Comments on: Alameda County’s voter turnout looks looooooow

By: Josh Richman

Josh Richman — Wed, 20 May 2009 02:47:16 +0000

Ulno: How would you feel about amending California's initiative process so there's judicial review BEFORE the election, so the voters' will isn't overturned afterward? Some states already require pre-ballot legal reviews of all initiatives. For example, Florida requires that after proponents have gathered 10 percent of the total number of signatures they need from at least seven of the state's 25 congressional districts, those signatures be submitted for certification and the initiative's language be submitted to the state Supreme Court for a legal review. If the court approves it, proponents gather the rest of the signatures needed to put it on the ballot; if the court finds it is unconstitutional, addresses more than one subject or is invalid for any other reason, it's dead.

By: Hilltopper

Hilltopper — Wed, 20 May 2009 02:15:14 +0000

There was nothing positive about today’s vote. Asking people to vote for things they do not like because not passing it would be worse is a pretty poor incentive.

Budgets should be passed by the legislature. But so long as we are one of only four states to have a 2/3 requirement, it cannot function. Sad days ahead.

By: Ulno

Ulno — Wed, 20 May 2009 01:28:59 +0000

I see little point in voting anymore. Our opinions don’t make one bit of difference, the city, state and federal civil dictators will do as they please.

Consider Prop 187. Prop 22. Prop 8.

It’s stare decisis when the tyrants get what they want. Otherwise, it’s overturned in courts, unenforced, and unconstitional.

These elections are merely rubber-stamping exercises to try to convince citizens that they have a say in their repression.

This is why we don’t vote. You can screw us, but don’t think we don’t know it.