Main Menu

Sponsors:

poll: Voter initiative

Started by Ron Wenrich, November 06, 2005, 07:51:41 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Ron Wenrich

As suggested by DanG.  Local elections are this Tuesday.  Poll ends 11-21-05
Never under estimate the power of stupid people in large groups.

Dan_Shade

personally, I think you should have to pass a "simple" test in order to have your vote count.  so i think initiatives are a very bad idea, if you don't care enough to vote out of the principle of democracy, you shouldn't be voting anyway.
Woodmizer LT40HDG25 / Stihl 066 alaskan
lots of dull bands and chains

There's a fine line between turning firewood into beautiful things and beautiful things into firewood.

CHARLIE

That is what we elect our representatives for. 
Charlie
"Everybody was gone when I arrived but I decided to stick around until I could figure out why I was there !"

pigman

I think I need to change my vote. I voted with the majority and that is something I seldom do. ::)
Things turn out best for people who make the best of how things turn out.

Modat22

I get discusted when I talk to people who vote and have no idea what the candidate stands for.

I also get sick when I see people not caring enough to vote. Voting is important. VOTE PEOPLE!
remember man that thy are dust.

beenthere

Quote from: Modat22 on November 07, 2005, 08:33:26 AM
I get discusted when I talk to people who vote and have no idea what the candidate stands for.

I also get sick when I see people not caring enough to vote. Voting is important. VOTE PEOPLE!

I agree voting is important, and some go because they are coaxed to the polling booth. I don't want anyone there who doesn't meet your first criteria - - that is "have an idea what the candidates stand for".  I also think Dan is correct about the "simple" test to be registered to vote.
All in all, I think our system could use improvements (i.e. election 'machines' and procedures, and registration verification) but still the best or equal to the best in the world. English should be the language of understanding to be registered, IMO. The direction we are creeping with non-english speaking (or understanding) people voting, driving, working, and hunting is worrying me. 
In Wisconsin we have very difficult hunting regulations, and many thousands of people living here now (Hmongs in particular) who have no understanding of these regs, yet they hunt as a sport and as a means to put meat on the table, unaware of many years of hunting etiquette. 
Through ranting....
south central Wisconsin
It may be that my sole purpose in life is simply to serve as a warning to others

Bro. Noble

I'm not sure about the 'simple test'  but I do think a tax reciept should be required.  If a guy isn't helping pay for it,  he hadn't ought to help run it.
milking and logging and sawing and milking

D._Frederick

Bro. Noble,

I agree with you a 100% on voting on issues that property taxes are paying, the poeple that are doing the paying should be the ones doing the voting. Oregon had this method up into the forties until the courts declared it illegal.

Dan_Shade

heh, I stand by my initial remark, but I misread the poll.

to answer the first one, yes, i do believe that any revisions to any constitution should be approved by the voters.

it sure would be nice if only tax-payers were allowed to vote, I think that's a flaw in our process.
Woodmizer LT40HDG25 / Stihl 066 alaskan
lots of dull bands and chains

There's a fine line between turning firewood into beautiful things and beautiful things into firewood.

beenthere

I think too that to vote, you must be paying taxes. Then, I extend that to the Gov't "buying" votes with Fed (and State) payments for welfare, farms subsidies, social security, ad infinitum and I begin to think those 'purchased' votes shouldn't count either (just like the ones who don't pay taxes).  Gets pretty mired down in a hurry.  :)  Who would be left to vote?


south central Wisconsin
It may be that my sole purpose in life is simply to serve as a warning to others

crtreedude

With the condition that you can not vote for spending unless you are paying taxes - I with driving it to the votes as much as possible.

One thing I would love is to have categories on the IRS form. When you finish filling out the form, there are categories where you want to spend the money. Miltary, social services, roads, etc. The country as a whole determines a fair rate of taxation - flat tax please - and then you vote where you want you money spent.

How much you want to bet there would be a shift in spending?  ;)

So, how did I end up here anyway?

beenthere

Quote from: crtreedude on November 07, 2005, 11:55:55 AM
...... and then you vote where you want you money spent.
:D :D
Yeah right  ::)  now wouldn't that be chaos to the nth degree.  We would get all our 'information' for how to spend money from the media..... ::)

Usually at whatever level of Gov't, down to the local school board, people think they know how the money should be spent - - until they actually get on the school board or into the local government and learn how few extra's there are to cut and how 'fixed' many of the expenses are that have to be paid. 
I think we have the means to elect those who wrestle with the spending decisions already in place. Not that we all like the decisions, but I think in total, it works.    However, I can think of a lot of improvements, but turning it loose on the 'public' directly is, IMO, not the answer. The 'left' coast is but a good example.
south central Wisconsin
It may be that my sole purpose in life is simply to serve as a warning to others

crtreedude

Actually, I know of a church who did exactly that - they decide that if people were giving, they should have the right to say where. After the chaos settled, it was amazing where the money went.

Unless the "fixed" items are placed on the cutting block, you are just fooling yourself.

So, how did I end up here anyway?

Ron Wenrich

Here's what's happening in Pennsylvania.  We have no voter initiative, although it has been introduced 16 times and been locked into committee to never see the light of day.  We have no term limits, which means these guys can be career politicians.  We have one representative that has been there since 1962.  We have no recall vote, so they can do it with impunity.  And, they control the money.  Incumbents get about 90% of the contributions and gerrymander districts to guarantee winning elections.

On July 7, they decided that they would take it to the taxpayer one more time.  They rejected a raise in the minimum wage, then turned around and gave themselves raises from 16-54%.  Some raised their salaries to $134,000.  You know, they work so hard.  They also raised the salaries of the judges and the cabinet members.  Supreme court judges help orchestrate the deal and wouldn't cal the procedure illegal.

They did this in the dead of night so the media couldn't report on it for a few days.  The procedure was illegal.  They also collected it immediately (in violation of the state consititution) and all left town to let the dust settle.  This is typical for hot button issues.

In addition to salary, they will get about $50,000/yr on retirement; medical, dental and drug insurance for life; and long term care.  They get $145 per diem for every day as long as sessions are 4 days or less.  Want to guess how long their sessions are?  They also get paid car allowance.

Since we have no other option, the electorate is outraged.  There have been demonstrations and the legislature has taken cover.  Numerous grassroots organizations have formed.  They figured it would die down.

It hasn't happened.  Some powerful incumbents have lost 75% of their base.  Our local senator has an approval rating of 17% and only 22% would vote for him.  He's up for election next year. 

Now, they are trying to appease us by repealing the raise.  They have other carrots to toss us just to save their butts.  I don't think it will work.

On Tuesday, 2 supreme court justices are up for a retention vote.  It doesn't look good for them.  Only one judge has ever been tossed out, and that was due to drugs.  These are going to be voters revolt.

Bottom line, if we had voter initiative, we would have had better control over these ruling elitists and this crap wouldn't happen.

Keep an eye on this, since this is going to bleed over into next years elections.  We have a US Senator that probably won't survive and maybe a few other Representatives.  Most of the State legislature is in trouble.

The biggest help in this whole issue has been the media.  Blast them if you like, but they have really dug up a bunch of dirt on these guys.  They have done an excellent job.
Never under estimate the power of stupid people in large groups.

SwampDonkey

We have been deeling with some touch and go politics lately here in Canada. It's possible we may be going to the poles before Christmas, but it's likely there will be a springtime election after a followup report from Gomery. Even with all the hype behind Gomery it's not uncommon for Candians to dismiss it as ongoing political scandals. We went through it before with Mulrooney. Alot of people in this country are pretty much out of touch and very permissive and passive when it comes to politics.

News excerpts about the Gomery Report taken from CTV.ca

Here in Canada the Gomery Report describes a system of kickbacks and illegal contributions that funnelled millions of dollars to the federal Liberal Party in Quebec. The report said it was Jacques Corriveau, a close friend of Chretien's and a former vice-president of the Liberal Party in Quebec, who organized what Gomery described as a "complex web" of transactions that involved "kickbacks and illegal contributions" to the Liberal Party of Canada.

Gomery goes on to say that both Chretien and Pelletier are to blamed for sins of omission that created a "culture of entitlement" that opened the doors for unscrupulous individuals to misspend millions of tax dollars. He said Chretien "is accountable for the defective manner in which the Sponsorship Program and initiatives were implemented."

As for Pelletier, Gomery said he "failed to take the most elementary precautions against mismanagement." Gomery said Chretien, "is directly responsible for errors committed by Mr. Pelletier (and) he must share the blame for the mismanagement that ensued."

Allan Cutler, who became a poster boy for honest civil servants after his story of resistance to shady sponsorship ad contracts became known, beamed in the wake of the Gomery report's release on Tuesday.

"Mr. Cutler is what many Canadians would like to believe is the public service in Canada," said Conservative MP John Williams.

Williams chaired the parliamentary public accounts committee that held hearings into the sponsorship scandal, before the inquiry led by Justice John Gomery opened last year. Cutler was a key witness before it and the Gomery inquiry.

Cutler accepted such praise with grace.

"I never in my wildest dreams thought this sort of thing would happen. It's rather nice,'' he said.

Between 1997 and 2001, $250 million went to the sponsorship program, ostensibly to boost the federal government's profile in Quebec in the wake of the 1995 sovereignty referendum.
"No amount of belief makes something a fact." James Randi

1 Thessalonians 5:21

2020 Polaris Ranger 570 to forward firewood, Husqvarna 555 XT Pro, Stihl FS560 clearing saw and continuously thinning my ground, on the side. Grow them trees. (((o)))

DanG

Since I suggested the topic for this month's poll, perhaps I should explain exactly what I wanted to see a discussion about.

Some states, notably California and Florida, as well as some others, have a provision that allows the general public to initiate proposals to the voters to ammend the state's Constitution.  This is done by securing a certain number of verifiable signatures on a petition.  That being done, the proposition appears on the next statewide ballot.  If it passes muster with the voters, it becomes law, no ifs, ands, or buts!  It matters not if it is practical, economical, or even doable.

These proposals, or initiatives, have been used by environmental activists and special interest groups to put some items in our State Constitutions that really do not belong there.  For instance, in Fla, the commercial fishing industry failed to police itself, as did the State.  So a voter initiative did it for them.  Now, the allowable size and shape of a shrimp net and a gill net is described, indelibly, in the Constitution.  The fishing industry in Florida is practically dead as a result.  Some group managed to poke through an amendment requiring the Legislature to fund a high speed passenger train from Orlando to Tampa at a cost of billions that the State doesn't have.  That one was rescinded at the next election. 8)  Then there was the "class size ammendment" which limits the size of school classes to something like 20 students.  The State can't pay for it, or even find enough qualified teachers to pull it off! 

Now, since we are stuck with this silly way of doing things, I think we might just get a few things done on the practical side, if we work it right.  I'm thinking of a proposal that would give a person the right to build his own shelter on his own land without interference from the Government.  The amendment could allow for quality by placing the inspection burden on the insurance companies and by restricting the sale of such properties for a substantial time.

My question is, what do you think of the premise of this method of lawmaking in general, and do you think it can be turned into a positive way of doing business?
"I don't feel like an old man.  I feel like a young man who has something wrong with him."  Dick Cavett
"Beat not thy sword into a plowshare, rather beat the sword of thine enemy into a plowshare."

Tom

I look at it as paramount to blackmail and back-door politics.

We can vote yea or nay on anything.  that's good.

We have representatives who could make sure that frivilous stuff wasn't being proposed.
It might make more sense if the signatures were presented to the Rep and he made sure that the idea was proposed.   It doesn't make good sense to pass into law things that have not been studied by those we put in the position of doing so.

Special interest groups should not have law making powers.  Individuals enmasse should.

Man!, If you want to see the building industry stopped, give the reins to the insurance companies.
I do think that there should be changes in the Gov. Think.   Now it is Bureacracy's idea that it's Government's job to stop a citizen from doing what he wants.   The reference needs to be changed such that the government "helps" citizens do what they want.   If the Citizen is doing something unsafe, then they should help him to find another way to accomplish his goals, not put him in jail or fine him into the poor house.

Furby

Quote from: Tom on November 10, 2005, 12:27:54 AM

Special interest groups should not have law making powers. Individuals enmasse should.


At what point will "Individuals enmasse" become a "special interest group"?

Tom

 That's a question that I'm not ready to answer at the  moment Furby.  But I'm of a mind that Lawyers shouldn't be able to change a state's constitution just because they are a group that can get together enough signatures. 

I look at citizens enmasse more like regular voters who initiated changes and laws through already available "Representative" channels and voted as voice to make things happen.  Citizens must make Reps listen.  Citizens can make special interest groups back off.  People already have a voice if they would just use it.

Furby

I understand what you are saying, and for the most part agree.
Where I was coming from with the question, is that in my mind, you really can't seperate out say Lawyers from the like minded citizens.
Otherwise the like mind citizens become just as bad as the Lawyers.
In my mind a like minded group of voters is just what you say, "Representative" channels or not:
QuoteBut I'm of a mind that Lawyers shouldn't be able to change a state's constitution just because they are a group that can get together enough signatures. 

DanG

Tom, let me clarify what I mean by letting the insurance companies bear the burden of inspection.  If a home is built that doesn't meet the codes, they wouldn't have to insure it.  I'm not talking about the building industry, but about individuals such as us, who would like to build our own house in which to live out our days.

I don't like the "voter initiative" process, but I do think we could use it to slow the bureaucracy down, if it is used wisely.

I agree that the citizens need to make their reps accountable, and that's the way it is supposed to work.  Problem is, too many voters are too lazy to really examine a politician's record, or search out the facts for themselves.  They just vote for the one with the best hairdo or the pearliest smile, or the one whose party is represented by their favorite ugly animal.  The reps say what the voters want to hear, then go ahead and do what they want, or get paid to want, until the next election.

Our system, a Democratic Republic, could work quite well if we could regulate the campaign process better.  We should outlaw ALL political advertising, and put the candidates on television in a public forum format.  The candidates should be isolated from one another, and not know what the opponent's answer to a question is until he has filed his own answer.  ALL entertainment broadcasting should be suspended in the days preceding the election, so that folks could get a good look at the candidates.  IMO, we have a perfectly good system of governing ourselves, but we are not using it to best advantage.
"I don't feel like an old man.  I feel like a young man who has something wrong with him."  Dick Cavett
"Beat not thy sword into a plowshare, rather beat the sword of thine enemy into a plowshare."

PawNature

I would like to see political parties done away with. People then would have to look at what the canidates stood for instead of voting party line. I know poeple who have no idea what their canidates stand for. They just hit the lever for what ever political party they belong to.
GOVERMENT HAS WAY TO MUCH CONTROL OVER OUR LIVES!!!!

Ron Wenrich

Here's what our initiative bill has for getting one started:

  An initiative measure may be proposed by presenting to
  the Secretary of the Commonwealth a petition that sets forth the
  text of the proposed statute or amendment to the Constitution
  and is certified by the Secretary of the Commonwealth to have
  been signed by registered electors equal in number to 8%, in the
  case of the statute, or 10%, in the case of an amendment to the
  Constitution, of the votes for all candidates for Governor at
  the last gubernatorial election.
      Signatures on initiative petitions must be obtained from
   at least 5% of the registered electors as of the date of the
   last gubernatorial election in each of 36 counties in this
   Commonwealth.

That seems like a pretty healthy number of signatures that a lot of those frivilous initiatives wouldn't develop.  But, our state doesn't trust the electorate with this ability.  We would have rescinded their payraise in a heartbeat as well as some other money grabs these guys made in the past few years.  I see the initiative as an electorate safeguard against an arrogant legislature.

One problem we have is that most of our legislators run unopposed.  The dominant party decides who is going to run, then there isn't any competition.  The general election has no opposition, since all the campaign money has been sucked up by the incumbents many months before. 

The payraise has raised such a furor in PA, that a local talkshow host gathered 155,000 signatures in 2 months and presented them to the Legisilature.  Well, not really the legislature, but one of their secretaries.  They were too scared to show their faces.

On Tuesday, they sent one Supreme Court justice packing.  The first time a judge has ever lost a retention vote.  The other judge narrowly escaped the vote.

Never under estimate the power of stupid people in large groups.

solodan

Quote from: DanG on November 10, 2005, 12:10:26 AM

Some states, notably California and Florida, as well as some others, have a provision that allows the general public to initiate proposals to the voters to ammend the state's Constitution.  This is done by securing a certain number of verifiable signatures on a petition.  That being done, the proposition appears on the next statewide ballot.  If it passes muster with the voters, it becomes law, no ifs, ands, or buts!  It matters not if it is practical, economical, or even doable.

These proposals, or initiatives, have been used by environmental activists and special interest groups to put some items in our State Constitutions that really do not belong there. 

Voter initiatives seem like a good idea and fair way to get things done, but only in theory.
Here in California the biggest problem lies with the fact that 32 million of the 35 million people live in a few densly clustered regions. This is the reason why a proposition like that of 117 won, and 197 was defeated. 117 made the mountain lion a specially protected mammal. 197 was to take the mountain lion out of the protection. The problem is, California is a huge state and the mountain lions are not running down the streets of L.A. So most of the voters have probably never seen a mountain lion, however these large elusive cats inhabit huge areas of the state. Most of these areas are uninhabited by people. Where I live, we  see them all the time, but we live in a lightly populated area.  Therefore 10% of the geography has 90% of the voice. I personally don't think that someone in L.A. should be able to protest a timber sale in my area, but I've seen it happen.