RATING: There’s poison in the process

I want to thank Stephanie Schad for her description of the KCRCC’s process of rating and vetting of candidates (My Turn, May 2). In it, she reinforces the reasons why so many find the process to be such an unreliable predictor of how the “chosen” candidates will perform in office.

What the process is, by her description, is a means for determining a candidate’s partisan political purity based on the narrow-minded opinions of the Republican Party elite leadership. 

Candidates must actively seek the recommendation of the Committee by filling out the required questionnaire. It seems to me that only those with the necessary political “rightness” would subject themselves to this process. The process also appears to be structured to eliminate otherwise qualified candidates from the primary and general elections.

What the process should be, but is not, is an honest evaluation of the knowledge, skills, abilities and experience of all of the candidates as they pertain to the offices to which the candidates aspire. This process should also be limited to only political races which are partisan in nature and not include local, non-partisan contests.

Relying on the opinions of a tight knit few when choosing the leaders of the community seems to me a poor way of expressing the will of the populace. I, for one will vote for candidates that can show they have the necessary qualifications for a given office, regardless of whether they have an “R,” “D,” “I” or no affiliation behind their name.

DAVID ST.AMAND

Post Falls