In which some November decisions are made

Tomorrow being Election Day, and it also being my sacred civic duty to vote, my tasks today include researching the issues that are being presented for consideration on the ballot. I admit to feeling like it's all a bit overwhelming. I have a list of all the amendments with my decisions noted next to each one to take to the polls with me tomorrow.

In general, I tend to vote pretty conservatively on certain types of issues, specifically amendments to the Colorado constitution. It's not because I'm a conservative - far from it.

In general, even if I were in favor of the concept, usually a statutory (referred) amendment would be a better choice than a constitutional one due to the requirements to subsequently change the constitution. Some of those have been dismal failures, but remain simply because they're bloody hard to repeal.

Some I've pretty rejected out of hand due to my beliefs about the purpose of a Constitution. Others have deeper reasons. Here are my decisions about some of the Amendments on the November 2006 Colorado Ballot. (Subsequent blogs will have some more specific ranting.)

Tomorrow I'm going to vote "no" on 38, the petitions amendment. Geeze, people; don't we have enough of the bloody things already? If you don't like the current process, change it - don't try to paste on an amendment that adds another layer of confusion. Of course, the Constitution is bloody hard to change, so an amendment seems like an easy fix. But easy fixes seldom are good fixes.

Also voting "no" on 39, school spending. Not an issue for the constitution. I will vote “yes” on Amendment J, which seems to be worded similarly. They took a belt-and suspenders approach to this issue. The difference is that, while 39 would amend the constitution, J is a change to statute. The risk is that 39 will pass while J won’t, and the constitution supersedes statute.

Likewise "no" on 40, term limits for judges. Term limits insure that we have a steady flow of amateurs running our government, and I don't believe that there are "activist" judges.

I will vote "yes" on the ethics in government amendment. Ethical behavior is something that should be a foundation of government, and thus in a Constitution. One would think that this should be common sense, but the fact that there is a need to spell it out indicates that common sense isn't so common.

The minimum wage amendment (42), should it be added to the constitution, would be subject to the same difficult change requirements as any other part of the Constitution no matter what the economic conditions would be. No matter how much I think we need a higher minimum wage in this state, I have to vote "no" on it.

As for marijuana possession, no matter how I feel about the concept, Amendment 44 doesn't belong in the Constitution. It's a statute, dammit.

Moving on to the referred amendments, those that would be entered into statute, I first look at E, a property tax reduction for disabled veterans. This is an extension of the Homestead Act, and as such, I would support it, because I think that people should be taxed according to their ability to pay. However (and rejecting arguments about how little we do for our veterans, and how they deserve honor) there is no income or needs test required. So it's a "no" vote.

Amendment F is recall deadlines. I’m not feeling strongly one way or another about this issue, and so will have to depend on the LWV’s “background” information to make up my mind. The background info states that current administrative deadlines are set in the Constitution and do not conform to other requirements of the law. As it seems that this amendment is designed to remedy that, I’m tending toward “yes”, but am still officially undecided. The opposition says that “Citizens should be able to remove unsatisfactory officials as quickly as possible and replace them with officials of their choice” which sounds like opposition to anything that might permit a witch hunt. I’m feeling more and more “yes” on F.

Amendment G, a repeal of obsolete provisions it a definite “yes”. If they’re obsolete, why keep them? If you want history, find a copy printed before the deletions.

Those are the “little” issues. They’re important, yes, but less meaningful in the grand scheme of things. It took a little bit of research, but it wasn’t too hard to make an educated decision on these issues. Besides, I don’t have a lot of emotional energy behind most of these issues.

The “big” issues are yet to come……..