Munjoy Hill Observer - November 2009
November 1, 2009 -
Every November, just as winter is creeping in, we have an opportunity to elect public officials and vote on referendum questions. While Questions 1 and 4 have gotten the most attention, the entire state will vote on seven different questions, from citizen's initiatives, to people's vetoes, and even a constitutional amendment.
Question 1 - Marriage Equality
Question 1 states, "Do you want to reject the new law that lets same-sex couples marry and allows individuals and religious groups to refuse to perform these marriages?" A "Yes" vote would overturn the law, removing the right of marriage from same-sex couples. A "No" vote would retain the law, and these rights.
Click here to read the Attorney General's explanation of Question 1.
This is the highest-profile referendum question we face this year, and there are many strong feelings on both sides. I will be voting "No" on Question 1. I am a strong supporter of marriage equality, and I voted for the bill in the Senate. I firmly believe discrimination against our LGBTQ friends and family is wrong and I believe all couples, regardless of sexual orientation, should have the same rights.
Read the full text of the bill here.
Question 2 - Excise Tax
Questions 2 states: "Do you want to cut the rate of the municipal excise tax by an average of 55% on motor vehicles less than six years old and exempt hybrid and other alternative-energy and highly fuel-efficient motor vehicles from sales tax and three years of excise tax?" A "Yes" vote would pass these restrictions, and a "No" vote would reject them.
Click here to read the Attorney General's explanation of Question 2.
This question has huge implications for municipalities and their ability to generate revenue for essential services, such as libraries, roads, schools, and emergency services. If the excise tax is cut, cities and towns would have to either cut services or find other revenue sources, such as raising property taxes. I will be voting "No" on Question 2.
Read the full text of the bill here.
Question 3 - School Consolidation
Question 3 states, "Do you want to repeal the 2007 law on school district consolidation and restore the laws previously in effect?" A "Yes" vote would overturn the law, removing the requirement that school districts consolidate. A "No" vote would retain the law.
Click here to read the Attorney General's explanation of Question 3.
As Chair of the Education Committee, I have spent countless hours with the Department of Education, school officials, and members of the Education Committee working to ensure that every child has an equitable K-12 school education. I will be voting "No" on Question 3 because consolidation is inevitable. First, the state K-12 student population is declining, and has been for awhile. Second, even when the State was pouring hundreds of millions of dollars into K-12 education from 2005-2008, it was unable to fund school districts to the required 55%. Now, with the shortfall in state revenues, reaching this goal is completely unrealistic. Finally, if we truly want what's best for our kids, then creating school districts each with at least 1,200 students provides more educational opportunities for students academically, artistically, and athletically.
Read the full text of the bill here.
Question 4 - TABOR II
Question 4 states, "Do you want to change the existing formulas that limit state and local government spending and require voter approval by referendum for spending over those limits and for increases in state taxes?" A "Yes" vote would implement the spending restrictions. A "No" vote would reject them.
Click here to read the Attorney General's explanation of Question 4.
In 2006, as the Maine State Director of the League of Young Voters, I worked with many other statewide progressive activists and organizations to defeat the original TABOR proposal. The 2006 TABOR sought to restrict government's ability to raise the revenue for essential services, and TABOR II will do the same. With the difficult economy, the Legislature was forced to shrink the biennial budget by $500 million while still maintaining core services. As of Tuesday, I learned that the Legislature will need to cut the budget by another $200 million. I will be voting "No" on Question 4 because the Legislature is reducing spending and keeping budgets in line without arbitrary restrictions on spending.
Read the full text of the bill here.
Question 5 - Medical Marijuana
Question 5 states, "Do you want to change the medical marijuana laws to allow treatment of more medical conditions and to create a regulated system of distribution?" A "Yes" vote would implement these new regulations. A "No" vote would reject them.
Click here to read the Attorney General's explanation of Question 5.
In 1999, Maine passed a law legalizing the medical use of marijuana. This allowed patients with chronic and debilitating illnesses to grow and possess a limited amount of marijuana if prescribed by a doctor. Ten years later, however, patients in Maine still have no legal way to obtain their medicine. Question 5 would establish an ID card and dispensary system to ensure a legal path for patients to get the medicine they need. I will be voting "Yes" on Question 5 because it will help us better utilize police resources as well as ensure that patients have legal access to their medicine.
Read the full text of the bill here.
Question 6 - Transportation Bond
Question 6 states, "Do you favor a $71,250,000 bond issue for improvements to highways and bridges, airports, public transit facilities, ferry and port facilities, including port and harbor structures, as well as funds for the LifeFlight Foundation that will make the State eligible for over $148,000,000 in federal and other matching funds?" A "Yes" vote would approve the bond. A "No" vote would reject it.
Click here to read the Attorney General's explanation of Question 6.
With Maine's incredibly tight budget, a slowly recovering economy, and a two-to-one return in federal dollars, now is a great time to take out a bond to invest in our infrastructure and create jobs. I will be voting "Yes" on Question 6.
Read the full text of the bill here.
Question 7 - Constitutional Amendment
Question 7 states, "Do you favor amending the Constitution of Maine to increase the amount of time that local officials have to certify the signatures on direct initiative petitions?" A "Yes" vote would accept the amendment. A "No" vote would reject it.
Click here to read the Attorney General's explanation of Question 7.
This amendment would give municipal clerks an extra two weeks to certify petition signatures. After seeing how hard the folks in the Portland City Clerk's office work, I will be voting "Yes" on Question 7. It will help ensure more signatures are validated as well as ease the pressure on our hard-working City employees.
