MA voter here. Got to say the question on unionizing for drivers is anything but simple. I had a popsicle headache after trying to interpret the language and implementation of what seemed something I would have supported unequivocally.
MA voter here. Got to say the question on unionizing for drivers is anything but simple. I had a popsicle headache after trying to interpret the language and implementation of what seemed something I would have supported unequivocally.
I think that's a problem with voter initiatives across the country. They are written by special interests and sometimes include proposals with unintended consequences or obfuscate the titled issue with poison pills.
I generally start at no until I'm convinced otherwise.
In California, Zack of the SFV puts out a voters guide, Zack's picks, that does an excellent job of analyzing the propositions.
I wouldn't say I start at yes or no, because it depends on the substance of the ballot measure, but if I absolutely can't understand it, I vote against it.
Agreed. In this case the implementation seems convoluted and not representative of the majority of drivers. Still have plenty of time to research - but leaning no.
Thank you for your kind words, DM! I am going to try to get the Picks out earlier this season (famous last words) since so many people vote fairly early.
In other CA ballot measure news I noticed in one of my last DKE comments that it was unusual that there were TV ads for congressional candidates before I saw anything about the ballot measures. Now I am seeing some spots about Props 33 and 34, which is the third time that the issue of allowing rent control in local jurisdictions has come to the ballot in recent years. While I support the substance of Prop 33 (and benefit from L.A. city rent control) I don't see the point of Michael Weinstein and the AIDS Healthcare Foundation running it again after losing twice in recent years (2018 and 2020). Not much has changed; we still have an affordability crisis and the Landlords' Lobby will still vastly outspend the AHF. Prop 33 will almost certainly lose. Now there is Prop 34 to try to put the AHF out of the initiative biz. I see 34 as an abuse of the initiative process and I doubt that it will pass, but it is early. So far no ads have appeared about the other eight statewide ballot measures.
I live in Massachusetts too, and I agree! In 2022 we had a few measures (spending limits on dental insurers for one) where any discussion began with "Why is this a ballot measure instead of a legislative bill?"
The initiatives, it seems to me, are a relief valve for ideas which can’t get traction in the legislature. At times that’s good, forcing an issue with popular support to be addressed. But in some cases the legislature punting on an issue is for good reason.
Any how this year we have half baked ideas (mushrooms anyone?) and complex ones up for popular vote.
I don’t object to it being an issue on the ballot, I couldn’t resist the pun though. To me It didn’t seem fully thought out… you could grow 12 square feet of 3 types of psychedelics, but if I read it correctly you couldn’t actually consume it without licensed supervision. …. Seemed a bit of an inconsistency. Having gone back there is actually 15 pages of details which is dense and includes the creation of a commission. So half baked, while clever was not accurate.
At least in our D super-majority state, I'm actually glad that the legislature has the ability to amend the laws later. They're generally reticent to completely toss something the voters just approved, (lest they themselves be tossed), and this allows for corrections and clarifications of these long and confusing bills.
On the other hand, I wish we could do something about our overly long and legalistic summaries that the AG's office writes. They read like the terms and conditions of a cell phone contact and often nearly incomprehensible, even to a highly educated native speaker of English, much less to the larger electorate.
Unfortunately in California, we have gotten Republican initiated propositions passed such as top two primaries and an independent redistricting commission that our legislature can't undo and has enough public support that it will be hard to get undone at the ballot box.
I am largely in favor of independent redistricting commissions and very much opposed to extreme gerrymandering.
That said, only a fool disarms unilaterally. So, as long as some Republican-controlled states are carrying out heinous disenfranchisement through gerrymandering, I would have liked to see Democrats gerrymander California and New York to the max!
MA voter here. Got to say the question on unionizing for drivers is anything but simple. I had a popsicle headache after trying to interpret the language and implementation of what seemed something I would have supported unequivocally.
I think that's a problem with voter initiatives across the country. They are written by special interests and sometimes include proposals with unintended consequences or obfuscate the titled issue with poison pills.
I generally start at no until I'm convinced otherwise.
In California, Zack of the SFV puts out a voters guide, Zack's picks, that does an excellent job of analyzing the propositions.
I wouldn't say I start at yes or no, because it depends on the substance of the ballot measure, but if I absolutely can't understand it, I vote against it.
Agreed. In this case the implementation seems convoluted and not representative of the majority of drivers. Still have plenty of time to research - but leaning no.
Thank you for your kind words, DM! I am going to try to get the Picks out earlier this season (famous last words) since so many people vote fairly early.
In other CA ballot measure news I noticed in one of my last DKE comments that it was unusual that there were TV ads for congressional candidates before I saw anything about the ballot measures. Now I am seeing some spots about Props 33 and 34, which is the third time that the issue of allowing rent control in local jurisdictions has come to the ballot in recent years. While I support the substance of Prop 33 (and benefit from L.A. city rent control) I don't see the point of Michael Weinstein and the AIDS Healthcare Foundation running it again after losing twice in recent years (2018 and 2020). Not much has changed; we still have an affordability crisis and the Landlords' Lobby will still vastly outspend the AHF. Prop 33 will almost certainly lose. Now there is Prop 34 to try to put the AHF out of the initiative biz. I see 34 as an abuse of the initiative process and I doubt that it will pass, but it is early. So far no ads have appeared about the other eight statewide ballot measures.
I live in Massachusetts too, and I agree! In 2022 we had a few measures (spending limits on dental insurers for one) where any discussion began with "Why is this a ballot measure instead of a legislative bill?"
Yes!
The initiatives, it seems to me, are a relief valve for ideas which can’t get traction in the legislature. At times that’s good, forcing an issue with popular support to be addressed. But in some cases the legislature punting on an issue is for good reason.
Any how this year we have half baked ideas (mushrooms anyone?) and complex ones up for popular vote.
Legalizing magic mushrooms seems to me to be a fine idea and a normal use for a referendum, although a legislative solution would be equally good.
I don’t object to it being an issue on the ballot, I couldn’t resist the pun though. To me It didn’t seem fully thought out… you could grow 12 square feet of 3 types of psychedelics, but if I read it correctly you couldn’t actually consume it without licensed supervision. …. Seemed a bit of an inconsistency. Having gone back there is actually 15 pages of details which is dense and includes the creation of a commission. So half baked, while clever was not accurate.
At least in our D super-majority state, I'm actually glad that the legislature has the ability to amend the laws later. They're generally reticent to completely toss something the voters just approved, (lest they themselves be tossed), and this allows for corrections and clarifications of these long and confusing bills.
On the other hand, I wish we could do something about our overly long and legalistic summaries that the AG's office writes. They read like the terms and conditions of a cell phone contact and often nearly incomprehensible, even to a highly educated native speaker of English, much less to the larger electorate.
Unfortunately in California, we have gotten Republican initiated propositions passed such as top two primaries and an independent redistricting commission that our legislature can't undo and has enough public support that it will be hard to get undone at the ballot box.
I am largely in favor of independent redistricting commissions and very much opposed to extreme gerrymandering.
That said, only a fool disarms unilaterally. So, as long as some Republican-controlled states are carrying out heinous disenfranchisement through gerrymandering, I would have liked to see Democrats gerrymander California and New York to the max!