image
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Phone: (314) 843-0102
|
Fax: (314) 843-0508
|
flag image

Upset by Yeckel's 'no vote' on marriage bill


Letter to the editor


To the editor:

Being a concerned voter during a current election year, I am watching the votes of my elected officials very closely to see just how they stand in relation to my personal views and ideals.

I was quite shocked when I discovered a recent vote, or should I say "no vote" by my state senator of the 1st District, Anita Yeckel, R-Sunset Hills.

According to the Senate Journal for March 1, Sen. Yeckel was recorded as present and accounted for. However, when it came time to vote, the record tells a different story.

In regard to Senate Joint Resolution 29, which calls for an amendment to the Missouri Constitution, which states that only marriages between a man and a woman will be valid and recognized in the state of Missouri. All senators voted on this resolution except for Sen. Yeckel. Now I ask you, if the record shows she was present at the beginning of the session, why does it show her as absent during that one vote?

I too find it confusing and hard to understand that she was present and voted for each Senate bill before and after Senate Resolution 29 was considered.

I know it sounds confusing, but what it comes down to is that Sen. Yeckel "walked" when it came time to vote of this conservational resolution.

I even contacted Sen. Yeckel's office March 3 to ask why she didn't vote. I was told, "She was in a meeting."

However, after asking several other elected officials and their staff, when a roll-call vote is taken, all senators are called upon to vote. I think her main duty and responsibility would be to vote before holding a meeting.

Sen. Yeckel must have had a short meeting since the record shows she was able to vote before and after that resolution.

Even though I do not support Senate Resolution 29 and it did pass with a final vote of 26 to 6, I find myself more upset with the fact that my senator, Sen. Anita Yeckel, who is elected by the citizens of St. Louis County, which is the 1st District, wasn't there to vote.

The question isn't her view on this conservational issue — it's the fact that she is elected and paid by the state of Missouri to vote and represent St. Louis County on issues like this and make many other tough decisions. Yet the record shows when it came down to making a decision, she didn't even cast a vote. How can she represent us when she "walks" at times when hard decisions have to be made?

Yet she still gets paid to represent us, even though St. Louis County wasn't really represented at all.

Sen. Yeckel cannot seek re-election for her Senate seat due to term limits. I question whether she will pick and support another candidate who is willing to "walk" when it comes time to vote and make those hard decisions.

We elect state officials to represent us, but how can they when they aren't even there? I am concerned if she will "walk," as she did on this issue, when facing such tough decisions as state treasurer — if she is fortunate enough to be elected in the Republican primary.

My fellow citizens, this is an important year where you will have to make many tough decisions about who will represent you in Jefferson City.

I ask you to remember events like this and to check up on your state officials to really see who is voting and who is "walking" on issues that concern us all.

Marty Zuniga

Oakville

  • Pitch It & Forget It
  • Huelsman's Jewelers
Site Search


Opinions
Schornheuser’s conduct warrants his resignation
Column about Fred Weber lawsuit ‘right on’
Lemay favors Pinnacle proposal, reader says
Voters should carefully scrutinize candidates
Weather
Type in your zip code and click "Go" to get your 7-day forecast.
Visit www.crh.noaa.gov