October 26, 2006

Arizona Propositions

Going off the adage that "the enemy of my enemy is my friend", I have always gotten a great deal of insight into ballot propositions by seeing who was for or against them.

For your consideration, the following is what the AFL-CIO sent to their members in Arizona. Yeah, they are a bunch of looneys - almost a guarantee that I will disagree with them on anything & everything.

 

Here are the props as written

- and here is the union list

Labor 2006 Proposition Positions - AFL-CIO

Prop. 100 Bailable Offenses
* NO Unnecessary cost to taxpayers

Prop. 101 Local Property Tax Levies
* NO Unnecessary TABOR-like government restrictions

Prop. 102 Standing in Civil Action
* NO Demonizes certain groups of people and victims of wrongdoing

Prop. 103 English as the official language
* NO Largely symbolic, divisive, and puts state safety and health at risk of being misunderstood
* could endanger workers

Prop. 104 Municipal Debts
* YES Allows municipalities to incur more debt for public safety& street projects

Prop. 105 State Trust Lands
* NO A ruse to distract voters from Prop. 106

Prop. 106 Conserving Arizona’s Future
* YES Protects valuable lands and benefits education & teachers

Prop. 107 - Protecting Marriage Arizona
* NO Denies bargained-for union health care benefits that have been previously negotiated

Prop. 200 Arizona Voter Reward Act
* YES Increases voter participation

Prop. 201 Smoke Free Arizona Act
* NEUTRAL No position

Prop. 202 Arizona Minimum Wage Coalition
* YES Increase Arizona’s Minimum Wage to$6.75/hour & adjusts it on an annual basis

Prop. 203 First Things First for AZ’s Children
* YES Supports and creates early childhood development programs

Prop. 204 Humane Treatment of Farm Animals Act
* Neutral No Position

Prop. 205 Your Right To Vote
* YES Increases union member participation & influence in elections

Prop. 206 Arizona Non-Smoker Protection Committee
* Neutral No position

Prop. 207 Free Property Rights Protection Act
* NO Will freeze comprehensive zoning and environmental planning & cost taxpayers millions

Prop. 300 Public Program Eligibility
* NO Would require education officials to do federal government’s jobs at a cost to Arizona taxpayers

Prop. 301 Probation for Methamphetamine Offenses
* NEUTRAL No position

Prop. 302 State Legislature Salaries
* YES Increases opportunities for working families to hold public office.

Posted by Vox at October 26, 2006 04:47 PM | TrackBack | politics

Comments

I can understand the sentiment, but I actually feel it's more wise to read the ballot measures before forming an opinion. Basing a POV on what another group simply dislikes is a bit childish, no offense. But then being a Libertarian I voted against all but 2-3 of them ;-)

Posted by: Thomas at October 27, 2006 10:04 AM

No, no, no - I wasn't suggesting I would vote in any particular way because of how a group felt about it. Simply that knowing a group that holds views that are SO far from mine supports or opposes a proposition gives me a bit of insight. I linked the official wording of the props specifically.

I was also noting that the odds were good that if the AFL-CIO felt one way, I would feel the other. This list shows that to be true - generally. Interesting, too, are their comments on the individual props; completely oversimplified in the some circumstances, downright misleading in others.

Posted by: Vox at October 27, 2006 12:27 PM

In political science there's a HUGE literature on voter decision-making. One of the more interesting strands of that literature addresses the various devices that voters use to simplify the decision. Party ID is the most important and obvious one; that guy's a Republican, I'm a Republican, I'm voting for that guy. On the propositions, sometimes my simplication tactic is like Vox's...if I don't have a strong feeling in my gut or brain one way or other, I look at the groups lined up on both sides and say, "I tend to think more like THESE people than THOSE people, so that's how I'm gonna vote."

Posted by: Special Agent Johnny Utah at October 27, 2006 04:50 PM

Understand the point.

I suppose if there was a group of big government socialist their approval might get me to lean the opposite way on some issues, oh wait, that is the group you showed. *chuckle*

Posted by: Thomas at October 30, 2006 11:02 AM