https://buy-zithromax.online buy kamagra usa https://antibiotics.top buy stromectol online https://deutschland-doxycycline.com https://ivermectin-apotheke.com kaufen cialis https://2-pharmaceuticals.com buy antibiotics online Online Pharmacy vermectin apotheke buy stromectol europe buy zithromax online https://kaufen-cialis.com levitra usa https://stromectol-apotheke.com buy doxycycline online https://buy-ivermectin.online https://stromectol-europe.com stromectol apotheke https://buyamoxil24x7.online deutschland doxycycline https://buy-stromectol.online https://doxycycline365.online https://levitra-usa.com buy ivermectin online buy amoxil online https://buykamagrausa.net

Colorado Ballot Propositions – Recap

For the most part, my vote “No” was echoed by most Colorado voters. My vote [State vote]  * AMENDMENT 46 – Colorado Civil Rights Initiative – Would prohibit the state from granting…

For the most part, my vote “No” was echoed by most Colorado voters. My vote [State vote] 

* AMENDMENT 46 – Colorado Civil Rights Initiative – Would prohibit the state from granting preferential treatment to anyone on the basis of race, sex or ethnicity in hiring, education and contracts. Poorly written and , to my mind, premature (albeit in a perfect world it would make great sense, and thus be unnecessary). No. [NO 50.4% — too close to call?] 

* AMENDMENT 47 – Right to work – Would outlaw agreements requiring workers covered by union contracts to pay fees for representation. Again, in a perfect world, “forced-unionism” wouldn’t be necessary. As it is, all those folks professing love and sympathy for the poor workers who have to pay union fees are the sort of folks that unions were designed to address.  Definitely No. [NO 55%] 

* AMENDMENT 48 – Definition of person – Would ban abortion by defining personhood as beginning at fertilization. If you want to ban abortion, then be up front and ban it, don’t play with semantics. Definitely No. [NO, 73%] 

* AMENDMENT 49 – Allowable Government Paycheck Deductions – Would ban governments from taking deductions directly from employee paychecks for any nongovernmental special interest group. Read: union dues. No. [NO, 60%] 

* AMENDMENT 50 – Limited Gaming in Central City, Black Hawk, and Cripple Creek – Would allow casino towns to vote on whether to increase bet limits to $100 from $5, expand hours of operation and add games. While I’m philosophically inclined to allow it, there’s no convincing argument made that it’s necessary to vote yes.  No. [YES 59%] 

* AMENDMENT 51 – Sales tax for disabled services – Would increase the state sales tax (by 2 cents on every $10) to fund services for those with developmental disabilities. I’m certainly in favor of funding services for those with developmental disabilities. A state constitutional amendment for a sales tax increase? Bad way to do it. No. [NO 63%] 

* AMENDMENT 52 – Use of Severance Tax Revenue for Highways – Would allocate more severance tax money to transportation. Instead of water projects? Stupid. No. [NO 64%] 

* AMENDMENT 54 – Campaign Contributions from Certain Government Contractors – Would bar sole-source government contractors and unions with exclusive bargaining powers from making contributions to political candidates. Wow, what’s that, three anti-union measures on the ballot? There’s something to be said for some of the provisions here, but it’s a ham-handed approach, and doesn’t prove its case. No. [YES 52%] 

* AMENDMENT 58 – Severance taxes on the Oil and Natural Gas Industry – Would reduce energy company tax breaks and use revenue to pay for college scholarships and other programs. Explain to me again why are we subsidizing energy companies? Yes. [NO 69%] 

* AMENDMENT 59 – Education Funding and TABOR Rebates – Would lift constitutional limits on state spending and direct additional revenue into an education fund. I’m no TABOR fan, but this one hasn’t convinced me. No. [NO 59%] 

* REFERENDUM L: Would lower the age of a candidate for the Colorado House and Senate from 25 to 21. Let the voters decide. Yes. [NO 54%] 

* REFERENDUM M – Would eliminate obsolete provisions in the state constitution about land value increases. It’s not clear they are all that obsolete. No. [YES 62%] 

* REFERENDUM N: – Would eliminate obsolete provisions in the constitution about intoxicating liquor. In this case, there’s no reason for the provisions. Yes. [YES 69%] 

* REFERENDUM O: Would increase the number of signatures required on petitions for constitutional amendments to at least 6 percent of votes cast in the previous election for governor. Retains citizen initiatives but makes constitutional changes a bit harder. Yes. [NO 53%] 

So I actually ended up with a pretty good percentage matching the overall vote, and there aren’t any where I “lost” that I feel particularly bitter or angsty about. That’s sort of a welcome change.

43 view(s)  

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *