Ballot proposals need more-accurate descriptions

All of Georgia’s proposed constitutional amendments passed in landslides. Why? The handout I received just before voting said the Georgia Outdoor Stewardship Fund proposal would “conserve lands that protect drinking water sources and the water quality of lakes and streams … (and) provide opportunities for our children and families to play and enjoy the outdoors … without increasing the current sales tax rate.” The courts proposal language said it would “lower costs, improve the efficiency of all courts, and promote predictability of judicial outcomes … for the benefit of all citizens of this state.” Who is getting paid what to place these things on the ballot? Do better descriptions cost more? Regarding the courts proposal, Georgia competes with other states for businesses. While a business court might attract some businesses, you might just get shafted in that court if you have a dispute with a business.


Moral nation should vet, admit asylum-seekers

In “Caravan mothers guilty of child abuse” (Readers Write, Nov. 2), the letter writer claims migrant parents of young children and babies are committing child abuse and should be arrested when or if they arrive at our borders. The writer’s complete lack of understanding of the motives for migration beggars belief. Does he not allow that the parents anxiously deliberated the arduous nature of the journey and considered it a better option than staying in their home countries, which have nothing to offer but poverty, unemployment, persecution, gangs and the like? Or that, contrary to the president’s unfounded statements and internet vitriol, these are likely good people seeking opportunity and hope for the future? Surely, as a supposedly moral and largely Christian nation, far from arresting these parents, we should show compassion and understanding, and step up our ability to carefully vet asylum-seekers rather than vilify them for political purposes.