To the editor: Charlton’s vote sorely disappointing
The Chester Telegraph | Feb 09, 2026 | Comments 7
I’ve never had the opportunity to chat with state Rep. Tom Charlton, but my impressions from afar have been pretty positive. That said, I’m very disappointed in my state representative right now.
Just as I was thinking that more people are seeing the true colors of the Trump administration and about how to bridge our political divide, Tom cast his vote against supporting our governor’s statements condemning the Trump administration’s virtual invasion of Minneapolis-St Paul.
It’s hard to understand what he was thinking, or why, but here are some things I’m now wondering about. Has he taken time to review our Bill of Rights recently? At a minimum we’ve seen the first, second, fourth, fifth and 14th amendment rights of individuals repeatedly violated in Minneapolis in recent weeks.
I believe it’s not only the right, but it’s the duty of Americans to stand up for the rule of law and to defend the rights granted by our Constitution to every person on American soil. We should be able to do both without being attacked and killed by law enforcement agents. On this point I think we all agree.
Surely Tom’s not suggesting that the murders of peacefully protesting citizens are somehow their own fault as the Trump administration attempted to do, is he? Does he think it’s appropriate that law enforcement practice to hide the identities of those federal agents who are the public faces of the administration?
Does he believe it’s effective to allow a law enforcement agency to investigate itself when being accused of unlawful activities?
Would he agree with our vice president’s assertion that ICE and CBP agents are entitled to full immunity for any actions while on duty?
If you think I’m out of line with any of this, please take a couple of minutes to read the House Resolution here. Afterward I think you’ll be asking yourself how any Constitution-loving American could ever oppose a single word of it.
I love the Constitution that’s kept our republic intact for 240 years. I want to bridge our political divide. That’s where I’m coming from, and that’s what I find so disappointing about Charlton’s “nay” vote.
Tim Roper
Chester
Filed Under: Commentary • Letters to the Editor
Just to be clear. Tom Charlton does not “stand for us all”. I sure hope there is “common ground” ahead for us as Mr. Roper spoke about.
Hi Randy,
I’m not tearing anyone down. That’s not me. I don’t do that. There’s far too much at stake here to waste energy on being unkind to one another.
This letter is simply me stating the reasons I’m so disappointed in Tom’s vote against the House Resolution. I’m seeking some common ground and hoping we can now find that. We need to pull together and stand up for the Constitution that our great nation was built upon and that has survived many tests to this point. Let’s lean back on it to pull us through again. Now. Together.
I would of thought by now people would know who and what Tom Charlton is and who he stands for! Tom stands for all of us and works very hard to understanding issues. Some people want to just label him for there own agenda? If you take the time to talk to our very open state rep as well as our long time Chester resident. You will find a kind and caring man who does represent us all. If you are looking for someone who shares your views 100% good luck with that.if you are looking to tear down a good and hard working man? My question is? Why?
Very good, Mr. Roper.
Hi Kelly,
I found, read and considered Tom’s explanation well before writing this LTE. Here’s the primary point of divergence for me: “…call on all parties to de-escalate confrontational action and inflammatory rhetoric.”
As another disappointed citizen wrote,”It sounded remarkably like telling a battered wife that she just needs to “behave” to avoid trouble.”
In other words: Don’t you dare question me because you know full well that makes me mad! Stay out of my way and you won’t get hurt. Shut your mouth and you won’t get shot. I don’t care about your Constitutional rights!
So, I find Tom’s position to be indefensible and attempting to defend it is not only tone deaf, it’s a pretty poor reflection on anyone attempting to do so.
Here is Rep Charlton’s explanation of his vote recorded in the House Journal on 1/29/26 pg 61. ( 2952 Journal of the House)He explained this extensively last night at his Representative update at the town hall in Chester.
Rep. Charlton of Chester provided the following vote explanation: “Madam Speaker: I voted no. I do support the Governor’s prerogative to issue his statement and have no doubt I am very deeply concerned by recent events in Minneapolis. This resolution as written, however, misses an opportunity to call on all parties to de-escalate confrontational action and inflammatory rhetoric. This is one of the first principles of conflict mitigation. With this omission the document falls from being something which may have helped de- escalation to theatrics on an already crowded stage. We can do much better than this. If we think to lead, we must be different.
Mr. Roper, thanks for this. It seems as if Mr. Charlton is just one more trump sycophant.