Globe gets the ballot questions right: #NYYY

We’re happy to see that the Boston Globe’s editorial board has followed the path pioneered here at BMG, and signed on to the #NYYY bandwagon.  The Globe had previously announced its support for “No on 1” and “Yes on 2“; today, it announced that it also favors repealing the casino law (Yes on 3), and enacting an earned sick time law for workers (Yes on 4).

Here’s the Globe’s take on casinos, with which we find ourselves in agreement.

That [casino] law, passed in a moment of economic desperation, was a mistake for the Commonwealth. Voters don’t have to believe that gambling is immoral, or that all casinos are inherently evil, to conclude that this law will do more harm than good….

The evidence of the last three years only seems to confirm most of the fears of critics of the Massachusetts casino law, while exposing some new ones. One of the casinos, planned for Everett, will likely have a dramatic traffic impact on Sullivan Square. Both the casinos approved so far are in struggling cities with a long history of municipal corruption and mismanagement. As expected, casino transactions have also proven to be a kind of flypaper for low-lifes, as the recent indictments of the Everett landowners show. The Massachusetts Gaming Commission, the newly created body that vetted the casino license applicants, has done a decent enough job within the confines of the law. Yet every tough decision seems to have gone the industry’s way, including the dubious one to allow the Suffolk Downs racetrack to continue seeking a license even after East Boston voters rejected a plan there. The industry’s winning streak before the commission isn’t a promising sign for the future of Massachusetts casino regulation….

Massachusetts took many risks, in terms of both quality of life and political integrity, to roll out the welcome mat for casinos. The heavy spending of the casino industry this election season is just a taste of what’s to come if casinos become embedded in the Commonwealth’s culture. It’s not worth the trade. Voters should repeal the casino legislation by voting yes on Question 3.

Well said.  As for question 4:

The measure is a welcome opportunity for the Commonwealth to lead, and voters should approve it….

[W]hile the ballot measure would clearly help many individual workers, it would also benefit society as a whole. It would contribute to public health by discouraging people from going to work when they’re ill, and by making it easier for them to visit doctors. (The measure would also allow the use of leave for routine medical appointments.) It would increase stability for children, whose parents might otherwise be forced to choose between keeping a job and caring for a sick child….

Critics are right that a ballot question is a blunt instrument for making complicated changes to labor law. But earned sick leave, in the past, has gained no traction in the State House. If this measure passes and proves to have unintended consequences, the Legislature should stand ready to modify the legal language, so long as the basic principle is intact: a humane, reasonable law that treats workers with dignity and respect.

Again, well said.  A measure like this can always be modified (or repealed) down the road.  But adopting it at the ballot appears to be the only way to get the conversation started.  And it’s a conversation that needs starting.

Please share widely!

0

0