insure a functioning republic.

Feel free to not avail yourself of those services. Send your kid to private school. Heck, home school your kids for all I care. You have that option available to you (without vouchers). Just don't ask me to pay for your choice.

I'm the one that doesn't want to be taxed twice!

Carlos A. | 10:30 a.m. Oct. 31, 2007

What are the UEA & NEA people afraid of? Competition! If they have to compete for students, they will lose their control of the "politically correct" agenda they want in the schools: things like gay pride, proper condom use, etc.

Joe | 10:35 a.m. Oct. 31, 2007

My daughter-in-law left teaching last year to become a stay-at-home mom. Having been in the profession, her natural instincts were to agree with what she thought was the industry position, the side she thought all teachers were taking - oppose vouchers.

Last night at dinner, my daughter-in-law told me that she finally went on-line and actually read the bill for the first time. She said the reading made her realize that the opposition arguments were not well-founded. They are based on fear; trying to scare people into believing something terrible will happen. And, in her opinion, they are completely groundless. She has completely reversed position and is now planning to vote FOR vouchers.

Her change of heart has convinced my wife (who is on the fence but leaning toward a NO vote) to actually read the bill with an open mind and reconsider her position.

It's surprising how people view things when you strip away the emotion, the slogans, the soundbites, the fear and evaluate the real source material. If you have an open mind (something that does not apply to most voucher opponents), it can really change your perspective.

Educators Son | 10:37 a.m. Oct. 31, 2007

It is high time for the public school teachers in this state to have some competition. I find it hard to watch these educators get on their TV Ads and tell how great they are. I agree there are some very dedicated sincere teachers on the system. However, the great majority are there running in at 7:30am and running out at 3:30 or 4pm. I agree that there must be a drastic overhaul of the system. The fact remains: after two or three years in the system the teacher is tenured. At that point it is almost impossible to get that teacher out of the system. Time for the legislators to step up to the plate. Time for these lawmakers to stop letting the UEA and NEA influence their votes. Make the call for the good of the students. The UEA and NEA have lost sight of their true purpose.

re:Steve | 10:44 a.m. Oct. 31, 2007

Maybe those people who don't know what they were signing should move to FloriDUH, where they can't fill out a ballot.

What is "unethical name signing" anyway?

Steve, you sound like a fairly intelligent person. If someone puts a paper in front of you and asks you to sign, do you read the paper or just take his word.

I really doubt anyone signed anything they did not know what it was.

What I would guess is some people try to make the other side sound unethical.

Nice try though. I think Richard Eyre owes someone some Oreos... ;-)

Utah voter | 10:46 a.m. Oct. 31, 2007

Well said, "Voucher Truth". I agree that vouchers should be limited to low-income students attending under performing public schools. We also need focus our energies and dollars to fixing the problem and instead of providing ways around the problem.

Joe | 10:47 a.m. Oct. 31, 2007

Voucher Truth: I find your moniker very ironic since you obfuscate the truth throughout your post. For example, you made these two statements:

"Do you believe in improving schools for ALL children ..."

"Vouchers should be limited to low income students that attend under performing public schools."

So first you think it should be for all children and then you think it should be limited. Not only should it be limited, but it must be limited according to your personal guidelines.

The point of vouchers is to give parents the ability to opt out of the mandatory public school system into something that might be more suitable to their children - in short, to give them a choice. But you come along and want to tell them that only some parents have a choice and you will determine which ones.

Like most anti-voucher arguments, yours is based on self-contradictory concepts and lies hoping to prey on the fears of those who read your comments.

Steven Jarvis | 10:53 a.m. Oct. 31, 2007

I never got to sign the petition, nor did my extended family. All oppose vouchers, even the dye-in-the-wool liberal in the family (we try to hide him in the closet at family gatherings).

Vouchers are very much a conservative issue. We don't want to waste tax monies on a service that helps about three percent of kids (mostly affluent ones). This Voucher program harms all public works programs' funding that come from the general fund. It also harms public education allocating less funds to the public schools from State and Federal sources leaving less for kids left behind in the school. Those funds are completely gone when the child does not attend the public school system.

Responsible tax use would be to fund appropriately the public school system. Bring all teacher salary up to a living wage, then create a fair system of merit pay to recruit the best people from all fields into education. We should handle these issues while we are in a boom period. We should also IMMEDIATELY increase the state Minimum wage to $7.50 and cut the food tax by one percent.

Bob & Fraud | 11:04 a.m. Oct. 31, 2007

Fraud & corruption? It is so easy to just throw out comments and statements w/o having to back it up. The uneducated people you wish to sway may actually buy your trash. But you are ok with fraud and corruption, vote R1! Once the gov writes a check for vouchers, there will be no accounting for what becomes of it. A perfect recipe for fraud.

only in Utah | 11:11 a.m. Oct. 31, 2007

Why aren't the anti-voucher supporters volunteering to pay a head tax for the multiple kids they have in school to help with extra costs they put on schools, as they pay the same as people with 1 or 2 kids, but that's okay cause everything's hush-hush about a head tax.

Against it | 11:27 a.m. Oct. 31, 2007

Eric makes an excellent point concerning the disconnect between what the Republican party dominated agenda in the legislature pushed through compared to the majority of the public (that voted the legislature in) does not appear to have agreed with. fact is, Utah's neo-con Republican party special interests anti-secular (pro-Religious views) agenda simply shoved the majority of voter feelings aside to buckle to this myopic notion that actually goes counter to State constitutional safeguards of the public funds.

When our legislature does something that appears to be counter to a majority of the voter population, a check-&-balance goes into action to set things right. It's called a petition drive! If enough signatures are garnered then it goes to a referendum vote to the public. If the public, that voted those legislaters in, votes against the legislative act, then the voting public has spoken and shown that the legislators and the governor did in fact not represent the voting public on the issue. In a patriotic America this is called DEMOCRACY!

Governor Huntsman signed the voucher into law based on a "couple" of points. I guess the numerous other relevant points that showed it to be damaging to public education didn't matter.

Idea For Jerry | 12:02 p.m. Oct. 31, 2007

Jerry,

Here is an idea that may work for you and your situation. Get together with a group of like minded families and start a Charter School. Money is available for start up expenses and other money issues. You can be on the Board and help make the decisions about what Math program to adopt. This will require considerable time and sacrifice on your part but if you really have such strong opinions about your local school district then I think you owe it to your children to do something different. Sure, you could get a voucher and do it that way, but I think the Charter School way would be really beneficial to you.

Steven Jarvis | 12:04 p.m. Oct. 31, 2007

To paid posters,

Don't worry. After the election is done I am sure someone will pick you up for a new campaign. You have done a remarkable job helping your cause of convincing people to support vouchers with your antics.

Jerry,

I feel your pain. I too live in ASD, but I would never vote for Vouchers. The best thing we can do is to start picking off the board members and putting in more reasonable people to represent us. In the meantime we have a great deal of choice available in the Charter school system and I am thankful that with the removal of vouchers from the mix, the legislature will finally equalize the WPU between the two for more equitable funding.

So Jerry | 12:46 p.m. Oct. 31, 2007

If you are in a private school, with your kids away from all that is evil education, and they carve pumpkins, what do you do?

I'm guessing that you would talk to the teachers.

See, if my daughter was carving pumpkins last Friday during math, I would ask the teacher "Why?", and see what their answer was.

Maybe they were counting seeds and graphing them across the classroom to see if bigger pumpkins had more than little ones.

Maybe your kids teacher was teaching them geometry, or colors, or the sense of touch or feel.

That's what teachers do, is teach. Everyone who thinks they can jump in and teach because they sit at a computer all day don't understand relevant, meaningful instruction.

See, ask the questions and if you get the wrong answers then jump all over the teachers.

But I assure you Jerry, with your negative attitude towards education, you're going to hate every school and teacher you run into.

Me | 12:54 p.m. Oct. 31, 2007

To Bob G | 4:48 a.m.

Please support your accusations about fraud and corruption. Otherwise, they are lies and misrepresentations and have no place in these comments.

Get It Right | 1:20 p.m. Oct. 31, 2007

Teachers work to a contract. They are paid for only the days/hours per the contract. It does not mean they are not dedicated if they work to their contract. Many teachers leave on time in order to go to their second jobs. It takes three years before a teacher can be eligible for tenure. This is not automatic: the teacher must pass exams, show lines of evidence (lesson plans, transcripts, etc) of professional development, and be observed multiple times by an administrator.

Signing the Referendum petition does not obligate the person to vote against vouchers. It just meant that the registered voter signing the petition believed that he/she should have a right to vote on the voucher bill.

This should not be an issue of whether private schools are good or bad, but of whether or not this is a proper use of tax dollars.

When the primary education system (public schools)is not fully funded, is it ethical to fund a secondary system? I say, "No," but the vote is yours.

May | 1:29 p.m. Oct. 31, 2007

Just think what a beautiful private school the Parents for Choice could have built for their own children with the millions of dollars they have spent trying to force the voucher idea down the throats of the public. Think how many scholarships could have been offered by private entities instead of taking away from an already underfunded public schools. And they could have all taken tax deductions. Seems like PFC have gone about this in entirely the wrong way.

Anonymous | 1:44 p.m. Oct. 31, 2007

These arguments about teacher tenure are ridiculous. If a reason exists for the fact that it seems hard to get bad teachers out of the system, it is that teacher pay and benefits are too low to provide a pool of valuable applicants to replace them. Increase education spending in this state, provide teachers better benefits, and more talented people will flow into the profession, at which point there will be a teacher surplus, forcing poor teachers out and better ones in. Vouchers aren't going to do it.

Steven Jarvis | 1:53 p.m. Oct. 31, 2007

Idea For Jerry,

That is the exact line of thinking that we should be having--finding solutions within the system instead of creating a government subsidy that helps the fewest children in the state.

For all the paid posts about fear-mongering. PCE does not have a leg to stand on against well-informed citizens like myself. The only thing your group has done has made the voters more aware of the politicians who were out supporting your agenda. It is now more likely the people PCE has paid for to get them in office will be removed. It is about time Curtis, Bramble and Stephenson be removed from office where they have done considerable damage to our public school system.

Joe | 2:01 p.m. Oct. 31, 2007

To "Against it": So if you don't like the voice of your legally elected legislature, you take it to the polls. But if you don't like the voice of the people, your side has already threatened to take it to the courts. Face it, what you really want is your own way at all costs. You want to force your will down my throat. Have you ever heard a voucher supporter threaten to take it to court if vouchers are voted down?

Forget the voice of the legislature. Forget the voice of the people. Your side wants to force your agenda no matter what. That is not checks and balances - that is despotism.

To "Idea For Jerry": You are aware there is a hard cap on the number of charter schools that can be started each year, aren't you? Are you going to lobby to eliminate that cap so Jerry can take your advice? Yeah, I thought not.

For Steven Jarvis | 3:33 p.m. Oct. 31, 2007

"It is now more likely the people PCE has paid for to get them in office will be removed. It is about time Curtis, Bramble and Stephenson be removed from office where they have done considerable damage to our public school system."

Steven, I think you are absolutely right, and to me, this is the real silver lining behind this whole boondoggle. I think a lot of people saw the real face of their supposed Representative.

Against it | 4:14 p.m. Oct. 31, 2007

To Joe.

Ahh Joe!!! When a minority in favor of an issue gain the upper hand that is "despotism," as the Republican dominated legislature did with the voucher issue. When the majority against an issue bring accountability back to the issue and check the legislature's non-representative actions (as our State constitution allows for) THAT"S CALLED DEMOCRACY!

It's amazing that when the pro-vouchers are pressed on detailing the financial ramifications (and I mean all of them), and since public funds are being used for private corporations should they not come under public policy, and why don't the pro-vouchers simply go back to their churches and demand they provide for the private education since the public education system has become too over-secularized for them. I either get a blank look, or they go red eyed beet red flushed, or more often I get the fast shuffle nonsensical merry-go-round answer.

Fact is, and it really irritates the pro-vouchers, poll after poll throughout the state of Utah consistently shows a large majority of voters oppose vouchers, especially in the rural areas where the so-called Mormon majority opposed to secularism in public education is strongest. Something seems askew here with the pro-voucher claims.

Against it | 4:32 p.m. Oct. 31, 2007

To Only in utah.

A head tax on school age children? Wow! That's about a bold as the post that squarely laid the voucher push at the feet of religion, which is the core reason those puffed up self-righteous legislators rammed voucher legislation through at the last minute mid-night hour.
A head tax is an excellent idea. But hopefully, your not a Republican or supoort that political party since they not only put the $1,000 tax credit per child in place but then raised that tax credit again. What business in their right mind rewards a cost-maker with cash incentives?
The head tax should be: no tax on two children (that's zero student impact on the system), then a graduated head tax on 3 or more children thereafter to subsidize the system. Why should a small family have to subsidize a large family through the insane child tax credit? Also, home owners over 60 years of age with no school age children at home should be exempted for 70% of their property tax assessment.
Want choices and options, then put them where they deserve to be and make the cost-makers pay their fair share. By the way I'm a Democrat!

Re: --Joe-- | 4:35 p.m. Oct. 31, 2007

How is Constitutional Due Process "despotism"?

Are you really trying to deny the citizens of the state of Utah their Constitutional Priviledges?

I though you said you did not like "self-contridictory concepts and lies", yet all of your arguements contain them.

Weird

At least your "daughter-in-law" and "wife" have come to their senses.

To:Against it | 4:45 p.m. Oct. 31, 2007

Regarding to Only in Utah

I consider myself a strong Republican.

That being said, your head tax makes the most sense of any post today. I have two little girls. I can afford to put them both in private school if I choose. And no one would be ramming their choice not to pay extra for my child's education down my throat (Joe), rather I would be paying my own way, which I believe is the Conservative Republican way.

Mont | 5:07 p.m. Oct. 31, 2007

I think people should have to pay for what they get. If they want private education, let them pay the premium. I have a large family, and I they are all schooled in my home. Non-Government subsidized! I still have to pay for everyone else's children. I think 'Against It' is a money monger that just thinks of himself. I wonder if she was schooled in the public system. I also think that she is overlooking the problem that that would cause by shifting a large tax burden to that segment of society. I also bet that she favors population control and only has one or two trophy children.

All I have to say is that I think that people need to take their children's education into their own hands. Yes they can go to public school, but get involved and help. Throwing money to the school system doesn't solve this hands off problem. Getting involved will. These after school programs, lunch and breakfast programs are only going to fuel the problem. Kids need parents to help them, not more cash thrown at them. That is how the children won't be left behind.

!!!

Teacher Shortage | 5:21 p.m. Oct. 31, 2007

I think it is good that you let the teachers know how we really feel about them. Great choice when we can't find teachers as it is.

Glad my wife and I left the State to teach in Colorado. Things aren't so tight here. People can afford to educate their own kids if they choose.

Let's do the math | 6:54 p.m. Oct. 31, 2007

Out of 2,262 small donors to defeat vouchers, "hundreds" were teachers.

Big donors were the UEA and NEA.

The same people who screwed up the schools want to keep our kids trapped in them, unless their parents are rich enough to pay the whole ransom.

Math Man | 7:31 p.m. Oct. 31, 2007

Hundreds out of thousands???

Wow. And teachers, if anyone, understand what needs to be done.

Why does everyone think teachers are afraid. We don't pay them much but squat. We disrespect them and teach our children to do the same.

They want to do what it takes to protect the children. Everyone sits back and watches and complains.

Teachers just do it.

I wouldn't be where I am without Mr. Carling. Thank You, sir...

Ethan | 8:32 p.m. Oct. 31, 2007

Sounds like both sides have wasted an awful lot of money instead of spending it on more productive things.

Math Class | 8:58 p.m. Oct. 31, 2007

Teachers know what needs to be done, but most of them are afraid for their jobs, so won't admit what the problems and solutions are.

Now, back to math class. "Hundreds" means more than 200, or roughly 1 in 10 of the donors. If you take away that 200 minimum, that leaves only 2,062 people -- not all of whom are Utahns -- willing to give any real money to the pro-voucher cause (and even these gave less than $100 each).

I'd be willing to bet that far more than 200 of those donors were teachers.

The UTPS spokesperson is right, this DOES "show the breadth of support" they have, and it's not much!

Page:
1
2
Next >

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.

Story graphic

Vouchers

Follow us on facebook

Follow us on Twitter

Reader comments
Plenty of election spending

Add your comment

Editorial: Extremism spike alarming

Pitta doesn't win award

Letters: Hefty tab for trial

LDS to emphasize helping needy

Construction worker injured in jump

Letters: Do health care math

U.'s Henderson more than a shooter

Poinsettia homecoming for Wynn

Letters: Don't give up fight

Kelly arrives at Notre Dame

Reader comments Plenty of election spending

Add your comment

Reader comments
Plenty of election spending