Letter: Negative Campaigning Is Not a Treat

Letters to the EditorPrint Story | Email Story

To the Editor:

Last week, in Williamstown and surrounding areas, Halloween became political.

When one of the authors of this letter went to a friend's party after trick-or-treating, he found a pack of M&Ms in his candy bag with a little note that stated: "Hillary for Prison 2016." It was outrageous. Halloween is for kids, not for campaigning. We feel that expressing your views about the election through children is inappropriate; if you want to express your feelings you should find a more reasonable way. The person was irresponsible when they did that.

The next day, in our fifth-grade class, we learned we weren't the only ones to get this "treat." There was a range of feelings. A few were unbothered by the note; many others were offended and some even felt that the statement is predatory. If our younger siblings got this message, they would feel terrified and scared. They might even cry. One of our friends got this note and he felt indignant and bewildered.

Hillary wasn't the only target of negative campaigning.

We heard of another house in our county that had a spinning wheel that decided what kind of candy you got. If you landed on Trump, you got Dum-Dums. If you landed on Clinton, you got Smarties. In school, we work hard to end bullying. Yes, Dum-Dums are candy, but it is essentially calling Trump dumb and Clinton smart. This is a great example of what we are trying to stop.



Both of these "treats" are bad role models for kids. They show us that you don't need to take responsibility for your actions or your political views. The people behind these acts are not articulating their political views in a productive way. They are using kids as tools in their campaign.

This is NOT OK.

Signed,
 

Concerned 5th graders
Williamstown, Mass.
 

We have been informed that this letter was composed by a group of fifth-graders who worked hard and used a thesaurus to make their point heard. We applaud their efforts. 

 

 


Tags: election 2016,   letters to the editor,   

If you would like to contribute information on this article, contact us at info@iberkshires.com.

Williamstown Charter Review Panel OKs Fix to Address 'Separation of Powers' Concern

By Stephen DravisiBerkshires Staff
WILLIAMSTOWN, Mass. — The Charter Review Committee on Wednesday voted unanimously to endorse an amended version of the compliance provision it drafted to be added to the Town Charter.
 
The committee accepted language designed to meet concerns raised by the Planning Board about separation of powers under the charter.
 
The committee's original compliance language — Article 32 on the annual town meeting warrant — would have made the Select Board responsible for determining a remedy if any other town board or committee violated the charter.
 
The Planning Board objected to that notion, pointing out that it would give one elected body in town some authority over another.
 
On Wednesday, Charter Review Committee co-Chairs Andrew Hogeland and Jeffrey Johnson, both members of the Select Board, brought their colleagues amended language that, in essence, gives authority to enforce charter compliance by a board to its appointing authority.
 
For example, the Select Board would have authority to determine a remedy if, say, the Community Preservation Committee somehow violated the charter. And the voters, who elect the Planning Board, would have ultimate say if that body violates the charter.
 
In reality, the charter says very little about what town boards and committees — other than the Select Board — can or cannot do, and the powers of bodies like the Planning Board are regulated by state law.
 
View Full Story

More Williamstown Stories