In yesterday’s mail I received my copy of the booklet that includes, among other things, summaries, texts, and arguments for and against the ballot questions. I thought I would use that as an excuse to review the questions an how I feel about them. Ultimately I think I am likely to vote on all of them the way most BMGers probably prefer, but that wasn’t always obvious. As I mentioned in a previous diary I think the book should include statements from at least the statewide candidates as well. This can be an open thread relative to any of the four questions.
Question 1 – Repeal of gas tax indexing: As you may know from my previous comments on this, this is far from my favorite way to raise revenue. However, now that it is on the books, as with any other tax, I feel the burden is on those proposing a cut to explain how to make up the revenue or what to sacrifice. I had not previously realized how long it has been since it increased and I don’t see the problem with indexing to the CPI since sales taxes which are calculated as percentage sort of do that by default. There’s also no question we need money for transportation. I’m voting NO.
Question 2 – Bottle bill expansion: As much as I don’t understand why this would be the case in 2014, apparently the current law works in terms of reducing litter and encouraging recycling. With recycling opportunities ubiquitous already and many communities having single-stream curbside it struck me at first as an outdated law. I would much rather make that universal and require recycling cans in businesses and public areas that have garbage cans. I’m honestly not sure it will change my habits, but since I have the choice to redeem I’m not going to complain about it being a tax either. I’m voting YES.
Question 3 – Casino repeal: I’m not opposed to gambling; that’s somebody’s choice and plenty of people do it as a matter of harmless recreation. However, there were plenty of safeguards that the state could have put in place, but did not. The process has stunk, both on the legislative and the bidding sides. I agree with JConway that the economic arguments against them are the strongest. The strongest argument for them is the jobs, but I’m increasingly concerned given the state of casinos elsewhere, that even the “permanent” jobs at the casinos themselves as opposed to the construction jobs will be a flash in the pan, lasting a few years at most, after which we will have quite the economic mess to clean up. I’m voting YES.
Question 4 – Earned sick time: This question is the only one of the four that has all along been an absolute no-brainer for me. It would increase worker productivity, protect one’s colleagues, and truly reflect family values. Nobody should have to choose between caring for themselves or a family member and collecting a paycheck. The opposition complains that businesses will have to pay double, both the sick time and the substitute coverage, but plenty already do that and the others will figure it out. This is a social and economic justice issue, plain and simple. I’m voting YES.
One thing I couldn’t help but notice is that on all the questions but the casinos the folks who advocate the side opposite mine did not do a good job trying to reach me. There were variations on big bad government that made me feel like I was back in the Reagan years. For question 1 it was we have a spending problem rather than a revenue problem; for question 2 it was the deposits will be a money grab for the state; for question 4 it was red tape. If anything such claims turn me off to the argument.
And I hope you can use that logic to persuade everyone you know. Trying to convince as many people to offset the fact that I won’t be voting in MA this cycle. This would be the biggest thing getting me to the polls. I hope Tom and CMD show up and vote for repeal, even if they blank their Governors selection.
Unions should be excited about building a casino like a gravedigger should be about digging his own grave. Yep, you have some work to do, but you’re going to have to lay down in it when you’re done.