Jeff Eastman wrote in support of SJR10 (Deseret News Readers' Forum, April 26) because he "wants to stop narrow-minded interests from telling Utahns what to do with their wildlife." We are curious as to which special interests he feels are so cunning, secretive, conniving and clever that they can outwit Utah's voting population, requiring that we change the standards at the ballot box to require a two-thirds majority for only wildlife issues.
As voting residents of Utah, we are personally insulted that this bill has even been introduced, much less passed in the Legislature. The residents of Utah can think, and vote, for themselves. Please do not tell us we are incapable of intelligent decisions on wildlife issues or are likely to be duped by these mysterious "narrow-minded interests."SJR10 is the first constitutional amendment of its kind in United States history, singling out a specific issue and holding it to a higher standard at the ballot box, establishing a dangerous precedent. If it is passed, Utah would be the first state to limit the freedom of its citizenry to affect public policy in a single arena, in this case wildlife issues.
There would be nothing to stop future legislatures from deciding the public cannot think and vote competently on other issues, such as education, transportation or taxes. We urge the residents of Utah to defeat SJR10, saying "we can think, we can vote. Do not muzzle us."
Martin and Anne Steitz