DAILY RELFECTOR: Letter to the Editor

Letter: Butterfield district not a mandate


An area paper (not the Reflector) made me laugh Sunday. The headline “G.K. Butterfield calls for fair redistricting” is most amusing.


He's one who benefits from unfair districting. For him to state, “We've got to make sure the lines are drawn fairly,” shows his arrogance. He stated the Voting Rights Act of 1965 requires the 1st District remain a minority-majority district. This is untrue. North Carolina must have two majority-minority districts but nowhere does it say which ones. Convicted felon Frank Balance drew it just so he could be elected and Butterfield benefited. I am sure Butterfield hopes this district remains gerrymandered because he lost quite a few counties last election.

Districts should be made in accordance with the wishes of our founding fathers. If they were, Butterfield would now be retired and we would have a man of integrity in Washington. We were educated by his opponent's campaign in 2010, bringing to light issues about Butterfield that would have never been known.

One, Butterfield admitted to pocketing taxpayer monies following congressional junkets. You should look into what happened to this money.

Following the election and before the new Congress was sworn in, the ethics office said in a report that Butterfield received excess per diem in four trips between June 2008 and August 2009. It found that he had not returned a total of $1,509 from four trips including visits to Lithuania, Belgium, Pakistan, Kazakhstan, England, Italy, Liberia, Ghana, South Africa and Morocco. The office also found that he used per diem for expenses not for travel, like souvenirs. Has this money been returned to the U.S. Treasury? What was he doing in these exotic places? The district is the fourth poorest in the nation and he is going to these countries? Why? We need to know.

BILL SHAVENDER
Washington, N.C.

http://reflector.cookepublishing.net/opinion/letters/letter-butterfield-district-not-mandate-353748