Your Opinion: Presidential primary, not caucus, favored

Dear Editor:

This letter was very difficult to write because I am dedicated to civil dialogue. So I am asking Missouri lawmakers to whom this letter is addressed to please not mistake my civility for a lack of passion.

On a scale of one to 10, I stand solidly at 11 in my opposition to eliminating the presidential primary in favor of a caucus. To do so would take away yet one more opportunity for all citizens to exercise their right to vote. (I say "yet another" because I have already expressed my views against requiring all citizens to have government issued photo IDs in order to vote in general elections - unless, of course, the government assumes full responsibility for providing everyone who meets the criteria with the required photo ID. (The right to vote is sacred.}

In my opinion the primary elections are more important than the final presidential election. If I have no opportunity to vote for the nominee, then all I can do is vote for the person that someone else chose. This does not seem to me to be the way a democracy should function.

The fact that the primary election costs money is not a valid argument. I pay my taxes just for such expenditures. It would not be a legitimate use of my tax money to take away my right to vote. I do not want a caucus made up of a few select people to make my choice for me.

As for the cost, perhaps, our lawmakers would be willing to pass a bill to help pay for the primary by donating the money spent on the current non-productive special session.