October 28, 2008

Vote Early!—Colorado Ballot Recommendations ’08, via CU Student Caroline Clark.

I’m a 19-year old, first time voter in a presidential election. The young people’s vote is critical in this election, especially in my home state of Colorado, and here is where I stand on the issues.  Please comment if you have any strong opinions—agree or disagree!  Colorado

46: [NO] This effectively ends Affirmative Action. I have a lot of mixed feelings about Affirmative Action, but I don’t believe that we are ready to constitutionally prohibit it. As a student at one of the whitest universities in the nation, I have a deep appreciation for diversity (or lack thereof) and I think Affirmative Action is necessary for this.

47: [NO] By prohibiting the requirement to pay union dues, I think it undermines the efforts over the years that have gone into worker’s rights. I just don’t trust that it’s in the worker’s best interests. 

48: [NO] This initiative not only outlaws abortion, but also forms of contraception. I believe in a woman’s right to choose—and also to have safe sex.

49: [NO?] I don’t trust this. It seems like there are all these efforts to undercut unions, which I support. I may have to inquire further, however, because I also want people to be able to choose how they spend their money. 

50: [NO] This raises the gambling stakes with a portion going to Community Colleges. The education component is important, but all this will do is increase your chances of losing money in Colorado. Isn’t our economy already in shambles? Sure, we can be more competitive with other gaming states, but I don’t think gambling should be our economic focus. We’ve got some pretty sweet mountains, that’s a better tourist attraction for out-of-staters anyway. 

51: [YES] This creates a funding source for developmental disability services. I understand that it becomes tricky when “special interest groups” get their initiatives on the ballot, it is a kind of intimidating can of worms. But to me, this promote equality in spite of developmental (dis)abilities, outweighs the precedence. 

52: [NO] This diversion of a tax to highway tax is vague. The fact that NO Colorado transportation districts support it seems odd. From what I understand, out of state oil companies (from Houston and LA) are providing financial support to the legislators too, so that makes me nervous. 

54: [NO] While attempting to avoid government pay-offs of greedy contractors, it silences the political voice family members of the contractors while maintaining loopholes for big businesses. The language of the amendment is vague and strange.

59: [YES] Ends state subsidies on oil companies and the extra revenues goes to state education. Yay! It’s not a tax increase, but a rechanneling of oil revenues.


 Ref L: [YES] This referendum lowers the age that one can sit in the Colorado senate/house to 21 years of age. I’m all about diversity, including diversity of age, experience, and perspective. It goes back to the age old question of, if I’m old enough to die for this country, how come I’m not old enough to pass legislature?

These remove obsolete constitutional language. I appreciate the desire to preserve the historical character of the constitution, but given some of my experience meddling through red tape, I believe the more clarity in legislation, the better. 

Ref M: [YES] Obsolete land laws. 

Ref N: [YES] Obsolete alcohol laws. 

Ref O: [YES] This makes it harder to change the constitution and keeps every day law out of it, instead guiding them toward the state statute. It diversifies the percentages within different state districts required of petition signers.

President: Barack Obama

House of Reps: Jared Polis

Senate: Mark Udall


Rep. Jack Pommer’s Blog

League of Women Voters      

Read 4 Comments and Reply

Read 4 comments and reply

Top Contributors Latest

Caroline Clark  |  Contribution: 510