None might be a good option

Editor:

I agree totally with Jim Elliott’s suggestion that voters be given the option to choose “None of the Above Candidates.” I’m guessing a fair number of those who vote in each election find none of the candidates for a position to their liking. When a few candidates lose to “None of the Above Candidates,” the message would be clear that the quality of candidates voters will vote for needs, on occasion, to improve. So often I hear, I voted for the candidate I disliked the least. I have been in that position more often than I like to remember. I have quit voting for candidates that I feel are unqualified for a job, or are not motivated to do a great job, even when it means I don’t vote for any candidate running for a specific office. I do realize that my non vote helps and hurts neither candidate. But if a candidate lost to, or there were a substantial number of “None of the Above Candidates” votes, that’s a clear and embarrassing message to the candidate(s) shunned. And maybe candidates would elect to address what voters feel is important and in a way that resonates with voters, which I think means we would see less negative campaigning. And candidates wouldn’t encourage and allow negative campaigning on their behalf by “activists” whose sole purpose is to attack rival candidates in very negative and tiresome ways. We need to demand highly qualified candidates for all positions at all levels of government. Having a “None of the Above Candidates” option might help us get there.

Ruth Cheney, Thompson Falls