LETTERS to the Editor

continued from page 41 society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors.”

— Joe Goode, Waterford Transparency

Editor:

It’s time to put some meat on the over politicized “transparency bone.”

Transparency is one of the most significant benefits of having access to voting records. Citizens can hold their elected officials accountable for their actions and make informed decisions about whether to re-elect them. This transparency also promotes trust in government, as citizens can see that their representatives are acting in the public interest.

Additionally, voting records provide valuable insight into politicians’ beliefs and priorities. By examining how they vote on certain issues, citizens can determine whether they align with their own values and priorities. This information is particularly important during elections, where voters can use voting records to make informed decisions about which candidates to support.

Access to voting records also promotes government accountability by making it more difficult for elected officials to deny responsibility for their actions or hide from their voting records. This accountability ensures that officials act in the best interests of their constituents, rather than corporate or other special interests.

Regrettably, the present approach to accessing the voting records of local politicians and School Board members through meeting minutes, agendas, and videos is not only time-consuming and cumbersome but also lacks equity. This system creates an unnecessary obstacle that disproportionately affects marginalized communities and individuals who may not have the resources or time to navigate this complicated process. As a result, it is a significant barrier to civic engagement and access to public information, which is a fundamental right of all citizens in a democratic society.

Citizens must spend countless hours sifting through documents and recordings just to find out how their elected officials have voted on critical issues that affect their lives. This system creates an unnecessary barrier to civic engagement and further disenfranchises marginalized communities and individuals who may not have the time or resources to devote to this process.

It is the responsibility of the state

Delegates, Senators, Board of Supervisors and School Board officials to ensure that citizens have easy access to this critical information. They must provide a more accessible and transparent system for accessing voting records. Anything less is a failure of their duty to serve their constituents, regardless of political affiliation.

Transparency in voting records is essential for holding elected officials accountable, promoting government accountability, civic engagement, and a healthy democracy. Access to voting records at the local level is just as critical as access at the state and national level. The current system of accessing local voting records is unacceptable and needs to be changed to provide citizens with easy access to this critical information. Local officials must step up and provide a more accessible and transparent system for accessing voting records.

— Scott Mineo, Ashburn

Hopeless Division

Editor:

Running through recent letters and articles is an unmentioned theme: our representative system of government no longer represents the public. Instead, leaders cater to personal interests, their party, and their ideology. Take the push in Loudoun for collective bargaining. Did the public ask for this? What possible benefits could there be for us?

Our supervisors should be required to read the new book “Not Accountable: Rethinking the Constitutionality of Public Employee Unions” before imposing this on us all. But they won’t: party and ideology predetermined their votes. The public sector unions extract dues from their members, which are laundered through the union and turned into campaign dollars for politicians. How many dollars? Look it up on Open Secrets yourself. The wheel rolls on endlessly; only the taxpayers are left out.

Speaking of being left out, when teachers unions become involved in public education it is worth asking these questions: Do the students have a union? Do the parents? Do the taxpayers? No. Their interests all fall to the bottom of the priority list. We just experienced a disastrous example of this, with the extended closure of schools (the longest closures occurred in places where the unions are the strongest). Economists are now calculating the lifelong losses to the students who were harmed, and we see alarming statistics on mental health, addiction, and suicide as well. No one even apologized, just the usual passing of the buck.

Everyone knows there are teachers who should not be allowed anywhere near a school, teachers who do the bare minimum, and phenomenal, gifted teachers who change the lives of their students forever. Teachers unions ensure it is impossible to fire the former or to reward the latter. The members receive their pay and benefits regardless of the students’ outcomes, even in places where schools manage 0% proficiency results (see Baltimore).

Or take the nebulous “equity” resolution with its unknown practical consequences. Did the public ask for this? How would it poll on a list of Loudoun voters’ priorities? Doesn’t matter. The supervisors do what they want regardless. Parents of Asian background and other “inconvenient minorities” should pay special attention, as a clue to what “equity” means for them can be found in recent controversies like the removal of merit admissions at TJ or schools “forgetting” to inform certain National Merit award winners.

A recent article focused on the problems the high cost of land and housing pose to young local farmers (who are creating amazing food products). How would the “equity” resolution affect any attempt to support them? Will support only be forthcoming if we happen to have the “correct” percentage of Black or LGBTQ farmers? No one knows.

The examples are endless. Voters are presented with a binary choice, motivated by anger and fear, and then forgotten the day after Election Day. The result is hopeless division, resentment, and a record low in public trust. Or occasionally something more drastic, like the election of Donald Trump.

— Dominic Santini, Leesburg

Defining Antisemitism

Editor: We need to define what is and is not antisemitism.

I was very disappointed to hear about the seven Democratic Senators who killed SB 1252 in committee. The bill, which passed in the Virginia House of Delegates, codifies the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s (IHRA) definition of antisemitism for purposes of understanding when antisemitic discrimination occurs.

My state senator, Sen. Jennifer Boysko, despite her commitment to equality and support for marginalized constituents, was one of the no votes. Why? Because she and others fell for a red herring logical fallacy that IHRA’s definition of antisemitism chills speech that criticizes Israeli policy. Believe me, it does not. I’m both Jewish and a Zionist who strongly believes in the right of Israel to exist. However, I regularly criticize Netanyahu’s racist anti-Arab policies and Israel’s human rights violations. Obviously, that doesn’t make me antisemitic. Nor does IHRA’s definition of antisemitism prevent me from speaking my mind.

The IHRA specifically addresses what kind of speech amounts to antisemitism. And it’s very important to understand why certain statements rise to the level of antisemitism while others do not. The IHRA definition explains that “criticism of Israel similar to that leveled against any other country” is never antisemitic. However, it is antisemitic hate speech to hold Jewish people collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel or to call for an end of Israel’s existence.

I’ve taught Judaics and Jewish values to local eighth through 10th graders for the past six years at my synagogue. Over the past four years, my students have described an increasing amount of antisemitic bullying. Because of this, I’ve expanded my lessons on antisemitism every single year, heavily relying on IHRA’s teaching materials to help students understand what is and what is not antisemitism.

The problem is that antisemitic movements like Boycott Divest and Sanction (“BDS”) conflate two very different types of anti-Israel statements and use propaganda to convince legislators that pro-Palestinian speech is being chilled.

BDS’s members will (and I don’t disagree) often denounce Israeli actions as racist or too extreme. Such criticisms against the policies of Israel are clearly permissible under the IHRA definition.

However, statements by BDS members that de-legitimize Israel’s very existence are most definitely antisemitic. BDS-type groups will often deny Israel’s right to exist claiming that Israel was invalidly formed as an “imperialistic colonial state.” Antisemitic movements like BDS advance outright lies denying ANY legitimate Jewish connection to our traditional Jewish homeland. These types of erasure are absolutely antisemitic.

Apparently, our leaders find it difficult to distinguish between statements denying the right of Jews or Israel to exist with statements criticizing Israeli human rights violations. I would love it if any one of them could attend one of my Sunday classes, meet my students, and learn with them as we dissect what is and is not antisemitism.

I implore our Judiciary Committee to revisit its refusal to define antisemitism for fear that criticism of Israeli policy would be. They’ve been unwittingly duped. And Virginia deserves better.

— Bari Barton Cooper, Brambleton

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR continues on page 43

LETTERS to the Editor

continued from page 42

First Step

Editor:

I’m a young Republican woman. You may see two oxymorons in that sentence, as both young voters and women in general tend to vote Democrat, but here’s a third—I’m a young Republican woman who’s concerned about climate and conservation issues.

You may think that a stereotypical Republican doesn’t care about the environment, but I want to see action that results in real emissions reductions. I want energy produced here in the United States, where we have some of the highest environmental standards and cleanest energy production. Despite what some may say, we can’t eliminate fossil fuels tomorrow, and we need a smart all-of-the-above energy strategy.

This strategy must include encouraging domestic mining and processing of the raw materials we need to build clean energy technologies. After all, we cannot afford to build a clean energy future dependent on China. Additionally, we must be able to actually build energy projects, and we do this by getting burdensome regulations out of the way, while still maintaining high environmental standards.

This imminent need to produce clean energy domestically is why, in one of its very first acts with control of Congress, the Republican majority introduced H.R. 1, the Lowering Energy Costs Act. H.R. 1. not only unleashes American natural gas—which is cleaner than natural gas produced elsewhere like Venezuela and Russia—but also helps secure supply chains for clean energy as well. While this legislation will need to be negotiated to ensure passage in the Senate, it’s an important signal that Republicans are prioritizing energy in a way that both unleashes American innovation and maintains high environmental standards.

Young conservatives, like myself, want an energy strategy that creates a future with abundant, affordable, and increasingly clean energy. We need an all-of-theabove approach to energy, including fossil energy, renewables, and nuclear energy.

H.R.1 is an admirable first step at securing America’s energy, and I hope to see additional, bipartisan steps to address the climate challenge from the 118th Congress, with of course, Republicans leading from the front.

— Jordan Orris, Ashburn

Helen Hough Cooper, 93 of Lovettsville, Virginia passed away on Saturday, February 25, 2023, at her home in Lovettsville, Virginia. Born Wednesday, January 15, 1930, in Leesburg, Virginia, she was the daughter of the late Monroe Hough and Myrtle Mock Hough. She was the wife of the late Clifton Cooper. Helen is survived by her daughters, Patricia Riley (Harry Zohn) of Sunset Beach, NC and Stacie Merchant (Mark) of Leesburg, VA. Also included are her granddaughters, Jennifer Marcus, Lauren Constantine, and Lesley Bamford; and four great-grandchildren. She was predeceased by her husband, son, William Riley, brother, James Hough and sister, Lola Alexander. She was an avid Washington Redskins fan, enjoyed square dancing with the Beaux and Belles and playing cards with her husband and friends. The family will receive guests at Zion Lutheran Church on April 22, 2023, from 10:00AM to 11:00AM. A Memorial Service will begin at 11:00AM followed by interment at Lovettsville Union Cemetery. A reception will be held at the New Jerusalem social hall. In lieu of flowers, donations can be made in Helen’s honor to Zion Lutheran Church, 38011 Morrisonville Rd, Lovettsville, VA 20180. Online condolences may be made to the family at www.loudounfuneralchapel.com