Ballot argument submission report


  Don't get me wrong, I also appreciate Jawg taking the time to write
something -- though sadly as it turned out, Jawg's and Phil's
submissions went for naught because Sean Elsbernd decided to oppose
those particular measures, and as a Supervisor, he gets first dibs on
being the official opponent. I've always thought this was a terrible
policy; as a matter of fact, I don't think Supervisors should be
allowed to put things directly on the ballot at all. Unlike the rest of
us, they already have the ability to pass laws and resolutions as
legislator, and if they think something ought to be passed, they should
pass it themselves in the usual legislative manner instead of
grandstanding to the public.

  As for me, I submitted 17 and 21 nearly identical copies of my
arguments against Propositions F and A respectively. Barbara Meskunas
submitted one copy of an argument for the Taxpayers Union, and another
single-copy argument was submitted by the Coleman Advocates for
Children and Youth. And in a stroke of extraordinarily bad luck,
Coleman won the lottery, which was held at 2pm. I had forgotten or
didn't realize that the deadline for opposing bond measures was 5pm, so
I hope to find out in another 10 minutes or so whether I will be the
official opponent of Proposition A. Again there are only IIRC two or
three other entries competing against my 21, so barring another
disastrous fluke of the odds, we should be represented on the ballot at
least once.

  I was glad to see the Pink Pistols secured the opposition slot against
Proposition H, the firearms ban. Their representative was present (I
forget his name), and I asked whether he would be willing to have the
Libertarian Party sign on to the rebuttal, and he responded very
positively. Log Cabin Republican Chris Bowman was also present and
promptly made a similar request on behalf of the GOP however, which
seemed to be received with equal favor.

Yours in liberty,
        <<< Starchild >>>

P.S. - Sean Elsbernd is also reportedly working on legislation that
would end the practice of stacking the lottery, which would definitely
be a good move, so long as the proposal contains no hidden, nasty

Thanks for once again making my day, Starchild! Shucks...go ahead and
disagree with me! Now, seriously. First, I am grateful that Jawj
took the time to do what she did do. Second, I do think shorter
writing has more chance of getting read than longer ones.

Third, we had a good time at the Department of Elections today.
Jawj, Starchild, Phil, and I were there putting in our two cents
worth (I did not write an argument, just helped Phil with his).
Power to the People!!



--- In, Starchild <sfdreamer@e...>

  Everyone knows how reluctant I am to disagree with Marcy on
anything... (just kidding!) 8) ... but I'm not so sure this is a


idea to submit as it is. First of all, why so short, Jawg? You've


300 words to make an argument, but you've only used 123 (plus name


title of course). Surely that space could be put to good use!

  Also, it's probably an unfortunate truth that if asked


government has become better and less corrupt because of the


of the Ethics Commission, most SF voters would answer with a


"Yes!" So I would strongly suggest not making that particular

point, as

much sense as it may make from a libertarian perspective.

  Your effort is certainly appreciated, but If this is all

we've got, we

might be better off not making a bid to be the official opponent


just submitting a short paid argument, because I expect that other
potential opponents have more specific and hard-hitting critiques


Proposition C, and it would be a shame to deny the voters a chance


hear them.

Yours in liberty,
        <<< Starchild >>>

Great argument from Jawj.


From: J. E. D. Greenwald
To: Marcy Berry
Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2005 12:05 AM
Subject: Proposition C opposition

Who watches the watchdogs? Will we soon need an Ethics

Commission for

the Ethics Commission?

Stripped of its window dressing, Proposition C is a measure to


the Ethics Commission to set its own salaries.

This is the true genius of government at work. To take

laws aimed

at producing open, honest government and turn them in an ethics


providing well-paid jobs for the boys.

Do you really think our government has become better and less


in the years since the creation of the Ethics Commission? Or

that a

specialized bureaucracy is needed to police laws that would


be enforced by the existing administrative and judicial

system, with

the help of a vigilant press and public?




+ Visit your group "lpsf-activists" on the web.

+ To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:

+ Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of



Yahoo! Groups Links

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
<font face=arial size=-1><a href="*
">Fair play? Video games influencing politics. Click and talk back!</a>.</font>

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: