Second stab at Measure B Street Resurfacing, etc.

Phil,

Thanks for stepping up to the plate! I took the liberty of editing
your submission, mostly because I see there is a limit of 300 words
(see Department of Elections, How to Submit a Ballot
Argument: "Proponent, opponent and paid artuments may not exceed 300
words.")

Your argument now has 295 words, according to my word processing word
counter. The 5 words still allowed will go towards your name: "The
names of the authors, and any titles or identifying information about
the authors are counted toward the word limit." I was wondering if
you wanted to identify yourself as a representative of the
LPSF: "Phil Berg, Libertarian Party, San Francisco" (5 words, since
geographic names count as one word).

I suggest that if anyone on this list has an opinion on this
argument, please state in the next day or so. Otherwise, the next
step should be completed, which is to fill out a "Ballot Argument
Control Sheet."

My own personal opinion: this argument is sheer poetry, and we
should run with it. There are weaknesses which rebuttals might seize
upon, such as "If not bonds, then what is to be used if the
handicapped barriers are to come down?" Or "Is not disability and
senior income now indexed for inflation?" However, all that is
irrelevant, since regardless of rebuttals, if any, the original
argument is there for all to see!

Marcy

Edited Argument:

San Franciscans are in general caring people. The great majority
want the hazards to blind and handicapped people in
San Francisco to be abated, and they should be, through the proper and
efficient application of existing resources. Bond issues are not free
money. They have to be paid back through taxes. The taxes do not just
fall on the healthy, the able bodied, and the employed. They fall on
everyone, and fall hardest on the blind, handicapped, sick and
disabled. The greatest insecurity for many is financial insecurity. I
am legally blind and have been disabled for ten years. Taxes, I know
first hand, add to the economic insecurity of disability. For
example, the Lighthouse for the Blind has a store, and for some the
tax is the difference between being able to afford essential
equipment or going without. Many able bodied voters believe that
inflation will reduce the burden of these bonds in the long run. They
may be correct; however,inflation is very cruel to the disabled and
the elderly. It destroys fixed income disability an retirement
payments. It depreciates savings. If for some reason inflation is
slowed or halted, San Francisco's bond burden may be a severe problem
for the City. These cost burdens should be reduced, as they are borne
in part by the poor and disabled. By rejecting this proposition the
concerned voters send a clear and compassionate message to the
politicians who are supposed to be serving us. We want the
handicapped physical barriers taken care of,but we no longer want to
put any more financial burdens on the citizens of
our city. In addition to taking an oath to defend the Constitution,
perhaps each politician should be required to take a Hippocratic
Oath, "first do no harm."

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
<font face=arial size=-1><a href="http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=12h98bokf/M=362329.6886306.7839369.3040540/D=groups/S=1705365370:TM/Y=YAHOO/EXP=1124070168/A=2894321/R=0/SIG=11dvsfulr/*http://youthnoise.com/page.php?page_id=1992
">Fair play? Video games influencing politics. Click and talk back!</a>.</font>
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lpsf-activists/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    lpsf-activists-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

minor revisoons, sorry to email receivers--- In

Phil,

Thanks for stepping up to the plate! I took the liberty of editing
your submission, mostly because I see there is a limit of 300 words
(see Department of Elections, How to Submit a Ballot
Argument: "Proponent, opponent and paid artuments may not exceed 300
words.")

Your argument now has 295 words, according to my word processing word
counter. The 5 words still allowed will go towards your name: "The
names of the authors, and any titles or identifying information about
the authors are counted toward the word limit." I was wondering if
you wanted to identify yourself as a representative of the
LPSF: "Phil Berg, Libertarian Party, San Francisco" (5 words, since
geographic names count as one word).

I suggest that if anyone on this list has an opinion on this
argument, please state in the next day or so. Otherwise, the next
step should be completed, which is to fill out a "Ballot Argument
Control Sheet."

My own personal opinion: this argument is sheer poetry, and we
should run with it. There are weaknesses which rebuttals might seize
upon, such as "If not bonds, then what is to be used if the
handicapped barriers are to come down?" Or "Is not disability and
senior income now indexed for inflation?" However, all that is
irrelevant, since regardless of rebuttals, if any, the original
argument is there for all to see!

Marcy

Edited Argument:

San Franciscans are caring people. The great majority
want the hazards to blind and handicapped people in
San Francisco to be abated, and they should be, through the
efficient application of existing resources. Bond issues are not free
money. They have to be paid back through taxes. The taxes do not just
fall on the healthy, the able bodied, and the employed. They fall on
everyone, and fall hardest on the blind, handicapped, sick and
disabled. The greatest insecurity for many is financial insecurity. I
am legally blind and have been disabled for ten years. Taxes, I know
first hand, add to the economic insecurity of disability. For
example, the Lighthouse for the Blind has a store, and for some the
tax is the difference between being able to afford essential
equipment or going without. Many able bodied voters believe that
inflation will reduce the burden of these bonds in the long run. They
may be correct; however,inflation is very cruel to the disabled and
the elderly. It destroys fixed income disability and retirement
payments. It depreciates savings. If for some reason inflation is
slowed or halted, San Francisco's bond burden may be a severe problem
for the City. These cost burdens should be reduced, as they are borne
in part by the poor and disabled. By rejecting this proposition the
concerned voters send a clear and compassionate message to the
politicians who are supposed to be serving us. We want the
handicapped physical barriers taken care of,but we no longer want to
put any more financial burdens on the citizens of
our city. In addition to taking an oath to defend the Constitution,
perhaps each politician should be required to take a Hippocratic
Oath, "first do no harm."

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
<font face=arial size=-1><a href="http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=12hdu1hd0/M=362329.6886306.7839369.3040540/D=groups/S=1705365370:TM/Y=YAHOO/EXP=1124238769/A=2894321/R=0/SIG=11dvsfulr/*http://youthnoise.com/page.php?page_id=1992
">Fair play? Video games influencing politics. Click and talk back!</a>.</font>
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lpsf-activists/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    lpsf-activists-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/