Maine Election

[Sarah]

Question 1: "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?"
     
Question 2: “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?”
 
Question 3: “Do you want to repeal the 2007 law on school district consolidation and restore the laws previously in effect?”
     
Question 4: “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?”
 
Question 5: “Do you want to change the medical marijuana laws to allow treatment of more medical conditions and to create a regulated system of distribution?”
 
Question 6: “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?”
          
Question 7: “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?”

Take that, New Jersey.

[yesno]

County Ballot Issue 1A:
Open Space Countywide 0.25% Sales and Use Tax Extension and $50M Bond Authorization Issue
SHALL BOULDER COUNTY DEBT BE INCREASED BY UP TO $50,000,000, WITH A MAXIMUM REPAYMENT COST OF UP TO $140,000,000, WITH NO INCREASE IN ANY COUNTY TAX OR TAX RATE, BY THE ISSUANCE OF REVENUE BONDS FOR THE PURPOSE OF OPEN SPACE ACQUISITION AND IMPROVEMENTS, WHICH BONDS SHALL BEAR INTEREST, MATURE, BE SUBJECT TO REDEMPTION, WITH OR WITHOUT PREMIUM, AND BE  ISSUED, DATED AND SOLD AT SUCH TIME OR TIMES, AT SUCH PRICES (AT, ABOVE OR BELOW PAR) AND IN SUCH MANNER AND CONTAINING SUCH OTHER TERMS, NOT INCONSISTENT HEREWITH, AS THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MAY DETERMINE; SHALL THE COUNTY'S EXISTING 0.25% OPEN SPACE SALES AND USE TAX CURRENTLY SET TO EXPIRE IN 2019 BE EXTENDED FOR FIFTEEN YEARS, TO AND INCLUDING DECEMBER 31, 2034, AT THE RATE OF 0.25% FOR THE PURPOSES OF OPEN SPACE ACQUISITION AND IMPROVEMENTS, AND MANAGEMENT AND MAINTENANCE OF SUCH OPEN SPACE AND IMPROVEMENTS; SHALL SUCH BONDS BE REPAID FROM THE PROCEEDS OF SUCH EXTENDED TAX AND, TO THE EXTENT PROCEEDS FROM SUCH EXTENDED TAX ARE NOT SUFFICIENT FOR THE REPAYMENT OF SUCH BONDS, FROM OTHER COUNTY OPEN SPACE SALES AND USE TAX REVENUES, THE CONSERVATION TRUST FUND, THE COUNTY'S GENERAL FUND AND OTHER LEGALLY AVAILABLE FUNDS; SHALL THE COUNTY BE AUTHORIZED, IN ORDER TO PROVIDE FOR THE PAYMENT OF SUCH BONDS, TO ENTER INTO A MULTIPLE-FISCAL YEAR OBLIGATION TO TRANSFER THE PROCEEDS OF SUCH EXTENDED TAX, OTHER COUNTY OPEN SPACE SALES AND USE TAX REVENUES, AND MONEYS FROM THE CONSERVATION TRUST FUND, THE GENERAL FUND AND OTHER LEGALLY AVAILABLE FUNDS TO THE OPEN SPACE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT TRUST FUND IN AN AMOUNT SUFFICIENT TO PAY THE DEBT SERVICE ON SUCH BONDS AND TO OTHERWISE COMPLY WITH THE COVENANTS OF THE RESOLUTION OR OTHER INSTRUMENTS GOVERNING SUCH BONDS; AND SHALL THE EARNINGS ON THE INVESTMENT OF THE PROCEEDS OF SUCH TAX AND SUCH BONDS, REGARDLESS OF AMOUNT, CONSTITUTE A VOTER-APPROVED REVENUE CHANGE; ALL IN ACCORDANCE WITH BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' RESOLUTION NO. 2009-100?
 
YES
NO

[buffcoat]

Question 1 of the Maine ballot is confusingly worded?

Do I want to reject the new law that lets same sex couples marry?  No.  But that no means I support letting them marry.  So no means yes?

Do I want to allow individuals and religious groups to refuse to perform these marriages?  Sure.  But that's not what the question asks - this statement is just a part of the description of the law.  AND, there are people who would not want them to be able to refuse and also support same sex marriage.  AND there are people who do want to reject the law but would favor allowing these people to refuse.

Man that is badly written.

[gravy boat]

That Colorado question -- whoa, my head hurts. 

[yesno]

Question 1 of the Maine ballot is confusingly worded?

Do I want to reject the new law that lets same sex couples marry?  No.  But that no means I support letting them marry.  So no means yes?

Do I want to allow individuals and religious groups to refuse to perform these marriages?  Sure.  But that's not what the question asks - this statement is just a part of the description of the law.  AND, there are people who would not want them to be able to refuse and also support same sex marriage.  AND there are people who do want to reject the law but would favor allowing these people to refuse.

Man that is badly written.

Yeah, that's bad.  What's wrong with:  "A law has recently been passed which allows same sex couples marry, but allows individuals to refuse to perform those marriages. Should not this law not be repealed?"

I may need to work on the last part.

The correct answer to the Boulder County question is: That's the kind of shit we elect you chuckleheads to figure out.

[Sarah]

Oh, I know.  My sister and I had quite a session about it.  Not least because a flyer from a local politician misrepresented the question in such a way that someone voting for same-sex marriage would think "yes" was the option to choose.

[SJK]

Oh, I know.  My sister and I had quite a session about it.  Not least because a flyer from a local politician misrepresented the question in such a way that someone voting for same-sex marriage would think "yes" was the option to choose.

Who is responsible for generating the question(s)? I had exactly the same reaction as Buffcoat when I read it. I'm from north of the 49th parallel...state politics are a complete mystery to me. So are provincial politics for that matter.

[Shaggy 2 Grote]

How about: "If you don't not want same-sex couples to not get married, don't not vote no on item one.  And also if clergy don't not want to not conduct the marriage ceremonies.  Not!  Vote yes or not yes."

[Sarah]

It's what is being called a "citizen veto," so I believe the people looking to overthrow the law are responsible for the wording.  All they needed was their thirty-seven signatures.

[Sarah]

How about: "If you don't not want same-sex couples to not get married, don't not vote no on item one.  And also if clergy don't not want to not conduct the marriage ceremonies.  Not!  Vote yes or not yes."

V. nice, Jasong.

[nec13]

It looks like the answer to Question 1 was yes.

Another victory for discrimination. It's a damn shame.

[Sarah]

Yeah, it makes me sad. 

[wwwes]

Really, really disheartening.

[moonshake]

Hard to believe that this brings such joy to some.

[Martin]

Fuck those guys in the head, in my opinion.