Election's Not
About Bush

I must respectfully disagree with your assessment of which side of the Congressional "battle lines" Martha Rainville and Rich Tarrant would be on if we elected them to represent us in Washington.

You have rightfully pointed out in your editorial of Oct. 26, that Martha Rainville possesses the needed skills of a successful politician, and that she is "running a strong but always civil campaign, appealing to a broad swath of voters."

She has made it clear in this campaign that she does not always walk in step with the current Republican leadership, (she took on the Pentagon, and won), and that she intends to think independently, and use her head to represent Vermonters and our ideals, not rubber stamp whatever President Bush wants. Her "Republican" label resulted from much broader, more general issues,than from any desire to support Bush's war policies at all costs. I trust her

And Rich Tarrant has indeed shown himself to also be an "independent-minded candidate with many of the most interesting ideas in the campaign." I checked out his health care plan on the Internet. It coordinates the efforts of all the current players in health care, and gives the patient control over his own medical record. His plan makes the most sense of any I have seen proposed, and I would like to see Mr. Tarrant go to Washington and give his plan a national stage, and a chance to work.

If George Bush was runninng for re-election, I could see the reasoning for voting to "drive them out." But this election is not about George Bush. It is about voting for the best person to represent us in Congress, whether s/he is Republican or Democrat. To vote strict "party label" is to continue the same insane deadlock that is crippling the Congress now.

I think that both Martha Rainville and Rich Tarrant will definitely be on "our side, America's side," when the "battle lines" are drawn in Washington.

Ruth Small

West Brookfield