RACE FOR GOVERNOR

Three views on third parties in Minnesota

James Lenfestey, in his Sept. 18 Opinion Exchange commentary "The third party's over," neglects to discuss why we have so-called third parties.

Third parties exist because the Democrats and the Republicans in recent years have failed to give Minnesota voters good choices. Why do the two dominant parties insist on nominating people who are party loyalists and not the best leaders?

There are many who will vote for a third-party candidate until one party or the other comes up with a candidate who has sensible ideas and good leadership ability and is not a shill for his or her party.

Until candidates of that caliber are found, the two parties might as well expect third-party candidates. One just might win.

H. ROBERT ANDERSON, SAVAGE

• • •

Lenfestey is right when writing "the long-term solution is ranked-choice voting. It allows voters to rank their preferences so they don't potentially throw the election to their least favorite candidate."

But then he tears apart third parties as the cause of political extremism. Does Lenfestey, a partisan DFLer, really believe that Independence Party gubernatorial candidate Tom Horner supporters such as former Gov. Arne Carlson and former U.S. Sen. Dave Durenberger are responsible for pushing the Republicans to the right? Lenfestey ignores the history of the Minnesota Farmer-Labor party that in the 1930s turned Minnesota Democrats into a third party. Does Lenfestey really believe fewer choices in politics will reinvigorate our political system?

My first choice in this election was DFLer Margaret Anderson Kelliher. My second choice is Tom Horner. Lenfestey believes people should cast their vote for DFL endorsee Mark Dayton to avoid electing Republican Tom Emmer. But with Horner polling nearly double the support of former Gov. Jesse Ventura at this point in the race, how can Lenfestey or anyone else predict who the so-called "spoiler" will be?

In support of Dayton, Lenfestey cites the former senator's vote against the Iraq fiasco. But Dayton later joined Sen. Joe Lieberman in blocking the Senate majority from voting to cut funding for the war.

Actions like these cause people to look for other options in third parties.

PHILIP H. WILLKIE, MINNEAPOLIS

• • •

I was disappointed in the Sept. 18 Opinion Exchange. "The third party's over" pleaded with voters to stop "wasting" their vote on a third-party candidate and instead pick one of the major parties. The second commentary, "Correcting a wild pitch for Emmer," passionately tried to convince the reader that the major parties aren't as bad as we've been led to believe.

It's painfully ironic that both articles encourage voters to put aside their personal beliefs and vote for one of the major parties. Once again we're left wondering who will speak out for the minor parties and independent candidates. After being shut out of every public debate and poll so far this campaign season, they're still handcuffed by rules designed to keep them out. They're not allowed into debates because they haven't received 5 percent in a poll. But they're not even included in polls, so it's impossible to get the 5 percent.

Worse yet, in the race for state auditor, no polling at all has been done, allowing public debates to freely exclude everyone except the major parties.

The voters in Minneapolis and St. Paul have clearly asked for more choices through the passage of ranked-choice voting in both cities.

At a time when reporting is becoming increasingly biased and polarized, our newspapers need to step forward and be the independent voice that advocates for polling that includes all ballot-qualified candidates.

With just a small amount of additional effort, they could at least ensure that every race for a Minnesota constitutional office has at least one poll that gives every candidate an opportunity to earn a spot in the public debates. And at a time when Minnesota voters are clearly struggling to choose between career politicians that have repeatedly failed to represent average citizens, those debates could actually give us some new perspectives and ideas for solving the problems faced by our state.

JIM IVEY, POLITICS CHAIR, GREEN PARTY OF MINNESOTA

Transplant HOPE

Donors can provide second chance for life

It was with great interest I read today's article "To India, for a new heart." My staff and I have the privilege of working every day with generous donors and their families who chose to help others through organ and tissue donation. They are providing a second chance at life for the men, women and children who are desperately awaiting a transplant.

We are fortunate to live in a state where citizens consistently demonstrate care and concern for those in their community. More than half of Minnesotans have designated themselves donors on their driver's licenses or ID cards. This is remarkable when compared with the national average of 37 percent.

When someone takes a moment to register to be a donor, they are providing hope to the more than 2,800 Minnesotans who, like Ron Lemmer, are waiting for a transplant. We encourage people to go to www.donatelifemn.org to learn more about donation and to document their wishes to be an organ and tissue donor.

SUSAN GUNDERSON, CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, LIFESOURCE

Bush tax cuts

Given timing, will GOP consider new tactic?

Now that it's official that the recession ended last year, can we assume that the Republicans will end their opposition to letting tax cuts for the richest Americans expire?

TOM LEE, MINNEAPOLIS

Correction

Because of a production error, the name of the writer of the last letter to the editor on Sept. 19 did not appear. The writer was Jim Bartos of Brooklyn Park.