The way the 2008 election has been portrayed in the media, it seems like there is only one choice: Obama or McCain. But further down the ballot, there are a bewildering number of choices and issues to vote on, the results of which will have huge effects on people’s lives. Here are just a few things voters will be directly deciding in statewide referenda. Do you want to smoke marijuana without worrying about a possession charge haunting you forever? Do you want to marry the (same-sex) love of your life? How about get an abortion? Conduct a municipal meeting partially in Spanish? Or ending your life using prescription medication?
Although most referenda range from the mundane (like Connecticut’s once-every-20-years-vote on whether or not to have a constitutional convention) to the awesome-but-inconsequential (Alaska’s Ballot Measure 2 would limit aerial hunting of bears and wolves to Fish and Wildlife personnel), a few end up being the focus of intense interest and fevered campaigning.
Here are five of the most controversial:
California Proposition 8: Gay Marriage
Gay marriage in California first hit the national scene when San Francisco mayor Gavin Newsom unilaterally declared that same-sex marriage was legal in San Francisco. Thousands of couples, including Ellen and Portia, besieged the city by the bay, and municipal officials were working night and day to perform all the marriages. Alas, the California Supreme Court voided all the marriages, as they were performed in violation of California’s family laws. The California legislature then passed bills to recognize same-sex marriages in 2005 and 2006, which were both vetoed by Gov. Schwarzenegger. On May 16, 2008, the California Supreme Court ruled that there was a “right to marry” and that any law which discriminated on basis of sexual orientation was unconstitutional. Proposition 8, otherwise known as the California Marriage Protection Act was drafted by opponents to the Court’s decision; it would amend the California Constitution to say that “only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.”
A recent poll conducted by Survey USA reported that 47 percent of likely voters intended to vote yes on Proposition 8, and 42 percent intended to vote no.
Fun Fact:Ronald George, author of the Court’s opinion legalizing same-sex marriage, was appointed by former Governor George Deukmejian, a Republican.
Massachusetts Question 2: Decriminalization of Marijuana
Just as California took cues from Massachusetts in legalizing gay marriage, Massachusetts is taking hints from its Western counterparts in substantially liberalizing its marijuana laws. In California, the oft-abused medical marijuana system has led to de facto decriminalization. If Question 2, the Massachusetts Sensible Marijuana Policy Initiative, were to pass, it would lower the sanction for possession of cannabis from six months in jail, a $500 fine and a permanent mark on their Criminal Offender Record Information to a mere $100 fine for possession of an ounce or less. Also, teenagers caught with less than an ounce of marijuana would have to complete a drug awareness program.
A recent poll conducted by Suffolk University found that 71 percent of likely voters support Question 2, while only 22 percent support the current laws.
Fun Fact: In the text of the proposition, marijuana is spelled “marihuana.”
South Dakota Initiated Measure 11: Abortion Ban
Once again, South Dakota is attempting to eliminate abortion rights, despite their federal protection under Roe v. Wade. In 2006, the South Dakota legislature passed a ban on all forms of abortion, with the exception of saving the life of the mother, and declaring that life begins “at the time of conception.” The law was supported by pro-life activists because it would result in a federal court challenge, thus prompting a reconsideration of Roe. The bill’s supporters never got that far, because the bill was rejected 55-45 by South Dakota voters in a referendum later that year.
South Dakotan pro-lifers are back at it, this time putting a referendum on the ballot to ban abortions in all cases except rape, incest or when an abortion would be “medically necessary to prevent death or the serious risk of substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily organ or system of the woman.” If a woman were to request an abortion under the rape and incest provisions, she would have to be in the first 20 weeks of her pregnancy and would have to “consent to biological sampling from herself and the embryo or fetus for DNA testing by law enforcement.” The attorney general of South Dakota inserted language into the official explanation of the referendum saying that, “Measure 11 will likely be challenged in court and may be declared to be in violation of the United States Constitution.”
Fun Fact: There is only one abortion provider in all of South Dakota, a Planned Parenthood clinic. They only offer the procedure once a week, and they are performed by one of four doctors who live outside the state. Roughly 800 abortions are performed each year.
Washington Initiative 1000: Doctor-Assisted Suicide
Since 1994, Oregon has had the distinction of being the only state to allow physician-assisted suicide. Now, with heavy support from former Gov. Booth Gardner, there is a ballot proposition in Washington that would allow medically-administered euthanasia. According to Yes on 1000!, “This initiative would allow mentally competent, terminally ill adults who have six months or less to live the legal choice to access and self-administer life-ending medication.” Physician-assisted suicide would be strictly limited to those who had terminal conditions and sought the approval of two doctors, one of which would be required to inform the patient of non-suicide alternatives. The law is identical to Oregon’s, and most notably would require that the patient – not the doctor would administer the lethal dose.
Fun Facts: Gov. Booth Gardner, the main proponent of the bill, has been diagnosed with Parkinson’s and told a reporter for the New York Times Magazine, “I can’t see where anybody benefits by my hanging around.” Also, actor Martin Sheen has recorded ads urging “No” votes on the initiative.
Missouri Constitutional Amendment 1: English Only in Government Meetings
This little Missouri proposition wins the award for most pointless and offensive. The Amendment would “add a statement [to the Missouri Constitution] that English shall be the language of all governmental meetings at which any public business is discussed, decided, or public policy is formulated, whether conducted in person or by communication equipment including conference calls, video conferences, or Internet chat or message board.” The amendment already builds on a 1998 bill which recognized English as the “common” language of the state. The main proponent of the amendment, Brian Nieves, said in its defense, “We have gotten reports during testimony in the Legislature that there have been city council meetings in the state of Missouri done partially in languages other than English to accommodate business owners, which is a huge problem in my mind.” However, he didn’t note any reports that indicated that any meeting was not also in English or that any citizen had a problem understanding a municipal government meeting due to it being done partially in other languages.
Fun Fact: Nieves doesn’t just support the bill, he also breaks up fights. In April, Representatives Trent Skaggs (a Democrat) and Steven Tilley (a Republican) started jawing at each other, so Nieves stepped in. Of course, he ended up lunging at Skaggs after the two exchanged words.