Unright

Some Notable 2004 Ballot Measures

Some notable measures on state and local ballots on Nov. 2:

STATE MEASURES

ALABAMA:

remove language from state constitution requiring racial segregation in public schools.

ALASKA:

decriminalize marijuana.

fill U.S. Senate vacancies by special election, not gubernatorial appointment.

ban bear-baiting.

ARKANSAS:

ban gay marriage.

increase property tax rates to support public education.

ARIZONA:

require proof of citizenship to register to vote and proof of immigration status to obtain certain government services.

CALIFORNIA:

devote $3 billion to human embryonic stem cell experiments.

create open primaries

raise taxes on rich to boost mental health care.

tone down Three Strikes Law to deal only with serious crimes.

allow card clubs, race tracks to add 30,000 slot machines.

give Indian tribes broader gambling rights in return for paying state 8.8 percent of revenue.

repeal law making businesses offer health insurance to workers.

COLORADO:

raise tobacco tax from 20 cents to 84 cents a pack to fund health care.

scrap winner-take-all system of awarding electoral votes, instead allocating them proportionately according to popular vote.

require power companies to use some renewable energy.

FLORIDA:

limit privacy rights of girls under 18, a prelude to any future law requiring parents be told when minor daughters seek abortions.

repeal high-speed train project, which Gov. Jeb Bush says state can't afford.

create state minimum wage of $6.15 an hour.

authorize Miami-Dade, Broward counties to hold referenda on allowing slot machines at race tracks, jai alai frontons.

bar licensing of doctors who commit three or more incidents of medical malpractice.

cap attorney fees in medical malpractice suits.

GEORGIA:

ban gay marriage.

KENTUCKY:

ban gay marriage.

MAINE:

cap property taxes at 1 percent of assessed value.

ban bear hunting with bait, dogs and traps.

MICHIGAN:

ban gay marriage.

require voter approval of new forms of gambling.

MISSISSIPPI:

ban gay marriage.

MONTANA:

ban gay marriage.

allow marijuana use for medical purposes.

lift ban on use of cyanide in some new gold and silver mines.

hike tax on cigarette pack from 70 cents to $1.70.

NEBRASKA:

legalize two casinos.

divert $2 million a year in lottery proceeds for improvements at state fairgrounds.

NEVADA:

raise state minimum wage to $6.15 from $5.15 an hour.

place $350,000 limit on pain and suffering damages in medical malpractice cases.

require legislature fund public schools ahead of all other items.

require state to fund schools at least at national average.

NORTH DAKOTA:

ban gay marriage.

OHIO:

ban gay marriage.

OKLAHOMA:

ban gay marriage.

start lottery, with state's proceeds dedicated to education.

boost tax on cigarette pack by 55 cents to help fund health care.

allow shot machines at horse tracks, expand tribal gambling options.

OREGON:

ban gay marriage.

expand existing medical marijuana program.

place $500,000 limit on pain and suffering damages in medical malpractice suits.

SOUTH CAROLINA:

drop requirement that bars, restaurants serve liquor from minibottles.

SOUTH DAKOTA:

exempt groceries from state and city sales tax.

UTAH:

ban gay marriage.

$150 million bond for conservation projects.

WASHINGTON:

allow more non-Indian gambling, dedicate tax revenue to property tax relief.

boost sales tax by a penny to provide $1 billion a year for education.

allow charter schools.

adopt open primary system.

block federal government from sending radioactive waste from other states to Hanford nuclear site until waste already there is cleaned up.

WEST VIRGINIA:

let lawmakers allocate taxes or sell bonds to pay bonuses to veterans of Kosovo, Afghanistan, Iraq.

WYOMING:

allow cap on medical malpractice damages for pain and suffering.

LOCAL MEASURES

Berkeley, Calif: decriminalize prostitution.

Cincinnati: repeal 1993 ban on gay rights laws.

Cleveland: raise property taxes to benefit public schools.

Columbus, Ohio: ban smoking in public places.

Maryland's Talbot County: limit size of superstores to 65,000 square feet.

Nevada's Churchill County: ban brothels.

San Francisco: let noncitizen parents vote in school board elections.

San Francisco: urge end to Iraq war.

Seattle: kill monorail project

FoolThemAll

MICHIGAN:

ban gay marriage.

require voter approval of new forms of gambling.

I'm voting 'no' on both. 'No' to the millage, as well.

__________________
I wonder if we're stuck in Rome.

cthulu23

Louisiana:

We already voted in constitutional discrimination against gays last month. I guess we aren't last in everything after all.

Scipio

I'm from Arkansas:

Voted for funding education, against discriminating against free American citizens, and for extending our painfully short congressional term limits (no experienced legislators = bad policy and lobbyist rule).

__________________
"Erections lasting more than 4 hours, though rare, require immediate medical attention."

ShaniFaye

Ok Im in Georgia and I've already voted (took advantage of early...not absentee...voting) our ballot did not have anything to do with banning gay marriage....we had to vote on an ammendment to the constitution to define marrriage as a union between a man and woman only

__________________
I want the diabetic plan that comes with rollover carbs. I dont like the unused one expiring at midnite!!

trickyy

yeah, i think other states have similar circumstances.
gay marriage is already prohibited by many state laws; the vote is to include language in the constitutions to back this up, defining marriage in a particular way.

Unright

Defining marriage as "a union between a man and a women only" means that unions between two men or two women cannot be defined as marriage and therefore they cannot receive the legal benefits of marriage that hetero couples enjoy. Ergo, gay marriages are illegal or 'banned'.

tspikes51

I'm from KY. As I understand it right now, what we are voting on is that we would add a statement to the constitution that says that marriage would be limited to a man and a woman. That says to me that we could make an amendment to permit civil union betwixt same sex couples.

__________________
"I'm telling you, we need to get rid of a few people or a million."
-Maddox

MSD

As far as I know, we don't get to vote on any of this, it's up to our elected idiots.

Unright

What's with people getting bogged down in language?

If government officials were looking to define heterosexual unions as marriage and homosexual unions as civil unions, they could do that on the same bill. As it stands, they are recognizing only marriage. It's governmental discrimination and homophobia in action.

SirSeymour

It is more acceptable for some to be voting on a "definition" than on a "ban", Unright. Hence the hang up on language.

__________________
SQL query
SELECT * FROM users WHERE clue > 0
Zero rows returned....

kutulu

I love how people are so against raising taxes......



Unless the taxes are only raised on the smokers. Fucking hypocrites.

Flyguy

Well, your habit kills people. And it raises health care costs. Also, it's preventable. Not meant to be a personal flame but it's the truth. That's why smokers pay higher prices.

zenmaster10665

Well said. Not hyporitical, just logical.

__________________
"Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before.
He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way."
-Kurt Vonnegut

santafe5000

Sadly, none of the states have an amendment banning LAWYER'S from having anything to do with the election process. If it weren't for lawyer's, the electoral process would be simple, as in, YES or NO, on questions on the ballot.

__________________
When all else fails, QUIT.

kutulu

Here's how I take your statement:

If a habit is detrimental to one's health and therefore raises health care costs it is right and just to increase taxes on the people practicing that particular habit to subsidize their increased health care costs (whether or not the STATE is paying those costs). Is this correct?

Why stop with the smokers then? Why aren't we taxing the drunks to the point that they can't afford beer anymore? You can get duty free cartons for $15. That's $1.50/pack. These taxes are as high at $1.40/pack , 93% of the retail price. Should your 12 pack of Bud light that sells for $7.99 have a $7.46 tax that pushes the retail price up to $15.44? Drinking is detrimental to people's physical AND mental health. Drunk drivers get in car accidents, resulting in higher auto premiums. The negative health effects of drinking can be avoided by not drinking. Solution!

Let's also tax unhealthy foods. That 69-cent candy bar will now cost you $1.33. Same with the soda you drink that you buy for $2.50 a six pack. Now it's going to cost you $4.83. Chicken is more healthy than beef, therefore beef should be taxed. That steak that sells for $9.99/lb now costs $19.28/lb. We'll hit McDonalds really hard. Heart problems and clogged arteries are less likely if a person has a healthy diet. Eating healthy can prevent those problems. This is great. We'll make people live a healthy life by taxing all unhealthy activities!!!!

While we are at it, let's give people tax breaks for excercising, those people are more likely to be healthy, of course. Let's also tax porn, strip clubs, and adultery. They are all detrimental to one's mental health since there are plenty of studies that show that.

These ideas have been proposed but never go anywhere. Why? Maybe it's because these taxes are fine and dandy as long as they tax those "other people." Unless you want to tax EVERY unhealthy habit that is a personal choice to be a part of you ARE being a hypocrite. Don't lie about it.

rukkyg

We tax cigarretts because of the above reasons and the fact that most politicians don't smoke.

I hate smokers cause they like to stand right by doors to public buildings because they can't smoke inside. Then I get a headache when i walk through their plumes. I don't get a headache from people eating steak or a candy bar. Nor do I have to hold my breath because someone is drunk outside a library.

Bill O'Rights

__________________
"I distrust those people who know so well what God wants them to do because I notice it always coincides with their own desires." - Susan B. Anthony

"Hedonism with rules isn't hedonism at all, it's the Republican party." - JumpinJesus

It is indisputable that true beauty lies within...but a nice rack sure doesn't hurt.

Bill O'Rights

Oh...and by the way:


Yes and no.

__________________
"I distrust those people who know so well what God wants them to do because I notice it always coincides with their own desires." - Susan B. Anthony

"Hedonism with rules isn't hedonism at all, it's the Republican party." - JumpinJesus

It is indisputable that true beauty lies within...but a nice rack sure doesn't hurt.

Unright

I started this thread by posting a list of State and Local amendments with the idea that people could discuss them and be better informed when they vote on them. Kutulu (or anyone else) didn't threadjack, they were posting on-topic!

Several states are attempting to pass laws that would raised the taxes on packs of cigarettes. It looks good on the surface because I consider cigarettes to be a harmful product and I don't personally smoke. The point that Kutulu raises is very important. Raising taxes on harmful products (or potentially harmful ones) creates a legal precedent that can become a slippery slope. Also raising taxes on cigarettes increases the black market for illegal cigarettes that are cheaper but are completly non-regulated. People need to know the pros and cons of each issue!

Mephisto2

I should like to discuss the Californian proposal to reduce the "Three Strikes and You're Out" law. I think it's a good idea, as it seems unduly harsh to me.

What do others believe?


Mr Mephisto

PS - I'm a smoker and I believe they should be taxed. The same goes for alcohol. Both of these habits not only kill their abusers, but also innocent people who have nothing to do with the original abuse (passive smoking, drunk driving etc). No one gets hurt because some fatty eats more burgers....

PPS - This is a great idea for a thread. Maybe we can discuss some finer points of these elections/proposals, rather than the Bush v Kerry stuff...

Flyguy

Yes, raising the tax on the people who are causing lung cancer (and I'm just speaking in the context of smoking here) is correct because YOU are the one who's causing it. And I'll say again, IT"S TOTALLY PREVENTABLE. You're the ones smoking; you are the ones who should be paying for the health care while people are laid up in hospitals with lung cancer. Not me. You also said that "The negative health effects of drinking can be avoided by not drinking. Solution!" The same goes for smoking. That's why you pay as much as you do you a pack of smokes.

The price of beer has gone up in recent years. At least from what I've seen. Granted, alcohol hasn't gotten much attention from the media because there aren't people laid up with liver problems as much as there are people with lung cancer. Either that or the media is lazy and doesn't want to put as much attention on both issues.

Taxing unhealthy foods won't work because one candy bar doesn't start you on the road to cancer. You'll start to get fat but excess weight can be dropped.

I don't think that it's about taxing unhealthy habits or activities as it is about trying to help pay for the increased costs of health care from unhealthy activities that deteriorate one's health which at the same time could be avoided entirely is such activity was avoided. I don't think that I'm a hypocrite, I just don’t believe that I should pay for your hospital stay when you get lung cancer because I didn't put a gun to your head and make you smoke that cigarette.

Unright

For my part, These are the ones I'd love to see pass and encourage other states to put up for a vote as well...

irateplatypus

my home state of Oklahoma has some big decisions to make. i don't remember an election having as fierce a climate for state issues like this one has had.

__________________
If you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly, you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance for survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves.

~ Winston Churchill

kutulu

I also thought this thread was about the discussion of our opinions on the proposed ballot propositions or amendements. Simply going through the list and saying yes or no seems like a waste of bandwidth.

Stompy

MI was supposed to have a legalize medical marijuana.

So very fuckin nice of them to conveniently forget about it.

[edit]
Damn, why don't we have any good ones? Decriminalize prositution? Yes! Ban brothels? No!

__________________
I love lamp.

MSD

It's just like zero tolerance. It's when a piece of paper starts calling the shots instead of a rational person. Life in prison for stealing a candy bar (it happened in Texas,) unacceptable. I don't believe im mandatory minimum sentences at all, so three strikes is an abomination in my book.

Stompy

Isn't it 3 felonies?

Stealing a candy bar isn't a felony.

__________________
I love lamp.

thesupermikey

Hey!
Indiana as a amendement up to repail the proporty tax on inventory!

i mean, that has to count for something!

__________________
If you are not outraged than you are not paying attention!

"Reality has a well-known liberal bias" - Steven Colbert

kutulu

In AZ, we once had a medical MJ ballot proposition that passed overwhelmingly. The governor decided to veto it before it even took effect. "of the people"

guthmund

Amen, brother.

Nearly any measure to increase funding to Arkansas schools will get my vote.

Extending term limits seems like the only sensible thing to do in this instance.

Discrimination based on homophobia is bad policy no matter how you look at it. In the land of the "free," I find it ironic that an initiative like this even made it on the ballot. I have yet to hear a valid argument for preservation of the "sanctity of marriage." If I did, I would expect it to extend to everyone not just an arbitrarily selected group.

All that being said, I doubt the first two will pass and am sure the third will. I've nothing to base this on other than my own personal episodes with the people in the area. Maybe the rest of the state will get it right because it's not looking too bright here.

Edit: In my haste, I forgot to add that I'm an Arkansan. We had a proposal to legalize marijuana as well, but it didn't get the required signatures to be on the Nov. ballot.

__________________
No signature. None. Seriously.

Flyguy

Alaska legalizing bud will NEVER pass. This will be about the third attempt to legalize it. I'm born and raised Alaskan and it's a predominately Republican state. It goes red every 4 years. The former democrat governor is running for senate trying to replace the current senator that got put in office by her father when he became the current governor. I hope she gets her ass kicked on Tuesday.

Unright

Still, it's impressive that it's at least able to be voted on. The liberals in Alaska seem far more organized than most other states.

Mephisto2

No, I don't think so. That's what the Californian Proposition is suggesting (I believe). Amending the Three Strikes and You're Out law so as that they only apply to serious offences. Currently stealing a pizza will get you in jail for 25 years if it's your third offence.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/...ee-strikes.htm

The link is to a two year old story, but you get the idea.


Mr Mephisto

tspikes51

I believe Lexington, KY is voting on whether or not to repeal the public smoking ban. Since we are in the middle of a big tobbaco producing area, that should be interesting.

__________________
"I'm telling you, we need to get rid of a few people or a million."
-Maddox

iccky

So you say that it is about taxing unhealthy activities that deteriorate ones health which at the same time can be completely avoided. Much like smoking, eating big Macs can be completely avoided (you can, for instance, eat a salad instead. Even at McDonalds). And eating big Macs has been fairly clearly shown to be an unhealthy activity. It is likely that eating big Macs will increase you risk of heart disease, and thus the chance that you will be sitting in a hospital bed at some time possibly at taxpayer expense. So if we tax cigarettes to pay for this, why should we not tax big Macs?

The second problem with this argument is the assumption that the money from the tax is the same amount as the money spent on caring for smokers. But the states already got that money back in the tobacco settlement several years ago. The billions of dollars that was paid by tobacco companies came straight out of smokers’ pockets, so really we've already paid for any money the state spends on our hospitalization.

Now if you can show me a study that says "we need to increase the cigarette tax to $1 a pack because that is the exact amount smokers cost us in increases health care costs," I'll concede the point, but you won't find it because that's not why states increase cigarette taxes. They do it because in the current political environment it’s impossible to raise taxes, except on "evil" smokers. So your schools, your roads, everything is being paid for on the backs of cigarette smokers.

Finally, smoking is admittedly a self-destructive and stupid behavior. But part of the price of living in a free society is allowing people to engage in self-destructive and admittedly stupid behaviors, even if these impose some burden on the rest of society. It’s called freedom, and it’s based on the presumption that the government does not know best. If we're going try to get rid of all stupid and self-destructive behaviors that impose a cost on society, why not put a huge prohibitively expensive tax on sex outside of marriage (all those STD clinics are expensive, not to mention children born out of wedlock), SUVs (air pollution and increased dependence on foreign oil), and of course the aforementioned big Macs. Where are all the libertarians on the board to defend our right to kill ourselves in the way we choose?