Bell Curve The Law Talking Guy Raised by Republicans U.S. West
Well, he's kind of had it in for me ever since I accidentally ran over his dog. Actually, replace "accidentally" with "repeatedly," and replace "dog" with "son."

Saturday, October 28, 2006

It's ballot proposition time!

It's that time of year, where I link to a list of who's endorsing which ballot propositions and ask my fellow citizens what they think. Is there anything I should vote "yes" on this year, or should I do what I always do and vote "no" across the board? Discuss in the comments.

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

Whenever I think of ballot propositions, I always flash back to that scene in "History of the World, Part I" (Mel Brooks) where the empress is choosing her guard.
"No, no, no, no, no, no, Yes, no , no ,no, no, no ,no, Yes, no, no , no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no....YES."

When in doubt, vote no.  

// posted by LTG

US West said...

It has taken me 2 weeks to vote. Every time I look at the 100+page guide, I freeze. I actually tried to read the legislative analyst's take on the propositions. What kills me are the ones where the monnies that have been designated have not all been spent, yet they want to issue bonds to get more money. HELLO! I started out saying no to everything, but then I looked at stuff like Prop 86, prop 87, prop 88, prop 90 and my liberal heart said, well, maybe yes on just this one.

Now I am going to vet justices. Great. They don't even do that in the voters' guide. For that, I have to go online.

Dr. Strangelove said...

There are three kinds of propositions or initiatives on the ballot: bond measures, special taxes, and everything else.

Bond Measures. Since bonds cost more than taxes, I only vote for bonds to pay for large, non-recurring expenses (e.g. to build infrastructure). This year there are several bonds on the ballot that look worthy: 1B-1E, so I voted for them. I voted against the other bond measure, Prop. 84, because several purposes listed (e.g. "maintain water quality") look more like ongoing expenses than one-time investments, and it also looked suspiciously like a grab-bag.

Special Taxes. Propositions 86-89 are special-purpose taxes. 86 taxes cigarette smokers to pay for random health-care; 87 taxes oil companies to pay for alternative energy research; 88 adds another property tax for specific education expenses; and 89 raises the corporate tax rate to pay for public financing of campaigns. Though it was a close call, I voted for 86 because in the end I don't mind requiring those who smoke to help pay for some of the health care costs their actions impose on the rest of us. I voted proudly for 87 because (despite the fear ads) it is not expected to raise fuel prices and we desperately need the funding for alternative energy. I voted against 88 because education and property taxes are local issues and I don't get what this weird $50/parcel surtax is for. I voted happily for 89 because I figure corporations pretty much pay for political campaigns anyhow so this just makes the process more fair.

Everything Else. Propositions 1A, 83, 85, and 90 remain. 1A further interferes with the legislature's already-limited ability to allocate spending; I voted NO. 83 increases (again?) penalties on sex offenders, including indefinite detention and lifelong GPS monitoring; I'm tired of vigilante initiatives and I don't think indefinite or perpetual punishment is in the interest of justice, so I voted NO. 85 is the same abortion restriction we voted down last time, so I voted NO again (enough, already). Finally, 90 is the stealth anti-environmental initiative, so I voted NO. It purports to protect property rights from eminent domain, but what it really does is make it so towns will have to "compensate" property owners whenever environmental protection rules stop them from doing something that might have made money (although of course that "something" would have harmed the environment, which was why the protection was enacted in the first place.)

That's my take on it.