State ballot measures

[LittleRedToyota]

with all the focus on the presidential election, it is also interesting to look at some of the various ballot measures that passed or failed in different states.

from a libertarian standpoint, there were some good things and some bad things.

good things:

-medical marijuana passed overwhelmingly in michigan
-stem cell research passed in michigan
-ending affirmative action passed in nebraska
-doctor assisted suicide passed in washington
-maryland voted to allow video lotteries
-colorado is at least close to ending affirmative action, though it is too close to call

bad things:

-bans on gay marriage passed in a number of states
-massachusettes declined to abolish their state income tax...though the fact that it was even on the ballot is a step in the right direction for that state.

of particular interest to me (as in i find it somewhat perplexing) is that florida voted for obama but also voted overwhelmingly to ban gay marriage. apparently floridians want the worst of both worlds and, with the exception of gun rights, really despise freedom.

california also seems to have voted to ban gay marriage (though i don't think it is official yet), but voted overwhelmingly for obama. and they already have an AWB. apparently californians really, really despise freedom.

overall, a couple steps forward, a couple steps back, i guess.

(ETA: oops. i meant to post this in the national politics subforum, not the general subforum. if any mods want to move it, please feel free.)

[Damage control]

I visited the Country of California once.........on the internet......Their President is some kind of robot from the future.......GET IN DA CHOPPER!


DC

[WolfMetalFab]

good things:

-maryland voted to allow video lotteries

The MD slots thing was not a good thing, because they ran it though as a amendment to the MD state constitution not a bill or any other way, it also limited the slots to be only placed on state or baltimore city owned property IIRC, The idea is sound, the way they did it is not IMO...

[LittleRedToyota]

The MD slots thing was not a good thing, because they ran it though as a amendment to the MD state constitution not a bill or any other way, it also limited the slots to be only placed on state or baltimore city owned property IIRC, The idea is sound, the way they did it is not IMO...

i see. i was not as informed as i should have been before forming an opinion on the matter.

thanks for the additional info.

[ThomasJ]

of particular interest to me (as in i find it somewhat perplexing) is that florida voted for obama but also voted overwhelmingly to ban gay marriage. apparently floridians want the worst of both worlds and, with the exception of gun rights, really despise freedom.

This is because you are comparing apples and oranges. One is an electoral vote while the other is a general vote. Obama received 200k votes over McCain (~ 4 mil to 3.8 mil). Hardly overwhelming and why the state was too close to call for a long time. Unfortunately, our electoral votes are tied to our popular vote, and we are a winner take all state.

The "gay marriage ban" is a bit misleading. It is already law in Florida (that is, no gay marriage); this just put it in the state constitution, unfortunately.

[LittleRedToyota]

This is because you are comparing apples and oranges. One is an electoral vote while the other is a general vote. Obama received 200k votes over McCain (~ 4 mil to 3.8 mil). Hardly overwhelming and why the state was too close to call for a long time. Unfortunately, our electoral votes are tied to our popular vote, and we are a winner take all state.

The "gay marriage ban" is a bit misleading. It is already law in Florida (that is, no gay marriage); this just put it in the state constitution, unfortunately.

yeah, but the gay marriage ban vote was overwhelming...which means there were a significant number of people who voted for both obama and amending the state constitution to ban gay marriage.

and, to me, those people are about as scary as people come...they seem to support both nanny state fascism and nanny state socialism. they are voting for the worst of both worlds, imho. i just don't get it.

[Eugene V. Debs]

bad things:

-bans on gay marriage passed in a number of states
-massachusettes declined to abolish their state income tax...though the fact that it was even on the ballot is a step in the right direction for that state.

Come on, practically-speaking the MA ballot question was bad, really bad. I mean what if it had passed? The income tax is abolished with no plan to deal with the consequences of that? The state infrastructure would collapse and the state's economy would tank along with it. Big structural changes to the government and/or the economy are not well-suited for ballot proposals. If you're gonna make a change that big you need a plan to deal with the results.

And I'm not wearing my socialist hat on this one either, I'm actually trying to look at this from the standpoint of my card-carrying LP days...in which case I'd say it might be a good idea, but it's a horribly impractical (and perhaps self-defeating and destructive) way to go about it.

[Eugene V. Debs]

yeah, but the gay marriage ban vote was overwhelming...which means there were a significant number of people who voted for both obama and amending the state constitution to ban gay marriage.

and, to me, those people are about as scary as people come...they seem to support both nanny state fascism and nanny state socialism. they are voting for the worst of both worlds, imho. i just don't get it.

Of course you "get it". You know as well as I do the culture of this country has become dangerously statist and people want a paternalistic government to take care of them-- whether that's by protecting their job, protecting them from the "bad guys" or protecting their traditional values-- that's understandable, but the problem is too many people are willing to trade away their (and our) rights for those things, and that's what the state always demands as its quid-pro-quo for "helping us" or "protecting us". Doesn't matter whether it's a state run by conservatives, Liberals, reactionaries or socialists-- that's always the deal because the state has its own institutional interests and gains its power at the expense of our rights.

[ThomasJ]

yeah, but the gay marriage ban vote was overwhelming...which means there were a significant number of people who voted for both obama and amending the state constitution to ban gay marriage.

and, to me, those people are about as scary as people come...they seem to support both nanny state fascism and nanny state socialism. they are voting for the worst of both worlds, imho. i just don't get it.

I can't pretend to know what others' core beliefs are, but perhaps one vote was based in religion whereas the other was not.

[LittleRedToyota]

Come on, practically-speaking the MA ballot question was bad, really bad. I mean what if it had passed? The income tax is abolished with no plan to deal with the consequences of that? The state infrastructure would collapse and the state's economy would tank along with it. Big structural changes to the government and/or the economy are not well-suited for ballot proposals. If you're gonna make a change that big you need a plan to deal with the results.

And I'm not wearing my socialist hat on this one either, I'm actually trying to look at this from the standpoint of my card-carrying LP days...in which case I'd say it might be a good idea, but it's a horribly impractical (and perhaps self-defeating and destructive) way to go about it.

maybe...or maybe it would just force the state legislature to hurry up and come up with an alternative--like just raising sales taxes, for example.

of course, to me, getting rid of income tax and replacing it with sales tax is a no-brainer, even on the national level.

(pre-emptive strike: the sales tax is higher on luxury goods...maybe none at all on food and clothing...so the rich do end up paying more taxes--er, well, actually those who spend more money which tend to be the rich, rather than investing it, end up paying more taxes.)