time spent: 20 minutes
Tonight I revisited the congressman's legislative records and opened the full text of one bill to see whether I could understand it what was written, without the benefit of having an attorney's background. The first bill was selected at random, H.R. 3039 regarding the preferential duty treatment of certain apparel articles from the Philippines. To my surprise and relief, I was able to read through the bill with relative ease.
Encouraged by this discovery, I launched my search for the bills that I felt were of particular interest to me. There were several candidates: HR 4183 addressing assistance for unemployed workers, HR 3548 addressing emergency unemployment compensation, HR 3038 addressing the civil rights act and others. Unfortunately a number of these were amendments, so the format was more cryptic and less comprehensive than that of a new bill, which meant that in order for me to fully appreciate the context of the amendment I would have to refer to the original language of the bill. Not enough of a deterrent, but definitely more work. Perhaps there is another way....
Wednesday, February 24, 2010
Sunday, February 21, 2010
Legistlative Activities for Congressman McDermott
time spent: 25 minutes
For the longest time I put off using my highly coveted vacation time to visit the likes of Washington D.C., when my preference clearly involved travel to Europe. Finally, two years ago, budget and time constraints presented the opportunity to rethink this. In order to maximize my trip I decided to read a book on the American Revolution to get a refresh on the key figures, battles and decisions made in the founding of our country. When we finally arrived at Washington D.C., it became apparent almost immediately that this was going to be a fantastic experience and it was. To put things in perspective realize that just about every tourist attraction is free. Moreover, the catalogue of information and national treasure has got to be among the finest in the world. I personally validated the claim that it is virtually impossible to take in all our Capital has to offer in a single trip. My indulgence in posting this reflection was triggered by the very fond memories of visiting such places as the Library of Congress.
It is from the Library of Congress that I am able to locate the legislative activities of Congressman McDermott thanks to the electronic cataloguing on the web (the congressman's website also offers a direct link) http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/?&Db=d111&querybd=@FIELD(FLD003+@4((@1(Rep+McDermott++Jim))+00766)).
The search results of bills and resolutions associated with Representative McDermott illuminated for me how many activities a congressman get involved in, some of them surprising to say the least. For example, I was surprised to see a House Resolution (H.R. 517) congratulating the University of Washington's women's softball team for winning the 2009 College World Series. Then there was H.R. 750 congratulating Seattle Mariner Ichiro Suzuki for becoming the first player in the history of Major League Baseball with at least 200 base hits in 9 consecutive seasons.
Not to take away anything from these fine athletes, but the first thought I had when I saw this was, really? We're paying our congressmen and women to bestow formal congratulations on team sports? To explore this question further I revisited the U.S. Constitution outlaying the duties of a congressman:
http://www.house.gov/house/Constitution/Constitution.html
Section. 8.
Clause 1: The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
Clause 2: To borrow Money on the credit of the United States;
Clause 3: To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;
Clause 4: To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;
Clause 5: To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;
Clause 6: To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;
Clause 7: To establish Post Offices and post Roads;
Clause 8: To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;
Clause 9: To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;
Clause 10: To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations;
Clause 11: To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;
Clause 12: To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;
Clause 13: To provide and maintain a Navy;
Clause 14: To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;
Clause 15: To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;
Clause 16: To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;
Clause 17: To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings;--And
Clause 18: To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.
Hmmm....nope, don't see it here. Moving on, I continued my search for bills that affected me more directly. I was both pleased and relieve to find that the majority of bills posted were more broadly in the interest of our nation than the aforementioned "hearty congratulations". Having many to choose from, I decided I would select one that particularly addressed my community (or state) and another that affected the nation as a whole.
That said, my next step is to select one of each topic from the vast list of bills.
For the longest time I put off using my highly coveted vacation time to visit the likes of Washington D.C., when my preference clearly involved travel to Europe. Finally, two years ago, budget and time constraints presented the opportunity to rethink this. In order to maximize my trip I decided to read a book on the American Revolution to get a refresh on the key figures, battles and decisions made in the founding of our country. When we finally arrived at Washington D.C., it became apparent almost immediately that this was going to be a fantastic experience and it was. To put things in perspective realize that just about every tourist attraction is free. Moreover, the catalogue of information and national treasure has got to be among the finest in the world. I personally validated the claim that it is virtually impossible to take in all our Capital has to offer in a single trip. My indulgence in posting this reflection was triggered by the very fond memories of visiting such places as the Library of Congress.
It is from the Library of Congress that I am able to locate the legislative activities of Congressman McDermott thanks to the electronic cataloguing on the web (the congressman's website also offers a direct link) http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/?&Db=d111&querybd=@FIELD(FLD003+@4((@1(Rep+McDermott++Jim))+00766)).
The search results of bills and resolutions associated with Representative McDermott illuminated for me how many activities a congressman get involved in, some of them surprising to say the least. For example, I was surprised to see a House Resolution (H.R. 517) congratulating the University of Washington's women's softball team for winning the 2009 College World Series. Then there was H.R. 750 congratulating Seattle Mariner Ichiro Suzuki for becoming the first player in the history of Major League Baseball with at least 200 base hits in 9 consecutive seasons.
Not to take away anything from these fine athletes, but the first thought I had when I saw this was, really? We're paying our congressmen and women to bestow formal congratulations on team sports? To explore this question further I revisited the U.S. Constitution outlaying the duties of a congressman:
http://www.house.gov/house/Constitution/Constitution.html
Section. 8.
Clause 1: The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
Clause 2: To borrow Money on the credit of the United States;
Clause 3: To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;
Clause 4: To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;
Clause 5: To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;
Clause 6: To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;
Clause 7: To establish Post Offices and post Roads;
Clause 8: To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;
Clause 9: To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;
Clause 10: To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations;
Clause 11: To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;
Clause 12: To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;
Clause 13: To provide and maintain a Navy;
Clause 14: To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;
Clause 15: To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;
Clause 16: To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;
Clause 17: To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings;--And
Clause 18: To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.
Hmmm....nope, don't see it here. Moving on, I continued my search for bills that affected me more directly. I was both pleased and relieve to find that the majority of bills posted were more broadly in the interest of our nation than the aforementioned "hearty congratulations". Having many to choose from, I decided I would select one that particularly addressed my community (or state) and another that affected the nation as a whole.
That said, my next step is to select one of each topic from the vast list of bills.
Saturday, February 20, 2010
Back to the Congressional Candidacy
time spent: 30 minutes
Getting an early start before challengers throw their hat in the ring gives me an opportunity to take a closer look at the incumbent for the congressional position up for (re)election this fall. Article I, Section 8 of the U.S Constitution outlines the responsibilities of a congressman, so as I evaluate Representative McDermott's track record, I at least have a basis of understanding what he was hired to do in the first place.
The next thing I did was take a look at his website:
http://www.house.gov/mcdermott/index.shtml
Within this site on the left hand column I was able to drill down to the legislative issues that he had been involved with and get a read on his position. The legislative menu divides itself into five areas of responsibility and this is where my work begins.
Getting an early start before challengers throw their hat in the ring gives me an opportunity to take a closer look at the incumbent for the congressional position up for (re)election this fall. Article I, Section 8 of the U.S Constitution outlines the responsibilities of a congressman, so as I evaluate Representative McDermott's track record, I at least have a basis of understanding what he was hired to do in the first place.
The next thing I did was take a look at his website:
http://www.house.gov/mcdermott/index.shtml
Within this site on the left hand column I was able to drill down to the legislative issues that he had been involved with and get a read on his position. The legislative menu divides itself into five areas of responsibility and this is where my work begins.
Naturally, there are numerous House resolutions so I will have to make a selection within this catalogue of those issues that resonate with me on some level. The page, entitled U.S. House of Representatives Roll Call Votes is identified by the congressional session (ex. 1st session, 2009) of the 111th Congress. What are helpful on this page are the category columns, including
- the date of the resolution
- the issue number
- a summary of the question (or issue)
- the result (i.e. pass or fail)
- a title/description field which may provide more clarity on the question
Once I go behind this curtain I am faced with the grueling task of trying navigate through a multitude of links relating to the resolution. This begs the question, how much information do I need to satisfy my research? How far will it be necessary to drill down to understand the measure, the circumstances behind it and the supporting information before I feel I can make an informed decision?
It becomes obvious rather quickly that this answer will vary on a case by case basis. It also clearly emphasizes the need to do the best job possible in electing people into office and this year I plan to do a more thorough job than I ever have in the past.
Possible Resources
time spent: 5 minutes
I was listening to the radio the other day and learned of a few websites that may be helpful in my research throughout this project. I must caution however that I have not yet researched these sites extensively and thus unable to post an evaluation regarding their objectivity:
Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget http://crfb.org/about-us
U. S. Budget Watch http://usbudgetwatch.org/
Stimulus.org http://stimulus.org/
Peterson/Pew Commission on Budget Reform: http://budgetreform.org/
In addition, I heard of another site that supposedly is tracking the economic stimulus:
http://www.onvia.com/governmentstimulus/fp/default.aspx
The above site also linked to another that supposedly tracks the economic recovery projects on a state-by-state basis.
http://www.recovery.org/
I was listening to the radio the other day and learned of a few websites that may be helpful in my research throughout this project. I must caution however that I have not yet researched these sites extensively and thus unable to post an evaluation regarding their objectivity:
Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget http://crfb.org/about-us
U. S. Budget Watch http://usbudgetwatch.org/
Stimulus.org http://stimulus.org/
Peterson/Pew Commission on Budget Reform: http://budgetreform.org/
In addition, I heard of another site that supposedly is tracking the economic stimulus:
http://www.onvia.com/governmentstimulus/fp/default.aspx
The above site also linked to another that supposedly tracks the economic recovery projects on a state-by-state basis.
http://www.recovery.org/
Moving On
time spent: 0 minutes
I didn't record any time to this post because I didn't actually do any research since my last post; instead I spent time considering the question put before me on Initiative 1068. When I first saw the initiative posted, I had expectations of something beyond a group of people wanting to legalize marijuana. I've been hearing through the media that some states like California might consider changing the laws in order to generate new revenue through sales taxes imposed on the 'product'. Not only that but based on what I had initially perceived to be the case in Amsterdam, I thought there would be some sort of regulations accompanying the measure to ensure that the product sold met certain 'standards'. What those would be I'm unsure of, but just as the tobacco industry got busted some years ago, it stands to reason that I would be equally concerned if an unsuspecting marijuana consumer bought a product that was laced with something else, perhaps more addictive.
In the absence of all those things, the question on the initiative so far appears straight forward: Do I want to lift restrictions of the cultivation, possession, sales and consumption of marijuana on individuals over the age of 18? It seems simple, but what happens if/when it passes? Would the State automatically apply associated laws as a consequence or would they have to introduce subsequent ballot measures? I'm interested in the consequence of this measure passing beyond what is written in the text of the proposed initiative.
In the meantime, until this becomes a formal ballot item, there is really nothing further to research other than my own personal views on what I believe the impact would be in passing this measure. Certainly I can research more on the medical effects of marijuana, but there are just as many arguments for as there are against. This project is not meant to deliver a dissertation on the medical effects of marijuana, so I will leave that to others to pursue at their own discretion. Thus, for all intents and purposes my research on this initiative has, at least for now, come to a close.
I didn't record any time to this post because I didn't actually do any research since my last post; instead I spent time considering the question put before me on Initiative 1068. When I first saw the initiative posted, I had expectations of something beyond a group of people wanting to legalize marijuana. I've been hearing through the media that some states like California might consider changing the laws in order to generate new revenue through sales taxes imposed on the 'product'. Not only that but based on what I had initially perceived to be the case in Amsterdam, I thought there would be some sort of regulations accompanying the measure to ensure that the product sold met certain 'standards'. What those would be I'm unsure of, but just as the tobacco industry got busted some years ago, it stands to reason that I would be equally concerned if an unsuspecting marijuana consumer bought a product that was laced with something else, perhaps more addictive.
In the absence of all those things, the question on the initiative so far appears straight forward: Do I want to lift restrictions of the cultivation, possession, sales and consumption of marijuana on individuals over the age of 18? It seems simple, but what happens if/when it passes? Would the State automatically apply associated laws as a consequence or would they have to introduce subsequent ballot measures? I'm interested in the consequence of this measure passing beyond what is written in the text of the proposed initiative.
In the meantime, until this becomes a formal ballot item, there is really nothing further to research other than my own personal views on what I believe the impact would be in passing this measure. Certainly I can research more on the medical effects of marijuana, but there are just as many arguments for as there are against. This project is not meant to deliver a dissertation on the medical effects of marijuana, so I will leave that to others to pursue at their own discretion. Thus, for all intents and purposes my research on this initiative has, at least for now, come to a close.
Sunday, February 14, 2010
Marijuana Reform Act - Initiative No. 1068
time spent: 25 minutes
I have chosen this initiative as part of this project because I am aware that some states are considering this option as a means of increasing revenue (and closing budget gaps) through taxes associated with the sale of marijuana. I don't use marijuana so I have no personal motivation for approving the initiative; at the same time I really don't know where I stand on the matter of legalizing the substance as I've heard sound arguments from both sides of the issue.
To start my own research on the topic, I downloaded the full text of the initiative being proposed: http://www.sos.wa.gov/elections/initiatives/text/i1068.pdf. Basically, this initiative is drafted to legalize the rights of persons 18 years or older to growing, transporting, selling or smoking the drug. What I am still looking for is the information that I would need to accompany this proposition, such as who regulates the 'quality' of marijuana being sold; where can marijuana be sold; will it be taxed; where can it be smoked, etc.
To get some background on the 'success' of legalizing marijuana, I turned to Amsterdam, where marijuana is considered a 'soft drug' and the substance is legalized on a limited level. Here is one of the sites I looked to: http://www.amsterdam.info/drugs/. I expected to find more clear cut guidance, but instead found that the laws are somewhat lax. For example, production, trade and stock of marijuana is still a criminal offense, which basically turns a blind side to where the marijuana is sourced in the first place. I did learn that only limited amounts can be in stock and sold on a per transaction basis and advertising the product is banned, but I still don't have all the parts of the puzzle in place. I need to sort out whether my concerns are one of safety, of health, of taxes or something else. In other words, what difference does legalizing marijuana make in my life, or am I simply casting a vote on behalf of someone else?
This site offers a bit more regarding Amsterdam and the guidelines for marijuana use: http://www.amsterdamescape.com/Drugs.html
I have chosen this initiative as part of this project because I am aware that some states are considering this option as a means of increasing revenue (and closing budget gaps) through taxes associated with the sale of marijuana. I don't use marijuana so I have no personal motivation for approving the initiative; at the same time I really don't know where I stand on the matter of legalizing the substance as I've heard sound arguments from both sides of the issue.
To start my own research on the topic, I downloaded the full text of the initiative being proposed: http://www.sos.wa.gov/elections/initiatives/text/i1068.pdf. Basically, this initiative is drafted to legalize the rights of persons 18 years or older to growing, transporting, selling or smoking the drug. What I am still looking for is the information that I would need to accompany this proposition, such as who regulates the 'quality' of marijuana being sold; where can marijuana be sold; will it be taxed; where can it be smoked, etc.
To get some background on the 'success' of legalizing marijuana, I turned to Amsterdam, where marijuana is considered a 'soft drug' and the substance is legalized on a limited level. Here is one of the sites I looked to: http://www.amsterdam.info/drugs/. I expected to find more clear cut guidance, but instead found that the laws are somewhat lax. For example, production, trade and stock of marijuana is still a criminal offense, which basically turns a blind side to where the marijuana is sourced in the first place. I did learn that only limited amounts can be in stock and sold on a per transaction basis and advertising the product is banned, but I still don't have all the parts of the puzzle in place. I need to sort out whether my concerns are one of safety, of health, of taxes or something else. In other words, what difference does legalizing marijuana make in my life, or am I simply casting a vote on behalf of someone else?
This site offers a bit more regarding Amsterdam and the guidelines for marijuana use: http://www.amsterdamescape.com/Drugs.html
2010 State Offices Subject to Election
time spent: 15 minutes
This morning I located the page that indicates that 2010 Offices Subject to Election in Washington State:
http://wei.secstate.wa.gov/osos/en/PreviousElections/2010/general/Pages/2010OfficesSubjecttoElection.aspx
They included one State Senator (a 6-year term), members of Congress (a 2-year term), state Legislatures and various Court positions. From earlier research I have found a way of determining which district I belong to, so I can narrow the focus rather easily. For purposes of this project I have a keen interest in giving closer scrutiny to the members of Congress. In my case, I am served by the 7th Congressional District represented by Congressman Jim McDermott.
At a State level, I live in the 36th Legislative district, where the State Senator (a 4-year term) and Representative (a 2-year term) positions are scheduled on the ballot as well. From a court perspective, there are three positions on the ballot for the State Supreme court (a 6-year term). Also affecting me are two positions on the Court of Appeals in Division 1, District 1 (a 6-year term and a 1-year term unexpired term) and the King County Superior Court position (a 2-year unexpired term).
From the lessons learned of the last two weeks, and recognizing I still have not completed my investigation of future ballot items at the county and city level, I will commit my focus thus far on Congressman McDermott. Time permitting I may record other efforts and findings pertaining to other candidate positions.
The first step I shall take in consideration of Congressman McDermott's candidacy is to refresh myself of the duties of a congressman, under Article 1 of the U.S. Constitution:
http://www.house.gov/house/Constitution/Constitution.html
This morning I located the page that indicates that 2010 Offices Subject to Election in Washington State:
http://wei.secstate.wa.gov/osos/en/PreviousElections/2010/general/Pages/2010OfficesSubjecttoElection.aspx
They included one State Senator (a 6-year term), members of Congress (a 2-year term), state Legislatures and various Court positions. From earlier research I have found a way of determining which district I belong to, so I can narrow the focus rather easily. For purposes of this project I have a keen interest in giving closer scrutiny to the members of Congress. In my case, I am served by the 7th Congressional District represented by Congressman Jim McDermott.
At a State level, I live in the 36th Legislative district, where the State Senator (a 4-year term) and Representative (a 2-year term) positions are scheduled on the ballot as well. From a court perspective, there are three positions on the ballot for the State Supreme court (a 6-year term). Also affecting me are two positions on the Court of Appeals in Division 1, District 1 (a 6-year term and a 1-year term unexpired term) and the King County Superior Court position (a 2-year unexpired term).
From the lessons learned of the last two weeks, and recognizing I still have not completed my investigation of future ballot items at the county and city level, I will commit my focus thus far on Congressman McDermott. Time permitting I may record other efforts and findings pertaining to other candidate positions.
The first step I shall take in consideration of Congressman McDermott's candidacy is to refresh myself of the duties of a congressman, under Article 1 of the U.S. Constitution:
http://www.house.gov/house/Constitution/Constitution.html
Saturday, February 13, 2010
Chapter Two - Looking Ahead
time spent: 20 minutes
Continuing my project, I turned to the State site to get a view of the Proposed Initiatives to the People in 2010: http://www.sos.wa.gov/elections/initiatives/people.aspx?y=2010. This site posts initiatives filed to date with the State and provides information about the number of signatures necessary to file each petition and the deadline for submission.
There are quite a few initiatives that have been filed, so my 'assignment' for this week shall be to select the one or two initiatives that evoke sufficient interest to warrant further investigation. Already I see several intruiging candidates and some that outright surprise me.
For example, there is an initiative filed that proposes teaching and testing on the Declaration of Independence, the U.S. Constitution and the Washington Constitution. More specifically, the initiative proposes to 'define' what teaching is required and when the teaching occurs. From this I gather that the folks proposing the initiative do not feel that the current curricula or teaching methods are adequate.
Then there's the initiative about firearms, proposing a declaration that law abiding citizens have the right to self-defense and privacy. I don't own a gun, but I did have the impression that I had this already, so I would definitely need to look into this before I could understand the intent of this petition. I'm wondering if the term 'privacy' here concerns the registration of a weapon.
There's the one about enforcing immigration laws, another about placing a ceiling on state income and debt, and the marijuana law. Of all these however the one I find most intriguing is the first one posted thus far, which is a proposal to "restate existing statutory requirements" that tax increases must be approved by two-thirds majority in the legislature. What is intriguing about this is that this was already voted into law by the people and as I understand it, our legislature is currently trying to overturn it. What puzzles me is why this has to go back to the people, how the legislature can overturn something already in effect and how, if voted (again) into law, this will be reinforced this time around when the voters have already approved this once before. Why do we need a law to restate a law?
This has happened before with the infamous Monorail tax. It was put to the ballot at least three times that I recall. It passed, then the vote was put to the people again. It passed, then the vote was put to the people again. It became a joke; it was as if the measure was going to continue to be put on the ballot until the people "finally got it right" in the eyes of those against it.
Before I select the one or two items I will focus on for this project, I will conduct a more thorough preliminary review to see if I can identify at an earlier stage, which initiative I have the best chance of researching. It looks like the next election is in April so I have a bit more time this time around.
Continuing my project, I turned to the State site to get a view of the Proposed Initiatives to the People in 2010: http://www.sos.wa.gov/elections/initiatives/people.aspx?y=2010. This site posts initiatives filed to date with the State and provides information about the number of signatures necessary to file each petition and the deadline for submission.
There are quite a few initiatives that have been filed, so my 'assignment' for this week shall be to select the one or two initiatives that evoke sufficient interest to warrant further investigation. Already I see several intruiging candidates and some that outright surprise me.
For example, there is an initiative filed that proposes teaching and testing on the Declaration of Independence, the U.S. Constitution and the Washington Constitution. More specifically, the initiative proposes to 'define' what teaching is required and when the teaching occurs. From this I gather that the folks proposing the initiative do not feel that the current curricula or teaching methods are adequate.
Then there's the initiative about firearms, proposing a declaration that law abiding citizens have the right to self-defense and privacy. I don't own a gun, but I did have the impression that I had this already, so I would definitely need to look into this before I could understand the intent of this petition. I'm wondering if the term 'privacy' here concerns the registration of a weapon.
There's the one about enforcing immigration laws, another about placing a ceiling on state income and debt, and the marijuana law. Of all these however the one I find most intriguing is the first one posted thus far, which is a proposal to "restate existing statutory requirements" that tax increases must be approved by two-thirds majority in the legislature. What is intriguing about this is that this was already voted into law by the people and as I understand it, our legislature is currently trying to overturn it. What puzzles me is why this has to go back to the people, how the legislature can overturn something already in effect and how, if voted (again) into law, this will be reinforced this time around when the voters have already approved this once before. Why do we need a law to restate a law?
This has happened before with the infamous Monorail tax. It was put to the ballot at least three times that I recall. It passed, then the vote was put to the people again. It passed, then the vote was put to the people again. It became a joke; it was as if the measure was going to continue to be put on the ballot until the people "finally got it right" in the eyes of those against it.
Before I select the one or two items I will focus on for this project, I will conduct a more thorough preliminary review to see if I can identify at an earlier stage, which initiative I have the best chance of researching. It looks like the next election is in April so I have a bit more time this time around.
An Anti-Climactic Ending to the First Ballot of the Year
Time spent: less than one hour
It's been almost 2 weeks since I last posted and not much more than one hour total was spent in that time on this project. I did call SPS to ask for details around the BTA. At first the woman did not know who to refer me to. Finally I got the name of a gentleman to call, which I did, but when I got his voice mail instead, it deflated my interest knowing the likelihood of our connecting 'real time' was slim to none.
Meanwhile in the past two weeks the free hours I've had to myself (usually from 7p-10p), I have had no desire to process new data.
Having said that I did arrive at a decision, but as my opinion is not the focus of this project so much as the research put towards it, I will not be conveying the results of my vote.
The project was never far from my mind and I experienced guilt, anxiety and disappointment at not being able to keep what I felt was a simple goal of 2 hours a week. At the same time I realized that this project is all about following the life of the ballot and that the interruptions and distractions are part of the process. Also, I had to remind myself that I knew from the beginning that it would not be realistic to research every ballot measure or candidate. This ballot came almost immediately on the heels of this project being launched and it was a great introduction for what lies ahead.
The lessons learned for this first ballot of 2010 were that 1) I started my research too late in the process and 2) it is difficult at best to follow the flow of money when it comes to government spending. Based on this, I've learned that in order to have a better shot of making an even more informed decision towards future ballots, I need to start looking ahead now for what is coming up for the remainder of the year.
That will be my next focus.
It's been almost 2 weeks since I last posted and not much more than one hour total was spent in that time on this project. I did call SPS to ask for details around the BTA. At first the woman did not know who to refer me to. Finally I got the name of a gentleman to call, which I did, but when I got his voice mail instead, it deflated my interest knowing the likelihood of our connecting 'real time' was slim to none.
Meanwhile in the past two weeks the free hours I've had to myself (usually from 7p-10p), I have had no desire to process new data.
Having said that I did arrive at a decision, but as my opinion is not the focus of this project so much as the research put towards it, I will not be conveying the results of my vote.
The project was never far from my mind and I experienced guilt, anxiety and disappointment at not being able to keep what I felt was a simple goal of 2 hours a week. At the same time I realized that this project is all about following the life of the ballot and that the interruptions and distractions are part of the process. Also, I had to remind myself that I knew from the beginning that it would not be realistic to research every ballot measure or candidate. This ballot came almost immediately on the heels of this project being launched and it was a great introduction for what lies ahead.
The lessons learned for this first ballot of 2010 were that 1) I started my research too late in the process and 2) it is difficult at best to follow the flow of money when it comes to government spending. Based on this, I've learned that in order to have a better shot of making an even more informed decision towards future ballots, I need to start looking ahead now for what is coming up for the remainder of the year.
That will be my next focus.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)