Sunday, October 26, 2008

The Propositions: How I will vote

First here are the Arizona Republic Recommendations.

I'm annoyed by two in particular. John McCain's (obviously). It completely ignored how badly McCain has mismanaged the presidential campaign, focused only on the good Senator years (from about 2000-2006), glossed over all of his flip-flops to gain favor of the base, not to mention ignoring the Palin fiasco, and didn't even defend the fact that John McCain is now 72 well passed his prime... I'm just saying.

Also, the arguments against 102 that I've heard here and in other places are very misleading. What's really annoying about what's happened in states like California and Massachusetts is that the courts have basically laid down the law in the regard.

I guess I can understand the civil rights argument to some extent, but gay marriage is much more than a civil rights issue. For a handful of judges to basic legislate this decision, is much more than presumptuous. There would not be this movement to amend state constitutions if judges would just stick with interpreting the law and not making it.

Also, the Arizona Republic incorrectly compares 102 with the proposition of two years ago that was rejected. That proposition was much more restrictive prohibiting legal rights not just for gay couple but for any unmarried couples. It was correctly turned down.

This one simply states that the legal definition of marriage should be between a man and a woman, but gives all kinds of room to allow for legal civil unions for gay couples. Quite simply a supporter for Obama (like myself) can easily vote yes for 102 without a hint of contradiction.

Anyway, here are my choices for the propositions in full:




The Propositions































































PropositionMy VoteBrief Explanation
100: Prohibition of Transfer Tax on PropertyNoI strongly disagree with arbitrary prohibition of taxes effectively tying the hands of legislature.
101: Freedom of Choice Health Care InitiativeNoThere is no need for this proposition and could tie the hands of our government from solving a more pressing problem - the huge numbers of the uninsured.
102: Marriage AmendmentYesFor me, this is actually a freedom of worship amendment. A traditional definition of marriage has strong religious implications. To change the legal definition of marriage runs directly counter to a great majority of long established religious tradition and deeply held religious faith.
105: Majority Rule InitiativeNoWill effectively dismantle the initiative process. Maybe not such a bad thing, just not sure I'm ready for that.
200: Pay Day Loan InitiativeNoPayDay loan reform written by the PayDay loan industry, can we say: "Conflict of Interest"?
201: Homeowners Bill of RightsYesI'm torn on this proposition slightly. I wish it was written differently, a little softer. But over the past 10 years Phoenix has grown irresponsibly, building soulless sprawl, and shoddy construction. I know most of that is halted now with the housing bubble bursting, but I'm all for a bit of additional barriers to mindless cheap housing construction, as well as a little protection against home buyers from shoddy construction.
202: Immigration InitiativeYesThis proposition actually weakens the current law in effect from a previous election year suite of propositions. I voted no on all of those, I'm voting yes here. Maybe someday I can write to the fullest extent possible my feelings on immigration. For now, let me say, it makes me sick (in fullest extent possible) how poorly we treat people who really all they want to do is work.
300: Pay Raises for LegislatureYesI only wish it was more so that more people could feel free to run and support a household on the salary.
School Bonds Questions 1 - 3Yes, Yes, YesOur schools need the money
School District UnificationNoNobody seems to want this, no money has been allocated to make sure it would work.
City of Tempe Bonds, Questions 1 - 4Yes, Yes, Yes, YesCall me a free spending liberal, but I want to see my city develop and maintain its water and sewage (question 1), improve its streets and drainage (question 2), improve public safety (question 3), and improve its parks and community services (question 4).


5 comments:

H said...

Scott, you said, "the Arizona Republic incorrectly compares 102 with the proposition of two years ago that was rejected. That proposition...was correctly turned down." I remember arguing that proposition with you 2 years ago and you were all for it then. Just saying.

Prop 202 is less about immigration and more about the people that hire illegal immigrants. I'm not saying that the two don't go hand in hand, but I am saying that I don't want to give amnesty to those that are breaking the law, ESPECIALLY when I believe that the companies that are going to benefit from this proposition are the ones that are exploiting the workers to begin with. Throughout the propostition they have added the words "in this state" which is protecting the big businessman with stores throughout the country. I'm for immigration too, I'm just not going to support the greedy corporations, even if I have to pay more for the products I buy.

tempe turley said...

Helena,

You are correct, I voted for it. I tend to vote for propositions, even if I'm uncomfortable with the precise language but agree with the fundamental issue behind it. Probably not a good philosophy.

Let's just say that I'm glad the proposition of two years ago did not pass even with my vote for it. There are other examples I could site.

tempe turley said...

Helena,

Regarding your arguments about those who hire illegals, I agree, some business are exploiting the workers (virtual slave labor, unsafe working conditions), but not all...

I wish we could solve the immigration issue comprehensively, but in the meantime, all we have are these little piecemeal propositions flung at us.

Maybe I'm wrong on this proposition, but I'd rather error on the side of anything Arpiro would oppose I'd support.

NOprop200 said...

Vote NO on Prop 200!

A NO vote is a vote to turn reckless, predatory lending into responsible lending!

www.200isnoreform.com

Goldwater said...

Thanks for your position on 105! It is a bad idea. Visit http://thevotersofaz.com for more.

Vote No on 105.