Ballot Proposals

I'm pretty certain of how I'm voting on all proposals except the school funding mandate. Can anyone here give me a DU perspective on that?

I see pros and cons both ways on that one.

but don't feel informed enough yet about the ramifications of the proposal. I know someone in our township who is involved with government on a local level, so maybe I'll ask her opinion.

the ballot proposals. I read the synopsis for the pros and cons, but am still looking for more info. I found that the MEA has some info on their website regarding Proposal 5 which encourages voters to vote Yes. Here's what I found:

http://www.mea.org/gov/082506_prop5_talkingpoints.html

The 'arguments' I've seen against it mostly center on demonizing the "greedy teachers" who want their health care and pensions to continue. Well, heaven forbid! Clearly, the national issues of inadequate pension funding and syyrocketing heath care profiteering have pinched the taxpayers. The corporatists appear to oppose Proposal 5 for two reasons: (1) Privatization of education and (2) "Starving the beast" strategies. While Proposal 5 is one of those "not perfect" solutions to problems that really exist in the underlying economics of health care and pension fund management, I think it's a case of "women and children first" ... protecting our future.

The war that's been waged on public education for the last 25+ years is truly appalling. It has been nihilisic and exploitative rather than improvement oriented. As a product of the public school system of the 50s and 60s, I think it's appalling that the affluent and wealthy want to make education a perquisite of only those who can afford it - like health care. Working poor? Die and leave uneducated children to pick up your shovel.

you aren't a retired teacher by any chance? I just didn't like the part where if the school system doesn't fund the retirement that they will dip into the general fund for the monies.

... I have no particular self-interest (axe to grind) in this proposal. Insofar as the local school district being willing/able to fund pensions, think about 'inner city' schools and the costs they incur for deteriorating infrastructure, security, social support programs, and other costs not borne in more affluent neighborhoods. Somehow, the larger sociopolitical context (the State) must be able to balance the resources in order to effect a more just distribution of educational opportunity. Poverty should not be an inheritance.

I'm embarrassed to say I haven't a clue who the candidates are and what they stand for. I don't want to be voting for a rightwing nutjob.

for their preferred choice on judges. Since I'm not well informed on them either, I'll call the dem office again.

:shrug:

n/t

... wanabe Inquisitor, and all-around neoconservative abomination. Getting her off the Court would be a victory for civil liberties.

Cavanagh is a lifetime resident of Michigan, working class background, advocate, and civil servant. He's a UofD and Detroit Law School graduate. He's a civil libertarian and anti-death-penalty ... and very well qualified.

Beckering has been a medical malpractice victim' advocate, graduate of UofM, from a family of lawyers, and civil libertarian.

Both Cavanagh and Bekkering are "gay-friendly" ... Corrigan is a homophobe.

While (hopelessly) straight, I look at how these people stand on GLBT issues as a big indicator. For me, membership in the Federalist Society is grounds for impeachment - or commitment to a mental ward.

I'm embarrassed to admit that I was too lazy to do the research. My job has been keeping me very busy these days. I, too, wouldn't vote for anyone with Federalist leanings and an Engler appointee is the kiss of death for me:)

I know Jane...she's from Grand Rapids area. Excellent speaker, strong dem. You won't regret your vote.

She'll get my vote.

It's one of those where voting no means voting to keep affirmative action and voting yes means getting rid of it, I think.

I will vote to keep AA, but I suspect that the voters will get rid of it. I think that will be bad for Michigan, but the up side is maybe we won't have to hear white males complain about how hard their lives are because of "reverse discrimination" (which is one of those ignorant terms that drives me crazy-discrimination is discrimination, no matter who is discriminating against whom).

on the AA proposal also. I didn't think it was worded such that people will be confused, at least not people who can read. If you read the first sentence you can tell it's a vote to BAN affirmative action. But then again, I don't trust most voters to be educated any more.

...would require the state to spend almost $600 million it doesn't have. On top of the elimination of the SBT. Sounds like a good idea, but what a bad time for it. I voted No.

for more information

Jane Beckering

Michael Cavanagh


All Democratic Party Candidates are linked at

Michigan Democratic Party Candidate Guide