Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: midnight Target on November 02, 2004, 09:41:14 AM
-
We have the longest ballot since the 70's. All kinds of propositions for everything from stem cell research to changing the 3-strikes rules to tort reform to sick kids health care.
The Bush-Kerry thing is the easy part.
-
Vote NO on 64, MT.
-
Cali always has a ton of propositions on the ballot. Texas on the other hand never has many. If they do, it's in legalise and you can't understand the real meaning of it.
-
My touch voting machine had 14 pages of candidates and propositions... Still I was surprised how quickly I got through it all, good thing I read up on the props beforehand.
-
Did you guys vote Yes on 69?
-
why vote no on 64?
-
Originally posted by GtoRA2
why vote no on 64?
Dude its an Airhead post.. :)
I voted yes 64.
-
Originally posted by GtoRA2
why vote no on 64?
It's the frivioulous lawsuit propisition, but what it actually does is gut provisions of the Consumer Protection Act. It's sponsored by big business, opposed by consumer groups.
-
Here is the complete list with my votes:
http://www.igs.berkeley.edu/library/htPropsIndex.html
59 Access to Government Information - Yes
60 Primary Elections - No
60A Surplus State Property - Yes
61 Children's Hospital Projects - Yes
62 Primary Elections - No
63 Mental Health Services Expansion and Funding - Yes
64 Limitations on Enforcement of Unfair Business Competition Laws - Yes
65 Local Government Funds and Revenues - Yes
66 Limitations on "Three Strikes" Law - Yes
67 Emergency and Medical Services - Yes
68 Tribal Gaming Compacts - No
69 DNA Samples - Yes
70 Tribal Gaming Compacts - No
71 Stem Cell Research - Yes
72 Health Care Coverage Requirements - No
-
69 DNA Samples - Yes
:rofl
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
My touch voting machine had 14 pages of candidates and propositions... Still I was surprised how quickly I got through it all, good thing I read up on the props beforehand.
Woot! You voted!
-
Originally posted by ra
:rofl
Proposition 69 requires collection of DNA samples from:
adults and juveniles convicted of any felony offense
adults and juveniles convicted of any sex offense or arson offense, or an attempt to commit such an offense (not just felonies)
adults arrested for or charged with felony sex offenses, murder, or voluntary manslaughter (or the attempt to commit such offenses)
Additionally, starting in 2009:
adults arrested for or charged with any felony offense
:confused: Why not?
-
Yep, and what an adventure it was. Read the " Damn I'm disappointed" thread. :)
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
Proposition 69 requires collection of DNA samples from:
adults and juveniles convicted of any felony offense
adults and juveniles convicted of any sex offense or arson offense, or an attempt to commit such an offense (not just felonies)
adults arrested for or charged with felony sex offenses, murder, or voluntary manslaughter (or the attempt to commit such offenses)
Additionally, starting in 2009:
adults arrested for or charged with any felony offense
:confused: Why not?
Think like a teenager.
-
Originally posted by ra
Think like a teenager.
That's why I'm asking you.
-
DNA samples will eventually be required for a driver's license. Of course it will be in the name of "security"or "fraud prevention". Fingerprints are already required nationwide and DNA is the fingerprint of the future. They tried to require retina scans but settled on fingerprints.
-
Voted with MT on everything except....
61
63
66
67
71
guess he never met a tax he didn't like or a criminal.
lazs
-
59 Access to Government Information - No
60 Primary Elections - No
60A Surplus State Property - No
61 Children's Hospital Projects - Yes
62 Primary Elections - Yes
63 Mental Health Services Expansion and Funding - Yes
64 Limitations on Enforcement of Unfair Business Competition Laws - No
65 Local Government Funds and Revenues - Yes
66 Limitations on "Three Strikes" Law - Yes
67 Emergency and Medical Services - Yes
68 Tribal Gaming Compacts - No
69 DNA Samples - No
70 Tribal Gaming Compacts - No
71 Stem Cell Research - Yes
72 Health Care Coverage Requirements - Yes
The reason I didn't like the DNA one was because eventually people will have to give samples who aren't convicted of anything. They should have left it up to a judge, like a search warrent.
-
feel a little better.... only agreed with mz on a couple.
lazs
-
I voted no on anything that is going to cost tax payers money. With the state this state is in, voting for ANYTHING that cost more money is stupid.
-
Originally posted by GtoRA2
I voted no on anything that is going to cost tax payers money. With the state this state is in, voting for ANYTHING that cost more money is stupid.
I won't vote until after I get off work, but that's my plan as well.
-
and... a "surcharge" is a tax. I would vote for a bill that made mz the only person to have to pay for it tho.
lazs
-
Hey CA. guys...how are things in the most beautiful State in the Nation? :)
MT - I think the vote on limiting '3 Strikes' was a mistake. Here's a good writeup on it - tell me if anything youn read in the writeup surprises you (for the record I probably would have voted 'yes' if I hadn't read this summary)?
http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110005816
Also - for Lazs - Horowitz puts the opposition to shame by refusing to pull Andrew Sullivan's Op/Ed on why he supports Kerry now from Front Page Magazine (what are the odds of a pro-Bush Op/Ed being displayed anywhere on Moveon.org I wonder? :)). Here is his explanation why, and his theory on why those who play partisan politics in time of war should be considered traitors (Rabid Bush haters this means you).
http://www.frontpagemagazine.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=15756
If I don't chat with you guys again for awhile 'Happy Thanksgiving' in advance.
Mike/wulfie
-
Originally posted by lazs2
and... a "surcharge" is a tax. I would vote for a bill that made mz the only person to have to pay for it tho.
lazs
I only wish I could be forced pay the Prop 63 tax on 'annual incomes over $1 million'.
-
59 y - Transparency = Good
60 y - Could cancel 62
60a y - Lord knows we need the money.
61 n - I like the way the LP site put it, "Not a proper function of government."
62 n - Would result in less diversity on ballots.
63 n - We are already taxed too heavily.
64 y - Lawsuits are killing this country.
65 y - More power to local governments.
66 y - Too much victimless "crime".
67 n - No more taxes pls.
68 n - I don't trust casino people.
69 n - Big Brother
70 n - Don't trust 'em.
71 n - None of the government's business.
72 n - Would be final blow to state's economy.
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
:confused: Why not?
Additionally, starting in 2009:
adults arrested for or charged with any felony offense
-
I gotta admit the props are entertaining. I know I am basically disenfranchised in the Presidential and Senatorial elections, but on all this little stuff we can all make a difference, and it gives me something to study.
-
Originally posted by FUNKED1
71 n - None of the government's business.
:confused:
-
mora thinks all business is government business..
I disagree on the 3 stikes one and on DNA... I can't imagine anyone convicted of three felonies in a row not being a career criminal waiting to screw up someones life. and.... DNA... it's just the new fingerprint... it might even get some guys out of being arrested wrongfully.
mz... a lot of the things you are voting for cost me money and I sure don't make a mill a year... I would vote that you alone pay for all of em if we have to have em tho.
lazs
-
The DNA and Stem Cell research are prime examples of my fundamental beef with the government.
Vote yes, no, or whatever. They're both going to happen.
If DNA doesn't pass, they'll bring it to fruition under the guise of "security" of some type.
If Stem Cell doesn't pass, they'll either do research offshore so it's not "U.S." research or they'll help fund another country's research in order to get data.
-
Originally posted by lazs2
mz... a lot of the things you are voting for cost me money and I sure don't make a mill a year... I would vote that you alone pay for all of em if we have to have em tho.
lazs
Initally you'll save money with MT's picks cause passage of Prop. 66 will cut loose about 20,000 career criminals out of our prison system. Over time, tho, as they are rearrested and put back in prison it'll even out...except for the victims they'll leave in their wake.
I'd expect MT to vote on this, but Funky voted yes on 66 too... Maybe he was confused and thought it was about Crimes Against Nature.
-
yep.... anyone who thinks a guy with three major felonies is just.... unlucky and a freespirt out to harm no one is terminally naive.
if he got busted for three felonies he is a career criminal.
lazs
-
I agree, the three strikes law is fine, do not want to go to jail stop braking the damn law.
Booo hoooo, so a guy who stole a bike got life.
-
Wait a minute!
66 wasn't about baseball????????
:eek:
-
Originally posted by Airhead
Initally you'll save money with MT's picks cause passage of Prop. 66 will cut loose about 20,000 career criminals out of our prison system. Over time, tho, as they are rearrested and put back in prison it'll even out...except for the victims they'll leave in their wake.
I'd expect MT to vote on this, but Funky voted yes on 66 too... Maybe he was confused and thought it was about Crimes Against Nature.
I don't think non-violent felons should be getting life sentences. There are too many bull**** non-crimes that are considered felonies in this country.
-
Originally posted by mora
:confused:
:confused:
-
Originally posted by FUNKED1
I don't think non-violent felons should be getting life sentences. There are too many bull**** non-crimes that are considered felonies in this country.
Funky, you don't show any opposition to the 3 strikes law but rather to the felonies that count as strikes. Which felonies do you feel are unfairly considered strikes? Curious, cause the author of 66 has a son in prison on 3 strikes cause he was convicted of felony drunk driving with fatalities... his previous two strikes were for narcotics pedaling. Should he get another chance?
-
Life sentence for selling chemicals or growing plants? That's ridiculous.
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
Proposition 69 requires collection of DNA samples from:
adults and juveniles convicted of any felony offense
adults and juveniles convicted of any sex offense or arson offense, or an attempt to commit such an offense (not just felonies)
adults arrested for or charged with felony sex offenses, murder, or voluntary manslaughter (or the attempt to commit such offenses)
Additionally, starting in 2009:
adults arrested for or charged with any felony offense
:confused: Why not?
yall in for one rude awakening, when all of the facts of DNA sampling and matching comes out.
-
Originally posted by FUNKED1
:confused:
:confused:
You voted against stem cell research and your argument was "it's not goverments business". Seems a little contradictory to me.
-
Originally posted by mora
:confused:
You voted against stem cell research and your argument was "it's not goverments business". Seems a little contradictory to me.
Contradictory? What did I contradict?
I didn't vote against stem cell research. If people want to do stem cell research, they should go ahead and do it. But it is not the proper role of the State of California to pay billions of dollars to fund it. That's what I voted against.
Our State government is suffering a financial crisis. Expenditures far exceed revenues. State services are being cut in many areas. Taxes are already so high that businesses (and thus jobs) are being driven out of the State. If we are going to be raising billions of dollars by taking on bond debt, we should be spending the funds on more basic government services like our decaying transportation infrastructure, poor schools, etc.
-
Ok, I didn't realise it was for the funding.
One question though, if other research gets gov funding, why stem cell research shouldn't?
-
non should.... as funked pointed out... it is non of their business... they have no money to "give" they earn nothing. They only take.
lazs
-
Virtually every cure for every disease we've ever discovered has had its seed money in federal research grants. If stem cell research didn't involve embryos the Feds would have funded its research long ago- what's keeping stem cell research down is this Administration's belief stem cells are human life. (shrug)
-
Originally posted by mora
Ok, I didn't realise it was for the funding.
One question though, if other research gets gov funding, why stem cell research shouldn't?
What cracks me up is how most liberals see (for example) my paycheck that I have earned, as money DUE THEM and EXPECTED.
I don't even live in California but to EXPECT taxpayers to carry the load of programs that the businesses could easily subsidized, is just wrong. I hope that in 2008 California will attract more votes on the Republican side. When the "Democratic Supporters" realize that 401k holders (for example) want the benefits of Job shipping overseas for a "larger profit margin" this country will be better off.
I sincerely HOPE, that you realized what you wre voting on mora, it appears as some other low lying issues snuck past you.
Karaya
-
Results:
59 Access to Government Information - Passed
60 Primary Elections - Passed
60A Surplus State Property - Passed
61 Children's Hospital Projects - Passed
62 Primary Elections - Failed
63 Mental Health Services Expansion and Funding - Passed
64 Limitations on Enforcement of Unfair Business Competition Laws - Passed
65 Local Government Funds and Revenues - Failed
66 Limitations on "Three Strikes" Law - Failed
67 Emergency and Medical Services - Failed
68 Tribal Gaming Compacts - Failed
69 DNA Samples - Passed
70 Tribal Gaming Compacts - Failed
71 Stem Cell Research - Passed
72 Health Care Coverage Requirements - Failed
-
Yep the dumb bellybutton voters in Cali are going to make things in this state even worse!
We got rid of a governer for budget problems for christ sake and what do we do? Vote for even more stupid spending.
6 BILLION!!! dollars? When the state is already taking loans just to pay the bills.
Voting yes on anything that cost this state more money is stupid, iresponisble and typical in this ****ed up state.
It was not about stem cells, it was about the cost....
-
"Give us money and we'll find cures for your diseases." Sounds like the usual bloviating by politicians. You'd think the CA voters could see through that by now.
-
1A Protect Local Funds and Revenues (improved on Prop 65) - Yes
59 Access to Government Information - Yes
60 Primary Elections - Yes
60A Surplus State Property - Yes
61 Children's Hospital Projects - Yes
62 Primary Elections - No
63 Mental Health Services Expansion and Funding - Yes
64 Limitations on Enforcement of Unfair Business Competition Laws - No
65 Local Government Funds and Revenues - No
66 Limitations on "Three Strikes" Law - Yes
67 Emergency and Medical Services - No
68 Tribal Gaming Compacts - No
69 DNA Samples - No
70 Tribal Gaming Compacts - No
71 Stem Cell Research - No
72 Health Care Coverage Requirements - No
-
ra
Cali voters I think do not realise the money comes from them and they just doomed us to higher taxes or more BS bonds to keep the state from bouncing checks.
-
I think they know where the money comes from, they just don't realise where it's going.
-
Originally posted by Masherbrum
What cracks me up is how most liberals see (for example) my paycheck that I have earned, as money DUE THEM and EXPECTED.
I don't even live in California but to EXPECT taxpayers to carry the load of programs that the businesses could easily subsidized, is just wrong. I hope that in 2008 California will attract more votes on the Republican side. When the "Democratic Supporters" realize that 401k holders (for example) want the benefits of Job shipping overseas for a "larger profit margin" this country will be better off.
I sincerely HOPE, that you realized what you wre voting on mora, it appears as some other low lying issues snuck past you.
Karaya
I didn't say that all research should be goverment funded. my point was, why should stem cell research be treated differently than any other research(in other words why should it's funding be specifically banned).
-
Originally posted by mora
Ok, I didn't realise it was for the funding.
One question though, if other research gets gov funding, why stem cell research shouldn't?
Personally it doesn't bother me.
-
I voted against the stem cell proposition not because I think the research is bad, but because I don't think California can afford it. I also don't think California should foot the bill for research that will benefit the whole country.
On the other hand maybe it will draw some biotech firms to California so that they can get in on the funding. More high paying jobs for California is a good thing.