Healthy election results, but still lots of work to be done

Healthy election results, but still lots of work to be done, as evidenced here, here and here.

I'm not gay, but I think it's a disgrace the number of partnership rights Americans choose to take away from their fellow citizens based solely on their sexual preference.

Three new voter tools added - famous documents

I added three important documents to the Voter Tools tonight: the United States Constitution, the United States Bill of Rights, and the Declaration of Independence.

Notice that I started at Wikipedia - while I don't think it's always the most factual, typically an effort has been made to present information in an impartial light. I wasn't looking for conspiracy theories or anything, but it gave me pause when I re-read more than the (famous) first line of the Declaration of Independence:

We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the consent of the governed.
That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these Ends, it is in the Right of the People to alter or abolish it, and to institute a new Government, laying its Foundation on such Principles, and organizing its Powers in such Form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient Causes; and accordingly all Experience hath shewn, that Mankind are more disposed to suffer, while Evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the Forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long Train of Abuses and Usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object, evinces a Design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their Right, it is their Duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future Security.

While I don't lean far left, this naturally brings the current administration to mind. Imagine, then, when I came upon this: Bush Moves Toward Martial Law, Thursday, 26 October 2006 (a provision making it easier for the President to declare martial law, stripping state governors of part of their authority over state National Guard units in domestic emergencies).

Is this a reasonable move in avoiding a second major terrorist attack, or is it as over the line as it feels...?

6 ways I would love to improve this blog

1) Really dive deep into each ballot item. While I'm happy with the discussions and progress that got started, I still don't feel like I'm on a foundation that's taken all considerations into account in making my best decisions.

2) Engage the candidates directly, both on their candidacy and on their stances on each propositions. Post the transcripts here for discussion. To cover even just the key candidates in my region though, would take a few extra trustworthy "feet on the street."

3) Collect real-time data on candidates and propositions. Based on current data, who holds the lead in each race, and by how much? How are each of the propositions tallying up so far? Real-time monitoring so you can watch trends etc. I don't need to host them here, but I wish I knew of those resources to add to my "Voter Tools" section.

4) Expand to the "real world." I think maybe 40% of people out there have even really given a hard look at the candidates and propositions yet, and of those, maybe 40% of them (16% of total) have searched online to investigate further. Now the likelihood of finding this blog... how best to increase awareness to folks that hold significant sway but are currently several steps away from this site.

5) Get more online visibility and community contribution. This is techy - just optimizing our presence in search engines, blog searches, articles, etc.

6) Make this a group blog. This is too much work for me to do alone, and I think a few rational voices would not only round out the site, it would also make many hands for lighter work. (This means you, Norkizzle :-)

Prop 86 perspective: Paying for other people's problems?

David of "The Good Human" blog has an interesting No on Proposition 86 perspective (hefty cigarette tax):

Sure, smoking is bad for you. But should a smoker have to subsidize helping people lose weight, the research of assorted other ailments, and help hospitals become exempt from antitrust laws? Thats just not right. And you that will vote yes on it because its about smoking, your vice might be next years proposition 86. Like fast food? That Big Mac might cost you $7.00 to fund Weight Watchers for others that cant stop eating.

I think lots of taxes (including gas) are already structured this way, but I could be wrong. Would I be willing to pay $7.00 for an extra-taxed Big Mac to help fund programs for out-of-control fast food eaters? I think maybe so, yeah - will have to chew on it (ha!) more.

Maybe I can swing him on Prop 87 in the meantime. ;-)

And GreenLAGirl disagrees - here's her "Yes on 86" perspective.

Measure P (Pleasanton Bernal Park Phase 2): Yes

• MEASURE P: Bernal Property Phase II Land Use Plan -- City of Pleasanton (Initiative Ordinance)
  City of Pleasanton Bernal Property Phase II Land Use Plan Initiative Ordinance. Shall the Bernal Property Phase II Land Use Plan, comprised of the "grand park" design concept, as adopted by the City Council, be ratified?

"Today, as a conceptual plan for Bernal moves forward, only one use has been approved by the council: three baseball fields in what will be a 10-field sports park on the eastern edge of the site near the Union Pacific Railroad tracks. Work on those fields, two to be lighted for league play and one designated as a practice field, will begin this fall with the first games likely to be played late next year.

'I call it an illustrative plan,' said consultant Wayne Rasmussen, who is a former principal planner for Pleasanton. Pointing to different sectors of the plan, he showed sites designated for a cultural arts center, community center, teen center, 4-H club demonstration farm, wetlands,
meadows and picnic grounds."

http://www.pleasantonweekly.com/story.php?story_id=506

Sounds good to me.

Proposition 86 (big cigarette tax): YES

• Proposition 86 Tax on Cigarettes
  Should the state impose an additional tax of $2.60 per cigarette pack to fund new and expanded health services, health insurance for children, and expand tobacco use prevention programs?

Need to see how this money will be broken down via HMO's etc. to make sure it's ethical, but the money saved on future health care (and plus I just hate being around cigarettes :-) gets a Yes from me.

Proposition 85 (Parent approval for abortions): NO

• Proposition 85 Waiting Period and Parental Notification Before Termination of Minor's Pregnancy
  Should the California Constitution be amended to require notification of the parent or legal guardian of an unemancipated pregnant minor at least 48 hours before performing an abortion?

I plan to vote No on this for several strong reasons:
1) It's after the fact (won't reduce teen pregnancy)
2) It assumes that the parents in teen pregnancy situations are mature caretakers
3) Could cause a delay in important medical care while the parents get involved.

Proposition 83 (Sex offenders): NO

• Proposition 83 Sex Offenders. Sexually Violent Predators. Punishment, Residence Restrictions and Monitoring
  Should California amend existing laws relating to violent and habitual sex offenders and child molesters to increase penalties and monitoring?

A lot of the text that got strikethroughs are things that I think are reasonable, or that I would need to see the actual penal code ("in violation of section 264.1", but doesn't say what that is, etc.). Goes to far in my opinion - at some point after a conviction, serving their time and potential rehabilitation, we have to give people a chance to try to live a normal life instead of spending money to treat them like criminals for the rest of their lives.

Proposition 1C (Housing, Emergency Shelter): NO

• Proposition 1C Housing and Emergency Shelter Trust Fund Act of 2006
  Should the state sell $2.9 billion in general obligation bonds to fund housing for lower-income residents and development in urban areas near public transportation?

Almost $3 billion of bond debt ("without raising taxes!"). I need to research how true the need for and effectiveness of each of these are (more emergency shelters, more affordable homes for seniors/fosters, more social services for homeless), but my initial vote is No.

Update: This fellow's perspective solidies my stance some.