Cheri Beasley is the better choice

To the Editor:

Along with voters of both political parties, I am concerned with the future of democracy and the form of government that has given the citizens of our country freedoms and rights that are protected by the United States Constitution.

Many times, these rights are challenged, and at times they become clarified or in some cases seemingly expanded or diminished. Most recently, many women, in particular, have questioned their equality under the laws since the SCOTUS decision overturning Roe v. Wade. This decision has added to the partisan fray that has been explosive, unyielding and downright destructive over the last few elections. It seems our U.S. Congress has been paralyzed in its lawmaking duties and problem-solving role while wrestling with partisan nonsense. No one benefits from this, other than perhaps, the participants in the fray.

We are facing yet another election cycle that seems to be nothing but a repeat of accusations of leaning too this way, or too that way, with the intent to scare a voter into voting with fear, rather than making a rational, thoughtful decision on how to cast their votes.

We should be looking at policy preferences, ability to perform the job, and most important the willingness to do a job for all of their constituents. The U.S. Senate seat is a good example of the candidates that offer choices of voting out of fear versus voting to choose a candidate that will provide thoughtful, balanced input to legislation.

Cheri Beasley is a former N.C. Supreme Court Chief Justice. Sitting on the bench forces an individual to balance facts and law and reach a conclusion that is fair and just.

Contrast this to her irresponsible opponent who skipped U.S. Congress floor votes to attend a CPAC convention. Additionally, Beasley’s opponent is a member of the Freedom Caucus. This a tip-off that a vote for that candidate will be a continuation of the shenanigans that have been ongoing since the early days of Mark Meadows. And we now know where that led us.

So, instead it seems like voting for a candidate that took an oath to justice and had to balance the interests of divergent points of view would give North Carolina a voice of wisdom that could represent us to accomplish the legislating that needs to get done.

Pam Krauss, Webster