To the Editor: Vote Yes

5
2168

Dear Editor:

This November, Virginia voters will have an opportunity to vote on two very important constitutional amendments: “Right to Work” and “Property tax exemptions for spouses of certain emergency services providers.” Too often, voters overlook these critical amendments amidst the excitement and attention given to our Presidential and Congressional races.

The first is on our right to work status. Virginia has been a right to work state for decades. As a result, Virginia enjoys great success in recruiting and retaining businesses. We must maintain this status as a job friendly state as we work to rebuild our economy. Passing this amendment will make Virginia a stronger state by guaranteeing that no employee can be fired just because he or she refuses to join a union. Enshrining it in our constitution permanently protects our right to work status.

The second constitutional amendment will give localities the option to provide a property tax exemption to the surviving spouse of a law enforcement, firefighter, or emergency service member killed in the line of duty. Everyday men and women in uniform risk their lives to serve our communities. Unfortunately, many have given the ultimate sacrifice to keep us safe. This amendment is a small recognition for the efforts of our first responders who put their lives on the line each and every day. Passing this amendment will show our public safety personnel that we stand with them and their families.

I urge you to vote “Yes” on both of these important amendments in November.

Sincerely,

Steve Landes
Delegate for the 25th District
4117 Lee Highway
Weyers Cave, VA 24486
(540) 246-4116

 

5 COMMENTS

  1. Vote NO on both. Constitutional amendments are serious business and are meant to more effectively protect or expand basic rights of the general population or certain groups of people threatened to be marginalized. Nothing like that is at stake here. Also once passed amendments are almost impossible to undo.

    Both issues are perfectly fine to be picked up in general legislation process, and see if they pass muster.
    Well, the first one actually DOES NOT pass muster at all. Written by the American Legislative Exchange Council, a pro-large business and anti-union, families, or workers front group by some well known billionaires are pushing this to put the nail in the coffin of having a greater say or bargaining power. Steven Landes is deceptive and dishonest again (“right to work” is anything but), just like in his opposition to state medicaid expansion, what he described falsely as costing the state a lot of money (it does not). Please Mike Marshall, if you want to use your letters to the editor as a political campaign platform then also invite opposing viewpoints to be published side by side. Thanks!

    • Hi Ron,
      Thanks so much for your comments. If you are interested, please send a letter to the editor that we can run in the November issue (which will be out on Friday the 4th). Would need it by Monday.
      Thank you!
      Allie

    • I agree vote NO on the amendments. We don’t need to amend our Constitution to include a provision that is currently in the law. The primary purpose is to ensure that any desired future change in our statutes will be next to impossible to achieve, hurting Virginia workers.

      The tax relief measure is no relief. It will only result in a decrease in local revenues, meaning fewer critical items in our budget will get funded. If the legislature believed this particular tax relief was such a great idea they can address it in the state budget and not take it out of the limited coffers of our counties. Vote NO.

  2. Reasons to recommend “No” votes on both, here clearly explained (copied from a social media posting)

    First, the “right to work” amendment — the reasons to oppose this are legion.

    A. “Right to work” means almost exactly the opposite. “Right to work” legislation actively discourages strong unions — the folks who brought us the weekend, and the 40-hour week, and employment-based health insurance. It means that if there are 100 employees in a union business, all 100 employees get the benefit of being represented by a union, even though only 50 may decide that they want to pay dues. Obviously, that weakens unions in the long run, which is why…

    B. Virginia has had a “right-to-work” statute on the books for decades. Which is why…

    C. It is completely unnecessary, even if you think it is a good idea, and if you think that a Constitution ought to be limited to the really important issues that deal with the structure of government…

    D. It doesn’t belong in the Constitution.

    Second, the “tax exemption for widows” exception shouldn’t be in the Constitution, because:

    A. Creating exceptions to what should otherwise be a universal tax system is bad policy. It fights the idea that taxes are the price we pay for civilization.

    B. If you are a conservative on tax matters, you want fewer exceptions, not more.

    C. If you want to give benefits to widows of first responders, why not pay first responders more?

    D. Even if it is possibly a good idea, why should it be in the Constitution?

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here