That’s My Vote
November 4, 2008 has the following items on the ballot in Arizona:
Prop 100 would amend the Arizona Constitution to prohibit a transfer tax on property.
No. There is no need to amend the constitution, adding more cruft for something that has not – to my knowledge – even been proposed. A yes vote would require any future consideration to be two-fold: repeal the amendment and approve a transfer tax. Vote no new amendments.
Prop 101. I’m going to stray from no new amendments for this proposition to amend the Arizona Constitution. It expands rights instead of removing them. Rightfully, this should be included in statute, but it’s apparently not. It’s related to health care and health care choice. A reluctant “yes” on 101.
Prop 102. Amend the Arizona Constitution to “provide that only a union of one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in this state”. This despite the fact that Arizonans voted against this two years ago; despite the fact that so-called “gay marriage” is already illegal in Arizona. Let me repeat that for the cheap seats, gay marriage is already illegal in Arizona. The bogey man here is that “activist judges” will change the law. Activist judges have done what judges do, interpret the law and when the law is wrong, they right that wrong. I won’t go into how much good is done when rights are expanded by “activist judges”. Something as simple as being read your rights when arrested, Miranda rights, come from an activist judge’s ruling. No, no, no on 102.
Prop 105. Amend the Arizona Constitution to “provide that an initiative measure that establishes, imposes or raises a tax, a fee or other revenue or mandates a spending obligation… shall not become law unless the initiative measure is approved at the election by a majority of qualified electors registered to vote in the state.” (emphasis added) No, No, NO! This amendment to the constitution would put all of the power in the hands of people who cannot be bothered to make it to the polls. All registered voters who don’t vote will have their votes cast as an automatic “no”. If a voter can’t be bothered to get off the couch and vote for or against something there is no way that they should get an automatic “no” overriding the wishes of people who actually do vote.
Prop 200. Modify and extend Pay Day Loan law. Yes.
Prop 201. Modify and expand homeowner/homebuyer rights. The commercials running against this are inaccurate and refer to sections of the proposition that do not exist using scare tactics and the “outside lobbyists” bogeyman. Yes.
Prop 202. I’m split on this one. Ostensibly this attempts to modify and correct the Arizona illegal worker law that was recently passed. The entire law needs to be thrown out. There are already federal laws in place to do exactly what the original law purported to do. Changing the law to “fit it” will do nothing to keep Arizonans or US Citizens (and legal residents) safer. The entire thing needs to be stricken from the books. This is in the same boat as my primary stand on amendments, no more cruft. Unfortunately, that option is not on the ballot – I would vote repeal if there were that option.
I would support an amendment to voting laws that would allow for a “Repeal original law” choice on the ballot.
Prop 300. Simple – raise the state legislator’s salaries from $24,000 to $30,000. They haven’t received a raise in ten years. Their jobs are part time and there should be no increase when the economy is flailing. No.
And now the floor is open for debate 
