Readers write for Oct. 28, 2010

The Election Integrity Watch, a group founded by ultra-conservative Tea Party activists, has decided to approach the serious problem of voter fraud in an incredibly counterproductive fashion ("Tea Party members are challenging voter eligibility," Oct. 27).

They plan to act as poll watchdogs, as if the trained and tested election officials and poll challengers from both parties who will be at every polling station are not up to the task. The self-righteous zeal of this concept puts integrity far, far down the list of first words that come first to my mind. The group's $500 reward for anyone who turns in someone successfully prosecuted for voter fraud leads to concerns over voter intimidation and even fraud fabrication that could actually interfere with the ability of legitimate poll watchers to do their jobs. With instructions for its watchdogs to notify election officials and poll challengers whenever they suspect specific voters to be ineligible, I'm wary of the chaos, conflict and especially of the racial tension that might arise.

I hope that our actions on Nov. 2 reflect the honest and welcoming Minnesotan principles I've grown up with and not the hatemongering and self-righteous attitudes of a few radicals.

CASEY WOJTALEWICZ, ST. JOSEPH, MINN.

• • •

Minnesotans: Is it ethical, much less legal, to issue a bounty to incite overzealous would-be "fraud finders" to approach individuals at polls? Is this really happening? Let's look at how this plays out: Individuals are targeted, based on appearance (how else does one suspect voter fraud not knowing the individual?) and harassed in order to find out their personal information so the "fraud finder" can turn them in for a bounty reward.

The Tea Party members promoting this would be advised to put some of this money away for the inevitable lawsuits against them for preventing a constitutional right.

COLLEEN SIMMONS, Minneapolis

After serving 30 years in law enforcement and criminal justice, I know that the official police uniform is an important public symbol. It commands respect and represents safety, security and service to the community, as well as authority, power and the ability to control. In the past 20 years, law enforcement agencies have instructed officers that the first step in the continuum of force is the mere presence of a uniformed officer. It is for these reasons that official military and police uniforms are prohibited for use to influence or interfere with elections or nominations for political office.

I raise this issue because of a recent spate of campaign literature and TV ads showing officers in their official uniforms urging support for a particular candidate.

In my view this is unethical and appears to be a violation of the law. The campaign literature has disclaimers (in small print) stating:

"Use of official uniform has been approved, but is not intended to imply endorsement by the police department."

Police chiefs, sheriffs and candidates should know better. Law enforcement should insist on higher standards and prohibit them from using the uniform to exploit elections.

We should expect nothing less.

LAURA GOODMAN, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC SAFETY, ST. CATHERINE'S UNIVERSITY, ST. PAUL

In an interview with National Journal, Republican Minority Leader Mitch McConnell described his party's primary goal should they retake control of the Senate: "The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president," he said. This is as clear, concise and honest a statement of the Republican agenda as could possibly be articulated. The Republican Party is the party of no: no new ideas, no solutions to the country's pressing needs, no willingness to work with Democrats to solve problems and no remorse for the egregious policies they pursued during the previous administration that collapsed the economy and mired our country in two wars. The Republican Party is also the party of power: their own power, the power of the ultra-rich to control the political discourse by buying up all the media, the power of the super-wealthy to avoid paying their fair share of taxes and the power of secret organizations accountable to no one to buy the outcome of elections though massive propagandizing.

As Rush Limbaugh so eloquently put it, they hope the president fails, and therefore they hope the country fails. They would rather the United States descend into chaos than that the Democrats should succeed at making things better. Think about that: They see our suffering as their path to power. They have said so themselves, and they have proven it by doing everything they could in the past two years to thwart all efforts to heal the economy, help small businesses, promote jobs, and reform health care and the corrupt practices of Wall Street. They have even voted against their own proposals rather than risk giving Obama a perceived victory.

STEPHEN LEHMAN, St. Paul

I hope that when Troy Gentry "harvested" a tame bear and left it to bleed to death, he first had the courtesy to offer it a blindfold and a cigarette ("Video shows illegal bear kill," Oct. 27).