Andrew Trembley (bovil) wrote,
Andrew Trembley

I voted...

...although I'm not too excited about it.

A good man (and a good bureaucrat) is going to lose to a movie-star flip-flopper.

The folks who keep saying Democrats are paternalistic big-government ninnies pushing their way into private lives are probably going to get their initiative to make the state to push its way into families when abortion is involved. The irony is that good and effective parents don't need this law, and it will give bad parents a chance to fuck up their kids even more.

Big tobacco and big oil have probably bought the loss of propositions that would have harmed them.

The initiative system, as it stands, is a total mess. It takes a greater majority to raise taxes than it takes to amend the state constitution. A momentary mood of the electorate can be cast into permanent law.

I think we need a pair of constitutional amendments.
  1. Yeah, the initiative process was a populist response to corrupt and unresponsive legislators. They've turned into a way that lazy and unresponsive legislators can avoid an issue. Initiative Statutes need a sunset date after which they're subject to legislative tinkering. 10 years is a satisfying number, and would allow some turnover in the legislature and administration.
  2. The constitution is a mess, riddled with crap. It shouldn't be this easy to change or expand the constition. Constitutional amendments need to be approved by a 2/3 majority.

I don't see this happening, though.

  • Post a new comment


    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded