I received "The Official Massachusetts Information for Voters" packet in the mail yesterday. During this year's election on November 4, voters in Massachusetts will be able to vote yay or nay on three questions. Here they are:
Question 1: State personal income tax
Background: The current state income tax is 5.3%
By voting yes: You agree that the state income tax should be lowered to 2.65% in 2009 and phased out completely in 2010.
By voting no: You are voting to leave the tax rate as is
Why it matters: It probably won't. The voters already overwhelmingly voted to lower the tax rate to a flat 5% which was widely ignored by the kingdom we commonly refer to as the Massachusetts State Legislature.
Question 2: Possession of Marijuana
Background: This proposal would change the possession of small amounts of marijuana (1 oz or less) from a criminal offense to a non-criminal offense.
By voting yes: You agree that people should not be prosecuted for possessing marijuana for personal use.
By voting no: You agree that the law should stay as it is
Why it matters: Don't assume that by passing this question that Boston will suddenly become Amsterdam West. You won't be able to buy weed in the spice aisle at Shaw's, develop legal hectare pot gardens, or light a joint at a "coffee house". Assuming that this bill passes and is adopted into the legislature, offenders will receive fines and civil penalties if caught with 1 oz or less of marijuana in lieu of a criminal record.
Question 3: Dog Racing
Background: Every few years they try to ban dog racing in Massachusetts.
By voting yes: You want to prohibit dog races on which betting or wagering occurs
By voting no: You want local dog tracks to stay in business as is
Why it matters: It seems like the MSPCA brings up this ballot initiative every year or so. It was narrowly defeated the last time it came up for a vote which likely fueled support for the '08 ballot question.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
The pot thing: "By voting yes: You agree that people should not be prosecuted for possessing marijuana for personal use.
By voting no: You agree that the law should stay as it is"
My interpretation:
By voting yes you think people should get a CORI for possession of less than 1 oz (whether it is for personal use or not is not part of the question)
By voting no you do NOT think ppl should get a CORI for possession of less than 1 oz.
The big deal is the CORI. 18 year olds can't get jobs or student loans (not that either of those things even exist anymore) because of CORI records. Possession of less than an ounce (an arbitrary amount, if you ask me) precludes folks from getting CORIs.
Dog Racing: "Why it matters: It seems like the MSPCA brings up this ballot initiative every year or so. It was narrowly defeated the last time it came up for a vote which likely fueled support for the '08 ballot question."
I don't think the MCPCA is why it matters. It matters because some people think it's cruel, MSPCA notwithstanding. The dogs get the shit kicked out of them. Some people are ok with that. Some aren't.
By voting yes you're ok with it.
By voting no you're not down with it.
Of course voting no also means you're cool with ppl losing their jobs.
Dee, I agree with you, especially on the dog racing. I think it's cruel and should be illegal. I just posted the questions on the blog as a public service since a lot of us don't know what the ballot questions are until we show up at the polls. And yes, denying someone a job or student loan because they were caught with a small amount of weed is ridiculous as well.
See you on Saturday!
I'm not saying I support or oppose any of the ballot questions - just throwing in my 2 (most unbias as possible) cents.
Post a Comment