Public traditions like the Pledge of Allegiance and invocation have long been a part of local government meetings, but should they remain? This week, Clark County Today wants to hear your thoughts!
At a recent Clark County Council meeting, a discussion emerged about whether these traditions should be kept as they are, updated to reflect a more diverse community, or removed to maintain government neutrality. The debate raises important questions about tradition, inclusivity, and the role of public ceremonies in official meetings.
Now, it’s your turn to weigh in! Do you think the Pledge and invocation should stay, change, or go? Cast your vote in our Clark County Today Weekly Poll and let us know where you stand.
More info:
No action taken after county councilor suggests invocation and Pledge of Allegiance are unnecessary
Clark County Council decided to keep the invocation and Pledge of Allegiance after public comments overwhelmingly opposed removing them.
Read more
Also read:
- Opinion: Interstate Bridge replacement – the forever project
Joe Cortright argues the Interstate Bridge Replacement Project could bring tolling and traffic disruptions on I-5 through the mid-2040s. - Opinion: Make your voice heard about the majority party’s state income tax proposal
Rep. John Ley outlines his opposition to Senate Bill 6346 and urges residents to participate in the February 24 public hearing before the House Finance Committee. - Letter: County Council resolution ‘strong on rhetoric, weak on results’
Peter Bracchi calls on the Clark County Council to withdraw its ICE-related resolution and replace it with a measurable public-safety plan. - Opinion: A loss at the Supreme Court
Lars Larson reacts to a Supreme Court decision limiting President Trump’s tariff authority and outlines his view of its economic impact. - POLL: Should Fort Vancouver Regional Libraries prioritize stronger parental oversight for children’s access to materials?
A packed meeting over changes to the Fort Vancouver Regional Libraries strategic plan has sparked debate over parental oversight and children’s access to materials.
