Left In Lowell

Member of the reality-based community of progressive (not anonymous) Massachusetts blogs

 
2013 Candidate Questionnaire Responses!
 

November 5, 2008

Yaywhee on Ballot Questions!

by at 1:12 am.

I don’t think I ever explicitly came out to say in linear fashion where I stood on the MA ballot questions, though individually I had things to say about them.

With 83% precincts reporting, the ballot questions have gone the way I could have wished, with absolutely fabulous resounding margins that make me proud to be from Massa-freakin-chusetts:

1. Repeal the income tax?
Winner No: 69%
Yes: 31%

2. Decriminalize marijuana?
Winner Yes: 65%
No: 35%

3. Abolish dog racing?
Winner Yes: 56%
No: 44%

Yay for sanity (Q#1), superyay for the dogs!, and…yay…for the pot heads?

Question #2’s margins totally caught me off guard. Who knew MA voters felt that strongly on this? Certainly, the compelling ads from law enforcement making the case must have had some impact. I think it’s a sane, pragmatic route to take and I think we see a mandate there for better ways of dealing with marijuana possession and possibly, CORI reform.

On Question #1, I just am flabbergasted by the margin of loss. These are margins you see in a John Kerry/Jeff Beatty race (scratch that, more people voted No to Q1 than for John Kerry).. I think we can safely say that the close call on this issue from 2002 where 45% voted for it is safely beat the crap out of. Thank whatever lord you believe in.

6 Responses to “Yaywhee on Ballot Questions!”

  1. kpem Says:

    It was a great night. Not thrilled with the marijuana thing, but the voters have spoken!

  2. Lynne Says:

    Boy, did they!

    Don’t worry, other countries and states have implemented this and the sky didn’t fall. We save a lot of money (even gain some) as a state, and a lot of young people don’t have to have issues with getting a job later in life.

  3. Paul@01852 Says:

    It occurred to me just few moments ago that law enforcement cried, “The sky is falling!” too after the Supreme Court ruled in Miranda and other civil rights cases. But guess what?! Law enforcement STILL manages to convict the guilty so I’m sure that those cops who use “less than an ounce” to do complete search of someone’s person or property will find other ways to arrest the *real* bad guys.

  4. kpem Says:

    “I’m sure that those cops who use “less than an ounce” to do complete search of someone’s person or property will find other ways to arrest the *real* bad guys”

    Paul yes this was my concern. With family members that are police officers I do not have a “police are evil” mentality. This has been a way for the police to confiscate many guns and get them off the street, and they certainly are not arresting naive 18 year olds for a couple of joints with no prior record. If this was really about stopping kids from getting a bad rap why not 1/8 ounce (6 joints?) for first time offenders? We just legalized 50 joints for all the dealers. I don’t get it.

  5. tryin to stay anonymous Says:

    Thank Goodness for NO on One. I may still have my job next year.

    I’m glad people realized you do need to pay for services if you want them and that this would have caused a far more regressive tax system to be put in place.

    I can understand the proponents wanting to send a message for greater budget accountability, but that is a different issue altogether. Put that on the ballot next time and they will win by a larger margin than this one lost. Unfortunately this was more about an extreme ideology on what services government should not provide than anything, but you’ll never hear Carla Howell and friends say that out loud.

    As for two I voted for it. Cops will still have probable cause for searches because they need to first determine the amount of marijuana in possesion to apply the law and therefore anything else they find is fair game. There are still multiple laws on the books regarding marijuana they still have to enforce. Believe me if a cop needs to jam somebody up on a charge to hold them, its not hard to make that happen.

    I was ambivalent about three, not because I don’t care about the dogs but because the industry was dying out and this will probably strengthen the push for casinos anyway. That said I’m not sorry it passed. I just hope the displaced workers will be able to feed their families and pay their bills in a tough economy. It sucks for them.

  6. Lynne Says:

    tryin’ - My sentiments exactly! I actually said that to Carla Howell in our podcast with her. If she’s so damn keen to get more government accountability and transparency, why not directly put THAT on the ballot?? It WOULD pass in a landslide. But as you said this wasn’t about that, of course. This was about drowning government in a bathtub, as one famous Grover once said.

    As to the workers at the tracks, it’s a lot less than the track owners say they employ. A lot of them are part time and seasonal. Though I wish them the best, and wouldn’t mind some funding of worker retraining for them, it definitely isn’t worth what we put these dogs through. Having met a few former track racers in my day, that is.

    Poor things can’t even sit, they are often trained with an electrified floor not to. You should have seen the hind legs shaking on my husband’s family’s adopted greyhound when she was put in that situation of needing to.

Leave a Reply

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>

[powered by WordPress.]


If you are not on Twitter and want to follow our feed on Facebook, click "Like" for our FB page.
BadgermillCity logo

Pages:

Recent Posts

Search

Categories:

Archives:

November 2008
M T W T F S S
« Oct   Dec »
 12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930

Other:

Email us!

(replace spaces, ['s, symbols)
Lynne | Mimi

Lowell Area Bloggers/Forums

Lowell Politics

Mass Bloggers

Politics Online

The Arts in Lowell

Trad Local Media

40 queries. 1.168 seconds