Thursday, October 2, 2008

Local Elections

I have not, by any stretch of the imagination, decided how my entire ballot is going to be filled out this year. I'm currently a registered Democrat (surprise, surprise), but I really consider myself an independent. I just feel that the current version of the two parties, the Democrats seem the more pragmatic party of the two. In fact, our current Congress has an ever shrinking supply of moderate conservatives...

But put a gun to my head, and force me to make my choices right now? Here's how I would go, but for many of these, I'm very much in need of more information before I can make my final decision. And I will get informed... at least as best as I can.

Really someday soon, I want to get into a position where I can track in real time the votes of my legislature. I hope to be much better informed in the near future.

Ok, here it goes.

The Propositions
Proposition 100: Protect Our Homes
This proposition prohibits a sales or a transfer tax on any real estate sale. Currently there are no taxes.

My vote: No. Want to keep tax flexibility with the government...

Proposition 101: Patient Choice Measure

This bill is a preemptive proposition ahead of possible health care legislation providing comprehensive government backed health care insurance. Something Barack Obama has pushed as a central piece to his campaign.

The guts of the proposition is to make sure patients can choose any kind of health care plan that they want.

My vote: No, its solving a problem that currently does not exist (similar to the one above).

Marriage Protection Ammendment

I already addressed this one here and here.

I do want to add that Google has come out against a similar bill in California. I understand both sides of the argument, but like I said, this is primarily a freedom of religion issue for me.

My vote: Yes

Proposition 105: Tax Relief or the End of Initiatives

This proposition will basically end propositions because it will raise the standard of passing a passing a proposition incredibly high (basically all registered voters who don't vote will be counted as a no vote).

My vote: No

Proposition 200: Payday Load Reform Act
This ballot will expand the law allowing pay day loans indefinitely, but will provide further regulation.

The interest rates on payday loans are crazy high, and this proposition is sponsored by PayDay loan companies. In my gut, I hate these sort of companies, but I recognize some people may really depend on them.

My vote: No

Proposition 201: Homeowners Bill of Rights
This one adds new regulation to home construction, longer warranties, new rights on fixing defects, etc.

I have not studies this near enough, but a gun has been placed on my head, so I must vote:

My vote: Yes

Proposition 202: Stop Illegal Hiring

This proposition is actually misleading. It actually relaxes the restrictions of earlier propositions making it easier for employers to higher illegal workers in two important ways:

1) Proposition 202 provides that a state, county or local official, in attempting to verify with the federal government if a person is authorized to work in the United States, is to rely solely upon the processes and procedures set forth in federal law. The federal law is weaker than what Arizona law currently requires.

2) Prohibits those who report illegal hiring from doing it anonymously.

I'm a big believer in immigration, and I believe our current immigration laws are a complete joke. Therefore, I support any proposition that loosens the restrictions and oppose any that tighten them.

My vote: Yes

Proposition 300: Legislative Pay Increase

This sort of proposition shows up almost every single time, and it seems to get voted down almost every single time. Give them a raise already. You get what you pay for.

My vote: Yes


President: John McCain/Sarah Palin vs Barack Obama/Joe Biden

My vote: Obama/Biden, duh.

Congress: Democrat Harry Mitchell vs. Republican David Schweikert

Mitchell has only been in office two years, and is a moderate democrat with a long record in Tempe (high school teacher at Tempe High for years and years, Tempe mayor, state legislature, now congressman).

While I hate his vote on the bailout (he voted no), I'll give him two more years. By all accounts, Schweikert is a principled conservative, although a pretty extreme one.

My vote: Mitchell

State Representative: Democrats: David Shapira, Ed Ableser vs. Republicans: Mark Thompson, Wesley Waddle
I know very little about these guys.

My vote (with a gun at my head): Shapira, Ableser

State Senate: Democrat: Meg Burton Cahill vs. Republican: Jesse Hernandez

Again, too little info currently.

My vote: Cahill

County Supervisor: Democrat: Ed Hermes v. Republican Fulton Brock
I'm clueless. Fulton Brock is the incumbent... That's all I know at the moment.

My vote: Fulton Brock

Corporation Commission: Democrats: Paul Newman, Rebecca Schneider, Sam George, Sandra Kennedy, Republicans: Bob Stump, Barry Wong, Marian McClure

The Democrats are making a strong push for much more solar energy. The Republicans want to leave more room for energy diversity.

I'm all in for solar:

My vote: Newman, Schneider, George.

This could change easily because I probably want a mix...

Maricopa County Attorney: Democrat Tim Nelson v. Republican Andrew Thomas

I hate Thomas extremist views generally, especially on immigration.

My vote: Nelson

Sheriff: Dan Saban vs. Sherriff Joe

Joe must go:

My vote: Dan Saban

There are other offices, but these are the major ones. I'll address the rest in another post. I'll also be updating these selections as I know more.

I would also like to know your opinions...


Anonymous said...

Disagree with you on the ACC race..

H said...

Well now anonymous, you may have swayed my vote. I was all about solar, but now I may have to leave Sam George high and dry. It does seem to me that this man is playing a bit dirty with some facts that can't be disputed. (I assume that even The New Times gets it straight when they report his name change and his sueing for a recount when he ran for a water board position in 2006). I want solar!!! So Kennedy and Newman will probably still get my vote, unless something really nasty comes up that involves them alone and not Sam George.

OUT OUT #$%@ JOE! I'm for Saban as well.

I'll get back with you on the rest since I haven't studied as much as I should have yet. I didn't get the candidate novel yet though, have you Scott?!

tempe turley said...


Seems like all three are a bit shady...

Need more info... and fast.

Do mean the mailings on the candidates? I received some stuff on the reps (Shapira and Eblezer, etc.) but it was pretty useless...

I vow to be more informed on these candidates before I vote though.

And I reserve the right to change my mind on any and all candidates, with the exception of Obama and Mitchell. My mind is made up on those two...


Sue said...

H, I've researced all of the candidates and they are all for solar. The three Dems are just marketing themselves as such. The candidate statements in the Clean Elections booklet are a great start in researching them. Also doing a news Google search on "Arizona Corporation Commission." Good luck...

Bruce said...

Well, the Tucson Citizen said this about Sandra Kennedy: They were "unimpressed" by her and wrote that she had a "dearth of knowledge" about what the Corporation Commission does. The Tucson Weekly called Sam George (formerly Sam Vagenas) "sleazy." The Citizen wrote it was "troubled that [Sam George] changed his name in 2004 from Sam Vagenas...As Vagenas, he helped get two pro-marijuana ballot issues passed in Arizona, though the Legislature later gutted them. State investigators also linked him to fake 'internal memos' circulated during the 2002 gubernatorial race, falsely claiming Janet Napolitano, as attorney general, covered up the Colorado City polygamy crisis." The Phoenix New Times writes: "George's third pro-marijuana initiative would have freed medical marijuana users to deal drugs to kids and actually required the Department of Public Safety to give out pot, for free." Bad, bad news, people.

H said...

I'm wondering why the AZ Chiropractic Assoc. and the AZ Dental Assoc. both back Prop 101. If the prop. passed would it be easier and more economical to visit these types of Dr.'s?

Prop 105 (I agree with a NO vote) There were 5 propositions listed that were highly publicized that would NOT have passed if this law were intact. Interesting.

Prop 200. Funny how Pay Day Loan people can put forth a prop. to make it sound like we are restricting their loans. Vote NO!

That's as far as I've gotten.

H said...

Scott, here's a few things we discovered in our voting class yesterday...

Prop 201, (I'm voting NO!) I think this is another proposition that is worded to make you think it's a good idea. The part that really concerns me is that if there is any dispute between a contractor and a buyer it MUST be settled in court, both parties MUST utilize lawyers, and lawyer fees can NOT be paid in a settlement. To me, this means that if I have a problem with a home I intend to buy (you don't even have to have signed anything) and I want to dispute it with the builders then I have to hire and pay a lawyer, win or lose.

Prop 202 (another NO!) This has nothing to do with stopping illegal hiring, but more to do with lessening the penalties on employees that do hire them. It should be called "Employer Amnesty" (I didn't make that up, someone else did). If this proposition passed it would give employers 2 stikes before anything is done to them, AND it would require that the Federal Govt. take action before the state could do anything. Furthermore, if caught, an owner's businesses within that state would be shut down, but other locations out of state could remain open.

I also have marked down a possible yes on 100 and yes on 101 but I don't have time to get into it right now... Bill says that (the real)Sarah Palin is going to be on SNL.

tempe turley said...


I knew that Prop 202 actually weakens the current law. Someday soon, I want to post my position on immigration (I'm very for it), but I'm all for weakening the current laws. So, I'm a pretty solid yes on 202.

I'm still pretty undecided on 201 and you make some good points. I want to feel like I fully understand the consequences both ways before I feel comfortable with any vote here.

I'm still leaning fairly strong to a no vote on both 100 and 101. I just don't think we should restrict ourselves tax wise on 100. 101 is trying to fix a problem that doesn't exist.