Schmidt: Shupe’s thoughts about supermajorities ‘disingenuous’

Rep. Bryan Shupe, R-Milford, has written a very disingenuous Opinion piece in which he clearly advocates for electing Republicans instead of Democrats in order to prevent a supermajority in the Delaware legislature, with a tongue-in-cheek encouragement to not vote based solely on party affiliation (“2024 elections could create political ruling class,” Oct. 27). Hmm. Does he think that no one could catch the incongruity of this?

He points out that the Delaware courts have denied several bills passed by the majority party. Does he really not know how the three branches of government work? Does he really not know that Republican-majority legislatures across the country also frequently get their acts denied by their state courts? This is how it is supposed to work, and it works quite well.

He seems to believe that the filing and discussion of bills with which he disagrees are bad. Again, this is how our glorious, messy government works. He apparently hasn’t noticed that Republicans also file bills that he probably disagrees with.

He recommends that voters talk to candidates and listen to what they say. Do you remember the big issue that he emphasized in his first campaign for state office? I do. And I can tell you that he dropped it like a hot potato shortly after taking office. I also remember his big issue a couple of years ago. Vanished like water vapor when reality set in.

He also says that we should not take national party politics into consideration when voting in Delaware elections. In our conversations, he has been extremely careful to avoid answering any questions about the last presidential election, the GOP and its current front-runner presidential candidate. Maybe he knows that his own base does care. It cares deeply and puts that affiliation and its implied alliance by anyone who runs as a Republican first in their decision making.

Bryan is not a bad person. I think he doesn’t do a terrible job. I wish he didn’t trot the party line so deeply (such as sending out “his” legislative updates that are not actually his, not approved individually by him or managed by him), but that’s politics. I do think we need, at least, a two-party system to ensure that serious debate takes place. Two parties that each represent a continuum and are not scared of their extreme minorities. I pray we can return to that messy, honorable history.

Peggy Schmidt

Milford

Reader reactions, pro or con, are welcomed at civiltalk@iniusa.org.