Monday, November 3, 2008

Local Issues

For those of you who are interested in the local ballot, this one's for you.

Residents of Missouri can find their polling place, a sample ballot, and other information here.  Beware that you have to enter the information EXACTLY right, or the system will tell you you're not registered.  For those in Clay County, you can also go here.  Lines are expected to be long, so make sure you know what you're doing and where you're going ahead of time, and don't wait until the last minute.  The law states that if you're in line when the polls close at 7pm, you'll be allowed to vote; if you arrive after 7pm, tough luck.  Bring your photo ID with you if you have one; if you don't, you can use something like a utility bill (don't get me started on this...!) to prove you are who you say you are.  Also, don't wear or display any endorsement of any candidate - we're probably going to have to deal with enough lawsuits as it is, so please don't introduce any more just to make a point!  Just go there, cast your vote, and get on with your day.

One of my major pet peeves is that it is extremely hard to find out about many state and local issues.  Very little publicizing is done on most of them, so we're often left to guess at a tiny description on a ballot which can easily be skewed to suggest one thing while actually accomplishing another.  This year I received an e-mail from one of our state reps with some explanations on each state issue that I found very helpful, and have copied below.  Based on the checking I've done on these issues -- which, in some cases, is admittedly very little -- here's my recommendation.

MO Amendment 1: English as the language of all government meetings
If accepted, Constitutional Amendment 1 will require English to be the official language of all governmental proceedings. The Missouri General Assembly passed a House Joint Resolution to place this issue on the November ballot.

My thoughts: Any time we can make English the official language, it's a good thing.  Vote yes.


MO Amendment 4: stormwater provisions
Constitutional Amendment 4 would change our constitutional process for financing storm water control projects. If approved, Constitutional Amendment 4, as described in Senate Joint Resolution 45, would expand the number of storm water projects that the state could choose to fund through the sale of bonds. Voters gave the legislature the ability to sell bonds for these projects in 1998, but a change in federal tax code has kept any bonds from being sold since 2002. By approving this amendment, water and sewer districts will have the opportunity to seek tax-free grants and loans from the state. In addition, the amendment would remove the existing cap on the amount of funds available for storm water projects and it would remove the existing restrictions on the method of disbursing the funds.

My thoughts: It's probably a good thing to fix up the sewage systems here, and attracting some grants is good, too.  Since it's not a tax increase and since it's a legitimate need, vote yes.

MO Prop A: repeal gambling loss limits
Most of you have probably heard the commercials or seen billboards regarding Proposition A.  This measure, placed on the ballot through a voter petition initiative, would change our current gambling laws to remove Missouri's current $500 loss limit (i.e. no more than $500 every two hours or $6,000 per day).  Proposition A would raise the casino gambling tax from 20% to 21% bringing an additional $105 to $130 million annually for elementary and secondary education.  In addition, the amendment would restrict the number of casinos in the state to those already built or currently under construction. The amendment would also eliminate some of the additional identity checks currently in place in Missouri casinos and require only identification to verify an individual is at least 21 years old.

My thoughts: Uh...no.  People can financially ruin themselves even with the loss limits; removing them will just accomplish it faster.  I don't believe you can legislate to prevent stupid decisions, but that doesn't mean we should give a suicidal person a loaded and cocked handgun.  And, why would we want to remove ID checks that could prevent young people from starting what we know is an addicting behavior?  I heard an interview in which one person said this was a case of existing casinos wanting to lock out everyone else and enrich themselves, while some out of state casinos wanted to get in on the KC market.  The clincher for me is that they're doing it 'for the children'.  That phrase automatically sets off my crap detector.  Vote no.

MO Prop B: form a Missouri Quality Homecare Council
Proposition B seeks to create a new government entity to organize home healthcare workers in Missouri. Proposition B would authorize the formation of the Missouri Quality Homecare Council that would be responsible for recruiting and training home healthcare workers, maintaining a statewide registry of personal care attendants, and making wage recommendations to the legislature. If passed, Proposition B would create a council comprised of eleven members appointed by the governor with an estimated annual cost to the taxpayers of Missouri of $500,000. The amendment also would allow home healthcare workers to unionize but would prevent them from striking.

My thoughts: More government is never a good thing, but sometimes it's a necessary evil.  With the aging Baby Boomer generation now breaking into the bracket that needs home health care, some oversight should probably be put in place.  Though I don't like that bit about the unionizing, this has a very small price, so vote yes.

MO Prop C: require 15% of energy to be from alternative sources by 2021
The final ballot initiative, Proposition C, would mandate that all investor-owned electric utilities (i.e. AmerenUE, Empire, and Kansas City Power & Light, etc.) generate or purchase 15% of their electricity from renewable sources by 2021. Renewable energy sources include solar, wind, biomass, and hydropower. The mandate would be phased in incrementally with an initial 2% requirement by 2011. These electric utilities also would be required to have at least 2% of the renewable energy sources come from solar.  If Proposition C passes, the utility companies may choose to pass the costs of implementation along to the consumer; however, rate increases for costs incurred because of this measure cannot exceed 1%.

My thoughts: I don't like this.  While I think that we need to move more toward alternative energy sources, I believe we need to do it by making those forms of energy more efficient and lower cost through the free market...not government mandates.  Mandates always give us unintended consequences, like what happened with ethanol - government mandated it and subsidized it, and it ended up causing hunger in third world countries.  It sounds like this will probably pass, but I'm voting no.

Liberty Question 1: capital improvements sales tax
My thoughts: It's a sales tax, so vote no.  The problem here is that the city's priorities are messed up.  Yes, we like nice parks and stuff, but if we're raising taxes for capital improvements while complaining about police shortages, what does that say?  Keep things in perspective - no new taxes until they get their house in order first.  Also, this tax would run for 20 years without review - that's way too long.  Vote no.

Liberty Question 2: transportation sales tax
My thoughts: It's a sales tax, so vote no.  Same issues as with the capital improvements tax.  Vote no.

Liberty Question 3: bonds
My thoughts: I spoke with my state rep, and he suggested that if we're voting no to the first two, it really wouldn't be proper to vote yes on this one - it's kind of like demanding goodies with one hand while taking them away with the other.  Vote no.

A couple of other high-profile KC-area issues that I wanted to comment on...
Johnson County: elect judges, or not?
When is public accountability ever a bad thing?  We know that judges have bias, anyway, so why not get that bias out in the open rather than keeping it behind closed doors?  I don't have a stake in this, but I'd say anything you can enact voter accountability, that's a good thing.

Kansas City light rail
No, no, no, no, no, no, no!  I've never understood Kansas City's fascination with light rail.  It's almost as if KC thinks it's not a proper 'big city' unless it has some kind of light rail system.  If you look at the details of light rail, you'll see that it never -- EVER -- pays for itself in any city, except perhaps if that city has an extremely high population density.  KC does not.  Also, keep in mind that you're not actually voting on a light rail proposal, you're voting on the idea of a light rail proposal.  The exact routes, the exact stops, the exact costs, the exact specs are unknown.  They're throwing this idea out there on the ballot, and will fill in those details later.  The question you need to ask yourself is how comfortable you are granting the KC government a blank check for hundreds of millions of dollars (probably billions, by the time it's over) in a massive project that you don't get to see until after you've made out the check.  That would be like buying a car, but not finding out what car you get until after the check has been cashed.  This will be a giant boondoggle, so resist the urge to support it.  I do have a stake in this, because if KC puts in this 'starter line', it will soon try to force the surrounding cities to sign on.  Vote no.

I hope this helps as you think about going to the polls tomorrow!

There's my two cents.

No comments: