Everyone else is doing it....
...So I'll livejournal on a political topic. But since everyone else has done the presidential election, and I've been weirdly apathetic about it this year (yeah, I don't want another republican administration, I'm voting for Obama, whatever...) I'll comment on the three ballot questions in Massachusetts.
Meta comments... At least two of the questions are repeats, which is interesting. (The third might be too, but I don't remember voting on it before.) Another thing is this little note in the voter information guide... "As provided by law, the 150-word arguments are written by proponents and opponents of each question, and reflect their opinions. The Commonwealth of Massachusetts does not endorse these arguments, and does not certify the truth or accuracy of any statement made in these arguments." Personally I have a problem with that. As I have said before, we are all entitled to our own opinions but not our own facts. They are pretty much saying that if a group flat out lies about the facts underlying their petition in an official government document presented to the voters to help them make decisions, "oh well." AARRGGHHH!!!! It's just not too much to ask that the official pro and con sections (all 150 words of them) be factually accurate! Especially when the opposing statements make factually verifiable claims at odds with each other.
Anyway, the Questions.
#1 Let's abolish the income tax because government is bad!!! Wheeee!!!! There won't be any impact on services and they couldn't possibly raise other taxes to compensate! [sigh] I know I have libertarian friends and I'm not out to offend them, but this initiative is just nuts. A major change from last time is that it doesn't abolish it immediately but cuts it in half for the first year. Which I suppose is nice because it will give the government some time to hike all other kinds of taxes, expand sales tax to include food like it does in some other states, and kill services to the least politically influencial groups... The claims made in the pro statement are just the sort that could use some fact checking, as they basically consist of wishful thinking at best and willful ignorance at worst. I wish they would just say "We want to cripple the government so that the free market will take over it's major services because we think it will all work out for the best in the end (sorry to anyone who gets screwed in the meantime)" Just be honest about it. One odd thing is that while the pro statement is written by Carla Howell again, this time she's listed as the chair of The Committee For Small Government. Rather than, you know, the head and constant candidate of the MA Libertarian Party. Wonder if she's broken off from the party and is doing her own small government splitter thing or if they just decided that "Small Government" doesn't have any baggage from their prior failed political attempts? Obviously I'll be voting against this one.
#2 Let's make marijuana possession and use a ticketable offense instead of a crime, but keep dealing and production illegal. One one hand the idea that a permanent criminal record for your classic "youthful indiscretion" is harsh has merit to me. On the other hand, it makes drug policy even weirder : "it's illegal to make or sell this but ok to buy and use it." On the gripping hand the Con statement claims (but again they could be TOTALLY LYING) that the "possession" amount in the bill is actually a 50 sale dealing amount. So I'll have to either do some more research to decide a vote on this one or skip voting on it at all.
#3 Let's ban greyhound racing. This is another repeat, though again there are some changes this time around. The provisions for retraining for unemployed track workers isn't there anymore. Last time that was included as the reallocation for the dog tracks' "slush fund" (the majority of taxes the tracks paid at the time went into a special budget category just for giving nice stuff back directly to them.) Maybe they got rid of the fund in the intervening 8 years, or maybe with all the movement to add slot machines, simulcasting, keno and who knows what else to the tracks it's believed that they will probably just stay open without the dogs by now. I'm opposed to greyhound racing and will be voting for this one, but I have little hope of it passing.
I don't know why I'm so politically apathetic this election cycle. Maybe I just don't have the energy for it. Maybe I've gotten so cynical I don't think it can matter. Oh well. My big political effort will be getting an absentee ballot so that I can vote even though I'll be in Vegas on the 2nd...
Meta comments... At least two of the questions are repeats, which is interesting. (The third might be too, but I don't remember voting on it before.) Another thing is this little note in the voter information guide... "As provided by law, the 150-word arguments are written by proponents and opponents of each question, and reflect their opinions. The Commonwealth of Massachusetts does not endorse these arguments, and does not certify the truth or accuracy of any statement made in these arguments." Personally I have a problem with that. As I have said before, we are all entitled to our own opinions but not our own facts. They are pretty much saying that if a group flat out lies about the facts underlying their petition in an official government document presented to the voters to help them make decisions, "oh well." AARRGGHHH!!!! It's just not too much to ask that the official pro and con sections (all 150 words of them) be factually accurate! Especially when the opposing statements make factually verifiable claims at odds with each other.
Anyway, the Questions.
#1 Let's abolish the income tax because government is bad!!! Wheeee!!!! There won't be any impact on services and they couldn't possibly raise other taxes to compensate! [sigh] I know I have libertarian friends and I'm not out to offend them, but this initiative is just nuts. A major change from last time is that it doesn't abolish it immediately but cuts it in half for the first year. Which I suppose is nice because it will give the government some time to hike all other kinds of taxes, expand sales tax to include food like it does in some other states, and kill services to the least politically influencial groups... The claims made in the pro statement are just the sort that could use some fact checking, as they basically consist of wishful thinking at best and willful ignorance at worst. I wish they would just say "We want to cripple the government so that the free market will take over it's major services because we think it will all work out for the best in the end (sorry to anyone who gets screwed in the meantime)" Just be honest about it. One odd thing is that while the pro statement is written by Carla Howell again, this time she's listed as the chair of The Committee For Small Government. Rather than, you know, the head and constant candidate of the MA Libertarian Party. Wonder if she's broken off from the party and is doing her own small government splitter thing or if they just decided that "Small Government" doesn't have any baggage from their prior failed political attempts? Obviously I'll be voting against this one.
#2 Let's make marijuana possession and use a ticketable offense instead of a crime, but keep dealing and production illegal. One one hand the idea that a permanent criminal record for your classic "youthful indiscretion" is harsh has merit to me. On the other hand, it makes drug policy even weirder : "it's illegal to make or sell this but ok to buy and use it." On the gripping hand the Con statement claims (but again they could be TOTALLY LYING) that the "possession" amount in the bill is actually a 50 sale dealing amount. So I'll have to either do some more research to decide a vote on this one or skip voting on it at all.
#3 Let's ban greyhound racing. This is another repeat, though again there are some changes this time around. The provisions for retraining for unemployed track workers isn't there anymore. Last time that was included as the reallocation for the dog tracks' "slush fund" (the majority of taxes the tracks paid at the time went into a special budget category just for giving nice stuff back directly to them.) Maybe they got rid of the fund in the intervening 8 years, or maybe with all the movement to add slot machines, simulcasting, keno and who knows what else to the tracks it's believed that they will probably just stay open without the dogs by now. I'm opposed to greyhound racing and will be voting for this one, but I have little hope of it passing.
I don't know why I'm so politically apathetic this election cycle. Maybe I just don't have the energy for it. Maybe I've gotten so cynical I don't think it can matter. Oh well. My big political effort will be getting an absentee ballot so that I can vote even though I'll be in Vegas on the 2nd...