Ballot Initiatives

For discussion of religion and politics

Moderators: LawBeefaroni, $iljanus

User avatar
Kraken
Posts: 43690
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:59 pm
Location: The Hub of the Universe
Contact:

Ballot Initiatives

Post by Kraken »

Massholes face three ballot questions:

Question 1 would repeal the state income tax. It is likely to be defeated by a huge margin. After the same question got 45% of the vote in 1999, the vote-no forces are spending heavily this time. Most of the money comes from teachers unions.

Ironrod intends to vote No on Question 1. Even though it's my nature to oppose government whenever possible (and I voted for it in '99), the state already has enough economic problems without losing 40% of its revenue. My head overrules my heart on this one.

Question 2 would decriminalize possession of one ounce of marijuana. Cops would write a $100 ticket and confiscate your weed instead of arresting you. Underage offenders would be required to undergo counseling. It looks like it will pass, with 51% supporting and only 35% opposed. All of the expected establishment powers oppose it, and support has eroded from 76% a couple of months ago, but with only 12 days left they probably can't frighten us into upholding prohibition.

Ironrod will vote Yes on Question 2. I would become a non-criminal for the first time since I left East Lansing, where the punishment was a $5 ticket.

Question 3 would ban dog racing. WTF? Apparently this one is too close to call. The sad-puppy people seem to have the momentum because Hey look -- sad puppies!

Ironrod will vote No on Question 3 because WTF? Who cares? Gambling is good. Gamblers pay lots of taxes.

Got any interesting ones in your state?
User avatar
The Meal
Posts: 27987
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 10:33 pm
Location: 2005 Stanley Cup Champion

Re: Ballot Initiatives

Post by The Meal »

Colorado faces more ballot initiatives than there are numbers this year. Fourteen (though proponents are only now supporting eleven of them, as the economic downturn has given them pause about their obviously economic-unfriendly initiatives). Nutty.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Co ... _4.2C_2008" target="_blank
Amendment 46: Discrimination and Preferrential Treatment By Governments Adds the following to the State Constitution: "The State shall not discriminate against, or grant preferential treatment to, any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in the operation of public employment, public education, or public contracting." Proposed by a Californian. Linked to a similar proposal in MI that's supported by the KKK. OPPOSE
Amendment 47: Prohibition on Mandatory Labor Union Membership and Dues SUPPORT
Amendment 48: Definition Of Person defines a person to "any human being from the moment of fertilization." in sections of state law OPPOSE
Amendment 49: Allowable Government Paycheck Deductions Disallows automagic withdrawal from Gov't employes' paychecks to pet projects and special interests mild SUPPORT
Amendment 50: Limited Gaming in Central City, Black Hawk, and Cripple Creek Allows local municipalities to increase betting limits on table games, amongst other things, extra taxes go to Community Colleges. strong SUPPORT
Amendment 51: State Sales Tax Increase for Services for People with Developmental Disabilities Adds 0.1% to the state sales tax for specific developmentally disabled programs OPPOSE (at the state level)
Amendment 52: Use of Severance Tax Revenue for Highways Mostly an I-70 expansion SUPPORT
Amendment 53: Criminal Accountability of Business Executives - withdrawn by the sponsors
Amendment 54: Campaign Contributions from Certain Government Contractors SUPPORT
Amendment 55: Allowable Reasons for Employee Discharge or Suspension - withdrawn by the sponsors
Amendment 56: Employer Responsibility for Health Insurance - withdrawn by the sponsors
Amendment 57: Additional Remedies for Injured Employees - withdrawn by the sponsors
Amendment 58: Severance Taxes on the Oil and Natural Gas Industry Increases taxes collected from mining and drilling interests SUPPORT
Amendment 59: Education Funding and TABOR Rebates Adjusts the methods by which the State Education Fund's budget grows OPPOSE
Referendum L: Qualifications For Serving In State Legislature lowers the age requirement to participate in the Colorado State Legislature from 25 to 21. SUPPORT
Referendum M: Obsolete Constitutional Provisions Relating To Land Value Increases
Referendum N: Obsolete Constitutional Provisions Relating To Alcoholic Beverages
Referendum O: Citizen-Initiated State Laws

Locally, we've only got a few to vote on.
http://www.timescall.com/elections/08el ... issues.asp" target="_blank
(County) 1A: Clean Energy Options Local Improvement District Provide more governmental incentives for folks to use renewables SUPPORT
(County 1B: Worthy Cause extension 0.05 percent sales and use tax that provides funds for local human services non-profits to make capital improvements. SUPPORT
(School district) 3A: Mill-levy override Restores cuts made last spring due to budget mismanagement (restoring 85 teaching jobs cut), and beefs up STEM curricula SUPPORT
(School district) 3B: School District Bond Issue adds $189 million in bonds for capital projects, new schools for everyone! OPPOSE
(City) ##: Police and firefighter's union Allow local groups to unionize OPPOSE
(City) ##: Mountain View Fire Protection District Mill-Levy Override More firefighters and equipment SUPPORT
Last edited by The Meal on Fri Oct 24, 2008 12:36 pm, edited 3 times in total.
"Better to talk to people than communicate via tweet." — Elontra
User avatar
Defiant
Posts: 21045
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:09 pm
Location: Tongue in cheek

Re: Ballot Initiatives

Post by Defiant »

The Meal wrote:Colorado faces more ballot initiatives than there are numbers this year.
Proposed: To increase the number of numbers there are from infinity to infinity + the number of ballot measures.

Yes/No
User avatar
LawBeefaroni
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55316
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 3:08 pm
Location: Urbs in Horto, outrageous taxes on everything

Re: Ballot Initiatives

Post by LawBeefaroni »

Top of the ballot:
"For the calling of a Constitutional Convention"
Yes/No.

Not really interesting but it delayed absentee ballots by at least two weeks because a judge ruled that it was confusing. It was argued that it was too late to print new ballots and that it would cost too much anyway. So they fought for weeks and finally decided upon the obvious (to the layman) solution: include a slip of paper explaining the vote for absentee ballots and hand one out to regular voters at the polls. I know this because the wife's absentee ballot arrived well after she left and too late to send across the planet and get it returned in time.

Bottom of the ballot:
"Shall the Illionis Constitution be amended to establish a recall process for th eoffice of Governor and other statewide elected officials?"
Yes/No

Interesting because yet another Illionois Governor is about to get fizzucked.


Also, if anyone is interested, here is our ballot (for our ward/precinct): Ballot in PDF.

A few things to note:
All candidates are ordered this way:
Democrat
Republican
Green
all others.

Enlarge Image
That struck me as odd, I thought they were supposed to do random ordering. But hey, this his Chicago. Note all the Democrat judges.

Also, check page two and see all the judge retention votes. I have to bring a cheat sheet.
" Hey OP, listen to my advice alright." -Tha General
"No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer." -Stigler's Law of Eponymy, discovered by Robert K. Merton

MYT
User avatar
Mr. Fed
Posts: 15111
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:05 pm
Location: Los Angeles, CA

Re: Ballot Initiatives

Post by Mr. Fed »

California faces a dog's breakfast of them, as usual.

The most well-known and controversial is Prop 8, a proposed constitutional amendment to make marriage between a man and a woman only, thus overturning the California Supreme Court's recent ruling.

It's a bitterly fought battle. The no vote was leading strongly for a while, but now it's close, in part because of a flood of money funding effective yes-vote advertisements.

A neighbor actually wrote unsolicited letters to everyone in the neighborhood explaining, in what I found to be insulting terms, why we should vote yes to Protect Our Families against the Gay Agenda. I felt like someone had stuck a burning cross on my lawn.

I drafted a response that began "Dear [word beginning with C that tends to make women flip out]," but the better angels of my nature prevailed.
Popehat, a blog.
User avatar
Exodor
Posts: 17196
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:10 pm
Location: Portland, OR

Re: Ballot Initiatives

Post by Exodor »

As usual Bill Sizemore has been busy so we have a shitton of initiatives here in Oregon


Meas.
num. Const.
Amd.? Ballot title

54 yes standardizes voting eligibility for school board elections with other state and local elections SUPPORT

55 yes changes operative date of redistricting plans; allows affected legislators to finish term in original district SUPPORT

56 yes provides that May and November property tax elections are decided by majority of voters voting SUPPORT

57 yes increases sentences for drug trafficking, theft against elderly and specified repeat property and identity theft crimes; requires addiction treatment for certain offenders. SUPPORT (mainly to defeat #61)

58 no prohibits teaching public school student in language other than English for more than two years

59 no creates an unlimited deduction for federal income taxes on individual taxpayers' Oregon income-tax returns

60 no teacher "classroom performance," not seniority, determines pay raises; "most qualified" teachers retained, regardless of seniority

61 no creates mandatory minimum prison sentences for certain theft, identity theft, forgery, drug, and burglary crimes

62 no allocates 15% of lottery proceeds to public safety fund for crime prevention, investigation, prosecution

63 no exempts specified property owners from building permit requirements for improvements valued at/under 35,000 dollars

64 no penalizes person, entity for using funds collected with "public resource" (defined) for "political purpose" (defined)

65 no changes general election nomination processes for major/minor party, independent candidates for most partisan offices






For non-Oregonians, Bill Sizemore is a local nut who has created a business around gathering signatures. I don't think he really cares much whether his proposals actually pass - he makes his money from the signature gathering necessary to get them on the ballot in the first place.

In fact, he's probably better off if they fail.



The interesting one this time around is #56. Right now we have a "double-majority" requirement in for tax measures. Not only do they have to pass with a majority but a majority of registered voters must cast ballots - so anyone who fails to vote is in effect voting no. It's puppies.
User avatar
tjg_marantz
Posts: 14688
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 12:54 pm
Location: Queen City, SK

Re: Ballot Initiatives

Post by tjg_marantz »

Okay I have a question. I our election, we had 1 question, who the fuck was gonna win. We had 4 or 5 options and that was it.

All these propositions you guys are voting on... euh, how can I put this? Shouldn't the guys that were elected be making these decisions??? I mean, essentially, you elect people to make these decisions no? *headscratch*

Also, is that PDF ballot representative of all ballots? Fill the arrow type? And these are the ballots people have trouble filling out? If so, in what sense? Can't draw a straight line or...?

Help a frenchie out.
Home of the Akimbo AWPs
User avatar
Kraken
Posts: 43690
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:59 pm
Location: The Hub of the Universe
Contact:

Re: Ballot Initiatives

Post by Kraken »

Wow. California is famous for government-by-initiative, but I didn't realize that Colorado and Oregon are so question-happy. Three questions are about all the democracy I can stomach (Dem candidates usually run unopposed here, so there are only a few contested races, and most of those are pro forma).
User avatar
LawBeefaroni
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55316
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 3:08 pm
Location: Urbs in Horto, outrageous taxes on everything

Re: Ballot Initiatives

Post by LawBeefaroni »

tjg_marantz wrote: Also, is that PDF ballot representative of all ballots? Fill the arrow type? And these are the ballots people have trouble filling out? If so, in what sense? Can't draw a straight line or...?

Help a frenchie out.
It's not representative. There dozens, perhaps hundreds of different ballot styles. I haven't heard of problems with the line ballots but IIRC, this is only the second time they've been in use here.
" Hey OP, listen to my advice alright." -Tha General
"No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer." -Stigler's Law of Eponymy, discovered by Robert K. Merton

MYT
User avatar
The Meal
Posts: 27987
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 10:33 pm
Location: 2005 Stanley Cup Champion

Re: Ballot Initiatives

Post by The Meal »

Ironrod wrote:Wow. California is famous for government-by-initiative, but I didn't realize that Colorado and Oregon are so question-happy. Three questions are about all the democracy I can stomach (Dem candidates usually run unopposed here, so there are only a few contested races, and most of those are pro forma).
Yeah, ballotpedia says:
Colorado was to have more initiatives (14) on the November 2008 ballot than on any previous year's ballot since 1912, when 22 initiatives were put before voters.
This raises the question: WTF was wrong with Coloradans back in 1912?!?
Colorado Measure 1 (1912). Prohibition. Failed.
Colorado Measure 2 (1912). Enforcement of prohibition through search and seizure. Failed.
Colorado Measure 3 (1912). Women's eight-hour employment law. Passed.
Colorado Measure 4 (1912). Regulation of public service corporations. Failed.
Colorado Measure 5 (1912). Establish a state fair. Failed.
Colorado Measure 6 (1912). Special funds for state immigration bureau. Failed.
Colorado Measure 7 (1912). Reduce publishing costs associated with constitutional amendments. Failed.
Colorado Measure 8 (1912). Home rule to cities and towns. Passed.
Colorado Measure 9 (1912). Laws governing recall of politicians. Passed.
Colorado Measure 10 (1912). Amending election laws. Failed.
Colorado Measure 11 (1912). Proposal to hold special elections for I&R measures. Failed.
Colorado Measure 12 (1912). Definition of contempt of court. Failed.
Colorado Measure 13 (1912). Establish court to deal with public utilities. Failed.
Colorado Measure 14 (1912). Amend election law to create a "headless ballot". Passed.
Colorado Measure 15 (1912). Popular control of schools. Failed.
Colorado Measure 16 (1912). Create juvenile courts in cities, counties over 100,000. Passed.
Colorado Measure 17 (1912). Aid to dependent children. Passed.
Colorado Measure 18 (1912). Amendment of civil service law. Passed.
Colorado Measure 19 (1912). Eight hour work day for miners and other underground laborers. Passed.
Colorado Measure 20 (1912). Funds for state highway commission. Failed.
Colorado Measure 31 (1912). Bonds for state highways. Failed.
Colorado Measure 32 (1912). Construction of tunnel through James Peak. Failed.
Wacky.
"Better to talk to people than communicate via tweet." — Elontra
User avatar
YellowKing
Posts: 30126
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 2:02 pm

Re: Ballot Initiatives

Post by YellowKing »

We have absolutely no state ballot measures this year. Big fat goose egg.
User avatar
pr0ner
Posts: 17424
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2004 3:00 pm
Location: Northern Virginia, VA
Contact:

Re: Ballot Initiatives

Post by pr0ner »

Exodor:

You said this: 60 no teacher "classroom performance," not seniority, determines pay raises; "most qualified" teachers retained, regardless of seniority

Does the no mean you think teachers should get pay raises only because of seniority, and not classroom performance? And that seniority should hold priority as to whether a teacher gets retained, not said teacher's actual job performance?
Hodor.
User avatar
LordMortis
Posts: 70101
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:26 pm

Re: Ballot Initiatives

Post by LordMortis »

Wow. We usually get like a maximum of four.

We have two this year:

http://www.michigan.gov/documents/State ... 5801_7.pdf" target="_blank

1) legalize medical marijuana - I am actually debating voting against this. Not because I disagee with it. Not in the least but because I don't think it goes far enough. In the end I probably will vote for it. There is no ad campaigning about it all. It should be a gimme, I'd guess.
2) limit Stem Cell researh - I am voting yes to these limits. The funny thing is both side are up in arms about this. The wording seems clear to me. 1) Follow federal laws. 2) Make them a tiny bit more strict. 3) Prohibit laws that furthrer limit research. I like it. Neither side seems like they are being honest in this. The vote no people are downright lying about it and doing so left and right again. Claiming that the amendment places the burden of funding stem cell research in the public/tax payer.
User avatar
ChrisGwinn
Posts: 10396
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 7:23 pm
Location: Rake Trinket
Contact:

Re: Ballot Initiatives

Post by ChrisGwinn »

We've got a statewide sales tax increase with funds dedicated to natural resources and cultural stuff. I'm going to vote no because I hate constitutional requirements for funding.

There's a city initiative to change the way our school board is structured. I don't entirely understand why people want to do it, so I still need to do some research.
User avatar
LawBeefaroni
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55316
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 3:08 pm
Location: Urbs in Horto, outrageous taxes on everything

Re: Ballot Initiatives

Post by LawBeefaroni »

The Meal wrote:
This raises the question: WTF was wrong with Coloradans back in 1912?!?
Nearly 10 years of women voting?
" Hey OP, listen to my advice alright." -Tha General
"No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer." -Stigler's Law of Eponymy, discovered by Robert K. Merton

MYT
User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 82094
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:

Re: Ballot Initiatives

Post by Isgrimnur »

pr0ner wrote:Exodor:

You said this: 60 no teacher "classroom performance," not seniority, determines pay raises; "most qualified" teachers retained, regardless of seniority

Does the no mean you think teachers should get pay raises only because of seniority, and not classroom performance? And that seniority should hold priority as to whether a teacher gets retained, not said teacher's actual job performance?
Meas.
num. Const.
Amd.?
Ballot title
I believe that refers to whether or not it is going as a Constitutional amendment, not his position.
It's almost as if people are the problem.
User avatar
Exodor
Posts: 17196
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:10 pm
Location: Portland, OR

Re: Ballot Initiatives

Post by Exodor »

pr0ner wrote:Exodor:

You said this: 60 no teacher "classroom performance," not seniority, determines pay raises; "most qualified" teachers retained, regardless of seniority

Does the no mean you think teachers should get pay raises only because of seniority, and not classroom performance? And that seniority should hold priority as to whether a teacher gets retained, not said teacher's actual job performance?
If the measure passes then seniority will no longer be used to determine teacher retention and raises - only "performance". Performance is assumed to be defined as test scores.

If it fails then the current system that's based mainly on seniority will remain.


It's yet another big FU from Sizemore to the teacher's union. They've been locked in mortal combat for years.

I believe that refers to whether or not it is going as a Constitutional amendment, not his position.
That's correct. The formatting is funky because I lazily cut and paste-ed from Wikipedia.

I started noting which measures I support before I ran out of time and had to go to work.
Last edited by Exodor on Fri Oct 24, 2008 4:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Koz
Posts: 5024
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 10:38 am
Location: Maine

Re: Ballot Initiatives

Post by Koz »

There's two for Maine.

One (although it's question 2) is whether or not to allow some big Las Vegas company to build a resort-style casino in Oxford County (read: Bumfuck, Maine from someone who lives in Maine). I plan to vote yes on this. The state should make a lot of money in taxes and it should produce up to 1000+ jobs which that area badly needs. Only downside is that the company making the casino is out-of-state and that it's not clear how many out-of-staters will be doing the actual gambling.

The second involves repealing a new tax on beverages (alcohol and soda). The new tax was made to fund the state health plan. I'm undecided on this at the moment. On the one hand I don't really care about restaurants having to foot a relatively small amount as I rarely go out to eat. On the other hand, the tax directly impacts tourism, which is Maine's #1 money-maker. Also, the health plan that the tax funds is pretty poorly managed and I'm not convinced it's mostly a waste in the first place. Of course if the tax is repealed they will probably just up property taxes and the like since they aren't going to reduce funding on the health plan.
User avatar
Mr. Sparkle
Posts: 12022
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 2:25 pm
Location: Cambridge, MA

Re: Ballot Initiatives

Post by Mr. Sparkle »

Ironrod did the questions:

1. No
2. Yes
3. Yes

The first two are easy. On the third, I'm not 100% convinced that greyhound racing qualifies as mistreatment of animals in and of itself(regulate in more protections if necessary, but banning?), and I'm generally loathe to ban stuff outright... but I live with a vegan and don't want to sleep on the couch, so "yes" it is.
My blog: Chimpanzee Tea Party

"Osama Bin Laden can suck my insouciance." -Kung Fu Monkey
User avatar
Kraken
Posts: 43690
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:59 pm
Location: The Hub of the Universe
Contact:

Re: Ballot Initiatives

Post by Kraken »

LordMortis wrote:
1) legalize medical marijuana - I am actually debating voting against this. Not because I disagee with it. Not in the least but because I don't think it goes far enough.
The perfect is the enemy of the good. There was some early opposition to our decriminalization proposal, too, for similar reasons (it doesn't go far enough and will destroy momentum for further reforms). I say, take what you can get when you can get it.
Mr. Sparkle wrote:On the third, I'm not 100% convinced that greyhound racing qualifies as mistreatment of animals in and of itself(regulate in more protections if necessary, but banning?), and I'm generally loathe to ban stuff outright... but I live with a vegan and don't want to sleep on the couch, so "yes" it is.
:lol: So you pretty much agree with my assessment ("WTF?"), but drew the opposite conclusion? I honestly don't care about this one way or the other. I'm voting No on the general principle of limiting government interference in private vices...taxable private vices. Anything that tricks the uneducated into voluntarily paying more taxes is fine with me. Plus I hate to think of all those poor doggies becoming unemployed. Won't somebody please think of the puppies?

Abolishing the income tax is very tempting. If the economy were stable, I'd go for it, as I did in '99. We could desperately use a 5.3% raise right now and, as my wife points out, Massachusetts has the worst-run government of any state that we've lived in, so taking it down a few pegs would be very satisfying. I'm voting No for three reasons: (1) the state is already in a world of financial hurt without this; (2) the legislature is so arrogant that they would surely find a way to circumvent it, just as they overruled the tax rate rollback a few years ago; and (3) the threatened cuts and layoffs would reflect seniority, cronyism, and patronage rather than merit or competence.
User avatar
Mr. Sparkle
Posts: 12022
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 2:25 pm
Location: Cambridge, MA

Re: Ballot Initiatives

Post by Mr. Sparkle »

Ironrod wrote::lol: So you pretty much agree with my assessment ("WTF?"), but drew the opposite conclusion? I honestly don't care about this one way or the other.
Yeah, I don't really care one way or the other, but I figure while it's conceivable to me that people could race their dogs in a humane manner, it's unlikely to happen as part of the gambling industry... the only reason I'm slightly hesitant about the ban, is that dog lovers can be a pretty kooky and I wonder how much is exaggerated... but since I don't feel like doing the actual research and watching the videos of dogs getting hurt racing, I'm just going to take the default liberal position that promotes apartment harmony.
My blog: Chimpanzee Tea Party

"Osama Bin Laden can suck my insouciance." -Kung Fu Monkey
User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 82094
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:

Re: Ballot Initiatives

Post by Isgrimnur »

Authorizing the Dallas County Hospital District [d/b/a Parkland Health and Hospital System] to pledge the revenues from its hospital system and from the ad valorem tax that was previously approved by the voters to the payment of combination tax and revenue bonds and other obligations that will be issued and executed for the capital purposes of the hospital system.
Shorthand: $747 million bond program to:
  • Construct an 862 adult-bed hospital that serves as a full service acute care hospital and houses a Level I Trauma Center and Burn Center
  • Construct an outpatient center adjacent to the hospital
  • Construct office buildings near the hospital
  • Reconfigure parking
Sure, why the heck not?
It's almost as if people are the problem.
User avatar
hitbyambulance
Posts: 10233
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 3:51 am
Location: Map Ref 47.6°N 122.35°W
Contact:

Re: Ballot Initiatives

Post by hitbyambulance »

Ironrod wrote:Question 3 would ban dog racing. WTF? Apparently this one is too close to call. The sad-puppy people seem to have the momentum because Hey look -- sad puppies!

Ironrod will vote No on Question 3 because WTF? Who cares? Gambling is good. Gamblers pay lots of taxes.
racing greyhounds are kept in their crates 23 hours a day, and any 'under-performing' dogs are killed. doesn't sound like something that should be allowed in a civilized society.
User avatar
gameoverman
Posts: 5908
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2005 2:21 pm
Location: Glendora, CA

Re: Ballot Initiatives

Post by gameoverman »

tjg_marantz wrote:Okay I have a question. I our election, we had 1 question, who the fuck was gonna win. We had 4 or 5 options and that was it.

All these propositions you guys are voting on... euh, how can I put this? Shouldn't the guys that were elected be making these decisions??? I mean, essentially, you elect people to make these decisions no? *headscratch*

Also, is that PDF ballot representative of all ballots? Fill the arrow type? And these are the ballots people have trouble filling out? If so, in what sense? Can't draw a straight line or...?

Help a frenchie out.
What if you have an issue you'd like addressed and no one in political office has any interest in addressing it? Should you just kick a rock with the side of your foot, say "aw shucks" and walk away?

OR

Should you also get to try to raise the signatures, and any other qualifying requirements, so that the people can vote on your issue- whether the politicians like it or not. There is no guarantee of course, that your issue will make it to the ballot, but you have a path to getting it there if you are willing to work at it.

I think having two ways to accomplishing your goal is a big plus. And even though I very much support the right for adults to marry each other(legally, as religion is separate from the state), I also recognize that a lot of people want an official restrictive definition set as law. So let's have a vote.
User avatar
Kraken
Posts: 43690
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:59 pm
Location: The Hub of the Universe
Contact:

Re: Ballot Initiatives

Post by Kraken »

hitbyambulance wrote:
Ironrod wrote:Question 3 would ban dog racing. WTF? Apparently this one is too close to call. The sad-puppy people seem to have the momentum because Hey look -- sad puppies!

Ironrod will vote No on Question 3 because WTF? Who cares? Gambling is good. Gamblers pay lots of taxes.
racing greyhounds are kept in their crates 23 hours a day, and any 'under-performing' dogs are killed. doesn't sound like something that should be allowed in a civilized society.
That's what the pro- side says. The anti- side says that's puppies; what you described is counterproductive to keeping dogs in peak condition. I know there aren't free-range greyhounds frolicking in Revere, but the cruelty charges sound like PETA propaganda to me. Greyhounds certainly do have a better retirement plan than I have. Convince me otherwise.
User avatar
naednek
Posts: 10866
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 9:23 pm

Re: Ballot Initiatives

Post by naednek »

The Meal wrote:Colorado faces more ballot initiatives than there are numbers this year. Fourteen (though proponents are only now supporting eleven of them, as the economic downturn has given them pause about their obviously economic-unfriendly initiatives). Nutty.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Co ... _4.2C_2008" target="_blank
Amendment 46: Discrimination and Preferrential Treatment By Governments Adds the following to the State Constitution: "The State shall not discriminate against, or grant preferential treatment to, any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in the operation of public employment, public education, or public contracting." Proposed by a Californian. Linked to a similar proposal in MI that's supported by the KKK. OPPOSE
Amendment 47: Prohibition on Mandatory Labor Union Membership and Dues SUPPORT
Amendment 48: Definition Of Person defines a person to "any human being from the moment of fertilization." in sections of state law OPPOSE
Amendment 49: Allowable Government Paycheck Deductions Disallows automagic withdrawal from Gov't employes' paychecks to pet projects and special interests mild SUPPORT
Amendment 50: Limited Gaming in Central City, Black Hawk, and Cripple Creek Allows local municipalities to increase betting limits on table games, amongst other things, extra taxes go to Community Colleges. strong SUPPORT
Amendment 51: State Sales Tax Increase for Services for People with Developmental Disabilities Adds 0.1% to the state sales tax for specific developmentally disabled programs OPPOSE (at the state level)
Amendment 52: Use of Severance Tax Revenue for Highways Mostly an I-70 expansion SUPPORT
Amendment 53: Criminal Accountability of Business Executives - withdrawn by the sponsors
Amendment 54: Campaign Contributions from Certain Government Contractors SUPPORT
Amendment 55: Allowable Reasons for Employee Discharge or Suspension - withdrawn by the sponsors
Amendment 56: Employer Responsibility for Health Insurance - withdrawn by the sponsors
Amendment 57: Additional Remedies for Injured Employees - withdrawn by the sponsors
Amendment 58: Severance Taxes on the Oil and Natural Gas Industry Increases taxes collected from mining and drilling interests SUPPORT
Amendment 59: Education Funding and TABOR Rebates Adjusts the methods by which the State Education Fund's budget grows OPPOSE
Referendum L: Qualifications For Serving In State Legislature lowers the age requirement to participate in the Colorado State Legislature from 25 to 21. SUPPORT
Referendum M: Obsolete Constitutional Provisions Relating To Land Value Increases
Referendum N: Obsolete Constitutional Provisions Relating To Alcoholic Beverages
Referendum O: Citizen-Initiated State Laws

Locally, we've only got a few to vote on.
http://www.timescall.com/elections/08el ... issues.asp" target="_blank
(County) 1A: Clean Energy Options Local Improvement District Provide more governmental incentives for folks to use renewables SUPPORT
(County 1B: Worthy Cause extension 0.05 percent sales and use tax that provides funds for local human services non-profits to make capital improvements. SUPPORT
(School district) 3A: Mill-levy override Restores cuts made last spring due to budget mismanagement (restoring 85 teaching jobs cut), and beefs up STEM curricula SUPPORT
(School district) 3B: School District Bond Issue adds $189 million in bonds for capital projects, new schools for everyone! OPPOSE
(City) ##: Police and firefighter's union Allow local groups to unionize OPPOSE
(City) ##: Mountain View Fire Protection District Mill-Levy Override More firefighters and equipment SUPPORT

Wow and I thought California had a lot of propositions. That's crazy.
hepcat - "I agree with Naednek"
User avatar
Fireball
Posts: 4762
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:43 pm

Re: Ballot Initiatives

Post by Fireball »

Isgrimnur wrote:
Authorizing the Dallas County Hospital District [d/b/a Parkland Health and Hospital System] to pledge the revenues from its hospital system and from the ad valorem tax that was previously approved by the voters to the payment of combination tax and revenue bonds and other obligations that will be issued and executed for the capital purposes of the hospital system.
Shorthand: $747 million bond program to:
  • Construct an 862 adult-bed hospital that serves as a full service acute care hospital and houses a Level I Trauma Center and Burn Center
  • Construct an outpatient center adjacent to the hospital
  • Construct office buildings near the hospital
  • Reconfigure parking
Sure, why the heck not?
I voted YES on the Parkland proposition.

Our early vote ballots in Texas are computer ballots, on election day they're fill-in-the-bubble scantrons. Here's a rundown of the possible items on your ballot if you live in Dallas County, Texas:

http://www.dalcoelections.org/nov42008/Sampleballot.pdf" target="_blank
Wed Oct 20, 2004 1:17 am
Zarathud: The sad thing is that Barak Obama is a very intelligent and articulate person, even when you disagree with his views it's clear that he's very thoughtful. I would have loved to see Obama in a real debate.
Me: Wait 12 years, when he runs for president. :-)
User avatar
pr0ner
Posts: 17424
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2004 3:00 pm
Location: Northern Virginia, VA
Contact:

Re: Ballot Initiatives

Post by pr0ner »

Scantrons! :wub:
Hodor.
User avatar
The Meal
Posts: 27987
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 10:33 pm
Location: 2005 Stanley Cup Champion

Re: Ballot Initiatives

Post by The Meal »

naednek wrote:That's crazy.
There were fifteen boxes available for me to fill in when voting for Prez/VP (did the early voting thing last Saturday so I could install the robo-call filter on the phone). At least the names of all the wannabes are shorter than the ungrokked text used to spell out the initiatives...
"Better to talk to people than communicate via tweet." — Elontra
User avatar
AWS260
Posts: 12665
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2006 12:51 pm
Location: Brooklyn

Re: Ballot Initiatives

Post by AWS260 »

Just one ballot proposal in NY that I'm aware of, "to eliminate the requirement that disabled veterans be receiving disability payments in order to qualify for extra credit on civil service examinations." Not exactly scintillating stuff. I'll be voting yes, and I expect that it will pass easily.
User avatar
Kraken
Posts: 43690
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:59 pm
Location: The Hub of the Universe
Contact:

Re: Ballot Initiatives

Post by Kraken »

I learned today that my town has a fourth question, which is nonbinding: Should we instruct our representatives to support Cape Wind, and the expansion of wind power in general? My wife says No, it's bad for the Cape. I say Yes, because screw the Cape. (Seriously, I think her information about the environmental impact is out of date). We have a few days to try to convince each other not to cancel our votes on that one.
User avatar
Kraken
Posts: 43690
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:59 pm
Location: The Hub of the Universe
Contact:

Re: Ballot Initiatives

Post by Kraken »

I'm a decriminal! Question 2 passed, 65-35, so Mass. joins 13 other states in making simple possession of marijuana a civil infraction. I'm surprised by the margin -- all of TPTB lined up against it. If I were a rich man I'd buy me a joint and smoke it in front of the local cop shop. The celebration would be worth the $100 ticket.

We voted overwhelmingly (about 70-30) to keep the income tax, to nobody's surprise. The sour economy killed that one.

It looks like we outlawed dog racing by a small margin. Whatever.

How did your initiatives do? Any surprises?
User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 82094
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:

Re: Ballot Initiatives

Post by Isgrimnur »

It was a landslide approval for the Parkland hospital bond election, 82-17

And congrats to Fireball, as his candidate won re-election in the Sheriff's race, 55-45 (581 of 708 Precincts Reporting)
It's almost as if people are the problem.
User avatar
hitbyambulance
Posts: 10233
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 3:51 am
Location: Map Ref 47.6°N 122.35°W
Contact:

Re: Ballot Initiatives

Post by hitbyambulance »

the stupid Tim Eyman "open-up-the-HOV-lanes-to-single-passenger-cars" initiative died the swift death it deserved. also, Washington is now the second state in the nation to allow terminally ill patients the choice to die via physician-prescribed means during their last 6 months of life. that's good enuff for me.
User avatar
JC Anejo
Posts: 961
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 10:16 pm
Location: Cape Cod

Re: Ballot Initiatives

Post by JC Anejo »

Ironrod wrote: It looks like we outlawed dog racing by a small margin. Whatever.

Unfortunately that one is not a "whatever" to anyone involved wth raising or competing in any event with their dogs as it was just the point attack in the HSUS attempts to do a way with the raising of pure bred dogs and what they call the exploitation of all animals.

Yes the greyhounds were not treated as well in the past as they should be, much better here then other states. After the last failed vote on banning it, actual rules were created on the conditions the animals should be kept the MSPCA who was asked to be involvedand they refused to give any real help and instead moved forward to with this attempt to get it banned. In the years between the votes the MSPCA could not find any reason to file cruelty charges.

As someone who is in the industry of dogs it was a very hard to speak out to the General public about what was going on here with this. A kennel couldn't put out a sign saying to vote against the dogswho would board with me. I talked to everyone I could one on one and that always went well but signs on the yard would have killed me althougheverywhere they could put out save the dogs signs.

I had no problem with better rules if that was needed but banning things just because you don't like things is a very slippery slope. THE HSUS doesn't want us to fish, hunt or do anything "unnatural" with are animals.

The fact that just because someone doesn’t treat their animals exactly the way you would doesn’t make it wrong. Beware the humanizing of animals you won’t like the end of the story.
User avatar
Al
Posts: 2233
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 11:46 am

WWJD? Lie about the education system, apparently.

Post by Al »

They're still counting the votes but it looks like the bigots won here in California. On a more positive note the redistricting proposition still has a very, very, very narrow lead.
User avatar
The Meal
Posts: 27987
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 10:33 pm
Location: 2005 Stanley Cup Champion

Re: Ballot Initiatives

Post by The Meal »

Amendment 46: Discrimination and Preferrential Treatment By Governments Adds the following to the State Constitution: "The State shall not discriminate against, or grant preferential treatment to, any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in the operation of public employment, public education, or public contracting." Proposed by a Californian. Linked to a similar proposal in MI that's supported by the KKK. TOO CLOSE TO CALL
Amendment 47: Prohibition on Mandatory Labor Union Membership and Dues FAIL
Amendment 48: Definition Of Person defines a person to "any human being from the moment of fertilization." in sections of state law FAIL
Amendment 49: Allowable Government Paycheck Deductions Disallows automagic withdrawal from Gov't employes' paychecks to pet projects and special interests mild FAIL
Amendment 50: Limited Gaming in Central City, Black Hawk, and Cripple Creek Allows local municipalities to increase betting limits on table games, amongst other things, extra taxes go to Community Colleges. strong PASS
Amendment 51: State Sales Tax Increase for Services for People with Developmental Disabilities Adds 0.1% to the state sales tax for specific developmentally disabled programs FAIL
Amendment 52: Use of Severance Tax Revenue for Highways Mostly an I-70 expansion FAIL
Amendment 54: Campaign Contributions from Certain Government Contractors TOO CLOSE TO CALL
Amendment 58: Severance Taxes on the Oil and Natural Gas Industry Increases taxes collected from mining and drilling interests FAIL
Amendment 59: Education Funding and TABOR Rebates Adjusts the methods by which the State Education Fund's budget grows FAIL
Referendum L: Qualifications For Serving In State Legislature lowers the age requirement to participate in the Colorado State Legislature from 25 to 21. FAIL

Locally, we've only got a few to vote on.
http://www.timescall.com/elections/08el ... issues.asp" target="_blank
(County) 1A: Clean Energy Options Local Improvement District Provide more governmental incentives for folks to use renewables PASS
(County 1B: Worthy Cause extension 0.05 percent sales and use tax that provides funds for local human services non-profits to make capital improvements. PASS
(School district) 3A: Mill-levy override Restores cuts made last spring due to budget mismanagement (restoring 85 teaching jobs cut), and beefs up STEM curricula PASS
(School district) 3B: School District Bond Issue adds $189 million in bonds for capital projects, new schools for everyone! LIKELY PASS
(City) ##: Police and firefighter's union Allow local groups to unionize TOO CLOSE TO CALL
(City) ##: Mountain View Fire Protection District Mill-Levy Override More firefighters and equipment CAN'T FIND RESULTS YET[/quote]
"Better to talk to people than communicate via tweet." — Elontra
User avatar
Moliere
Posts: 12297
Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 10:57 am
Location: Walking through a desert land

Re: Ballot Initiatives

Post by Moliere »

Arizona got it mostly right.

Prop 100 - Protect Our Homes
YES 76.9
NO 23.1

Prop 101 - Medical Choice for Arizona
NO 50.1
YES 49.9
(disappointing that people vote against the concept of being allowed to pay for your own health care)

Prop 102 - Marriage
YES 56.4
NO 43.6
(anti-gay marriage is so 20th century)

Prop 105 - Majority Rules - Let the People Decide
NO 65.8
YES 34.2
(strange that people vote against the idea of making it harder to raise their taxes)

Prop 200 - Payday Loan Reform Act
NO 59.5
YES 40.5

Prop 201 - Homeowners' Bill of Rights Committee
NO 78.0
YES 22.0

Prop 202 - Stop Illegal Hiring
NO 59.1
YES 40.9

Prop 300 - State Legislator's Salaries
NO 64.5
YES 35.5
"The world is suffering more today from the good people who want to mind other men's business than it is from the bad people who are willing to let everybody look after their own individual affairs." - Clarence Darrow
Dan_Theman
Posts: 4714
Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 4:43 pm

Re: WWJD? Lie about the education system, apparently.

Post by Dan_Theman »

Al wrote:They're still counting the votes but it looks like the bigots won here in California. On a more positive note the redistricting proposition still has a very, very, very narrow lead.
I still hope that if that fails, someone would place an issue stripping marital status as something that grants rights. It would never pass, but maybe - just maybe - the juxtaposition would get a few more people thinking about their stance so that sometime in the future it might be taken off the books.

Anyway, for Ohio:

Issues 5 & 6 were seen as the two "sexy" issues this time around, generating fairly large media campaigns. Regardless, not many people felt their outcomes were ever in much doubt:
  • Issue 1: requires an earlier filing deadline for ballot issues - PASSED
  • Issue 2: a plan to issue $400 million in state bonds to pay for conservation projects - PASSED
  • Issue 3: rewords and slightly expands a landowner's rights of "reasonable use" of groundwater running through their property - PASSED
  • Issue 4: taken off the ballot due to issues with the validity of the petitions - oops!
  • Issue 5: limits payday lenders to a 28% intereste rate on their loans (instead of 391%, which equated to $15 interest per $100 for a two-week loan), effectively putting them out of business - PASSED
  • Issue 6: allows a single casino to be built - FAILED

Issue 5 dealt with the controversial payday lending industry. The rates wre atrocious, but given the default rate of those types of loans they were considered to be appropriate in past legislation. Furthermore, it was determined that those loans did provide a useful service to the public. That said, they were horribly abused by individuals who would routinely put themselves in deeper holes they wouldn't be able to get out of. It was not uncommon for a person to go from one payday lending institution to another to another to keep paying off prior loans. One measure of this bill would have stopped the practice by instituting a statewide database that would limit people to four such high-interest/short-term loans a year, regardless of which institution provided them. Of course, capping the interest rate at 28% made it a moot point for most of the hole-in-the-wall loan stores to keep operating, as the interest rate over a two week period for $100 would garner such a company about $1. In the end, most saw the measure as a way to vote these institutions out of being. This one passed by a ratio of almost 2 - to - 1 (63% voted "yes" to limit payday lending institutions).

Of course, Issue 6 (that would allow the first casino to be built in the state) met its stiffest organized opposition by a conglomerate of casinos from neighboring states. They took out a huge number of ad buys to avoid losing all of their Ohio business. The measue failed by nearly a 2 - to 1 margin (63% voted "no"). Two mindsets seemed to work against it: people either voted out of a sense of morality ("Um, gambling, you see ... it's bad") or outrage due to some misinformation in the ads (indicating that Ohio wouldn't get any tax money, which wasn't the case).
User avatar
Kraken
Posts: 43690
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:59 pm
Location: The Hub of the Universe
Contact:

Re: Ballot Initiatives

Post by Kraken »

JC Anejo wrote:
Ironrod wrote: It looks like we outlawed dog racing by a small margin. Whatever.
Unfortunately that one is not a "whatever" to anyone involved wth raising or competing in any event with their dogs as it was just the point attack in the HSUS attempts to do a way with the raising of pure bred dogs and what they call the exploitation of all animals.
FWIW I voted No on that one. It's just more unnecessary government intrusion to eliminate 1000 jobs and a juicy source of tax dollars. But I don't think the "No" faction made a good enough case to counter the "sad puppies" approach from the Yes side. I never once heard the argument that you just made, for example.

The Globe's coverage today raised the possibility that the legislature will overturn or gut marijuana decriminalization. TPTB are all aligned against it, and the legislature works for (and is) TPTB. Screw the popular will.
Post Reply