Blue Mass Group

Reality-based commentary on politics.

  • Shop
  • Subscribe to BMG
  • Contact
  • Log In
  • Front Page
  • All Posts
  • About
  • Rules
  • Events
  • Register on BMG

Here’s why Massachusetts voters should say NNYY on November 8 ballot questions

November 2, 2016 By Jamie Eldridge 13 Comments

jbe_qs

The country will decide who our next president will be on November 8th, but Massachusetts voters will also make decisions on ballot questions that will have a significant impact locally. Here’s why I will vote #NNYY next Tuesday.

No On 1

As a longtime opponent of expanded gambling in Massachusetts, I am opposed to allowing yet another slot parlor to the state. Expanding gambling hurts local small businesses, and increases the number of people falling into crime, addiction, and foreclosures. Additionally, I am deeply disturbed that Question 1 was bankrolled by one wealthy developer who is using the ballot process for his own gain. That is why I am voting no on Question 1.


No On 2

Question 2 is a deeply flawed charter school referendum that is being funded by Wall Street venture capitalists, and has the serious potential to drain significant education funding from public schools across Massachusetts. It’s critical to read this one passage from the summary of Question 2, and think of its consequences:

“New charters and enrollment expansions approved under this law would be exempt from existing limits on the number of charter schools, the number of students enrolled in them, and the amount of local school districts’ spending allocated to them.”

This ballot question is not about whether charter schools are good or bad for students. It’s about whether we can afford Question 2 at a time when the state continues to underfund our public schools, including Chapter 70 education aid, the Special Education Circuit Breaker, regional school transportation, and the charter school reimbursement – state data show that local school districts will lose more than $450 million to charter schools this year, even after state reimbursements. Adding more charter schools will lead to even more funding cuts for all Massachusetts public schools, leaving taxpayers with the responsibility to plug gaps in their local school budgets.

Wealthy out-of-state investors are spending historic amounts of dark money to increase the number of charter school in Massachusetts because they stand to make huge profits from bringing Walmart-style business principles into our public schools. I strongly urge voters to vote no on Question 2 so we can get back to improving all public schools in the Commonwealth.


Yes On 3

This proposed law would prohibit any farm owner or operator from knowingly confining any breeding pig, calf raised for veal, or egg-laying hen in a way that prevents the animal from lying down, standing up, fully extending its limbs, or turning around freely. As society becomes more thoughtful about how we treat our animals, including those for consumption, I think that this ballot question provides reasonable protections and living conditions for confined animals. That is why I will vote yes on Question 3.


Yes On 4

Approximately 800,000 adults use marijuana recreationally in Massachusetts. Yet except for exceptionally small amounts, it is still illegal to possess marijuana allowing drug cartels and criminals to control the marijuana supply in our communities.

It’s time to bring a public health approach to marijuana distribution: legalizing, regulating, and taxing marijuana will bring the use and sale of marijuana out of the shadows, and reduce the crime and chaos in our communities. In addition, as Massachusetts continues to face an opioid crisis driven by prescription painkillers and heroin, we can give ailing residents the alternative of using marijuana to alleviate their pain instead of harmful opioids.

Additionally, racial disparity in policing disproportionately impacts black members of our community. It’s disturbing that black Massachusetts residents are 3.3 times as likely to be arrested for having marijuana than white residents in Massachusetts, even four years after medical marijuana became legal. By legalizing marijuana, Massachusetts voters can strike a blow for criminal justice reform, and take an important, if modest, step towards reducing mass incarceration of non-violent youth.

Finally, legalizing, taxing, and regulating marijuana would generate additional revenue for the state to invest in essential government services such as public education, transportation, human services, and public health. For those concerned about teen use of marijuana, there is no evidence that teen use has increased in states where marijuana has been legalized. If we’re serious about reducing teen drug use, it’s much better to have a public health approach, like tobacco and alcohol, where state resources and strategies have successfully reduced teen use of each drug.

For all of these reasons, I’m voting yes on Question 4.

Please share widely!
fb-share-icon
Tweet
0
0

Filed Under: User Tagged With: ballot-questions, charter-schools, jamie-eldridge, marijuana legalization, massachusetts, NoOn1, NoOn2, public-education, YesOn3, YesOn4

Comments

  1. Christopher says

    November 2, 2016 at 11:23 pm

    NNYN

    Log in to Reply
  2. fredrichlariccia says

    November 3, 2016 at 12:15 am

    and thank you, Senator Eldridge, for your courageous and bold leadership, not just on the ballot questions but for mentoring and supporting our next generation of progressive leaders.

    The good Senator knocked over 800 doors in my hometown of Wakefield last Saturday with 50 volunteers from NARAL, Planned Parenthood, several unions and Congressman Seth Moulton’s office for our 9th Essex District state representative Democratic nominee, Jen Migliore.

    Fred Rich LaRiccia
    Campaign Manager
    The Migliore Committee

    Log in to Reply
  3. jconway says

    November 3, 2016 at 11:36 am

    This is an act of rare courage from a state legislator.

    Log in to Reply
  4. johntmay says

    November 3, 2016 at 6:37 pm

    I voted last week.

    Log in to Reply
  5. johnk says

    November 3, 2016 at 11:04 pm

    I image there are some decent points, these aren’t it.

    It’s time to bring a public health approach to marijuana distribution: legalizing, regulating, and taxing marijuana will bring the use and sale of marijuana out of the shadows, and reduce the crime and chaos in our communities. In addition, as Massachusetts continues to face an opioid crisis driven by prescription painkillers and heroin, we can give ailing residents the alternative of using marijuana to alleviate their pain instead of harmful opioids.

    Oh, boy. “public health approach” is tax revenue. Plus isn’t medical marijuana already legal in MA?

    Additionally, racial disparity in policing disproportionately impacts black members of our community. It’s disturbing that black Massachusetts residents are 3.3 times as likely to be arrested for having marijuana than white residents in Massachusetts, even four years after medical marijuana became legal. By legalizing marijuana, Massachusetts voters can strike a blow for criminal justice reform, and take an important, if modest, step towards reducing mass incarceration of non-violent youth.

    Wait, legalizing marijuana is going to stop racial profiling? Who knew? Plus now we have medical marijuana, could you please tell your earlier point.

    Finally, legalizing, taxing, and regulating marijuana would generate additional revenue for the state to invest in essential government services such as public education, transportation, human services, and public health. For those concerned about teen use of marijuana, there is no evidence that teen use has increased in states where marijuana has been legalized. If we’re serious about reducing teen drug use, it’s much better to have a public health approach, like tobacco and alcohol, where state resources and strategies have successfully reduced teen use of each drug.

    “legalizing, taxing, and regulating marijuana would generate additional revenue for the state to invest in essential government services such as public education” that argument sickens me. It’s just so horrible it’s almost unspeakable. Why didn’t you note the drastic rise in people in their 20s, seemed to missed that one.

    Log in to Reply
    • jconway says

      November 4, 2016 at 10:07 am

      Use has NOT gone up, deaths have NOT gone up, crime has gone DOWN, and revenues have exceeded projections in Colorado. Teen use has gone DOWN in Colorado and has already gone UP in MA despite the illegality.

      And actually medical marijuana isn’t entirely legal here. My friends mother who is undergoing several rounds of chemo and battling for her life is currently ineligible to get any due to quotas on prescriptions and what kinds of cancers are covered. Making it commercially available will actually increase access for medical use, which is what the doctors on tv are discussing.

      I have yet to see reality based/data based arguments against legalization that are not just fear mongering about potency and child access, nitpicking about elements of the proposed law lawmakers don’t like despite passing on the opportunity to craft a better law, and imposing personal moral objections to recreational use on others via the law, a highly illiberal position.

      Log in to Reply
    • Jamie Eldridge says

      November 4, 2016 at 11:51 pm

      John, I wanted to respond to your critiques of my arguments for voting yes on Question 4.

      First, a public health approach isn’t simply about revenue. That’s like saying that the cigarette tax, which of course raises revenue, wasn’t used to run advertisements encouraging young people to stop smoking, expanding access to healthcare, or funding tobacco control programs in Massachusetts communities. A public health approach is recognizing that there are a significant number of people who use a drug that is rather benign, allowing people to use that drug, and then crafting policies to ensure that the drug is used responsibly. It’s what we do with alcohol, and it’s been a success, especially over the past 30 years.

      Second, legalizing marijuana will help reduce the disparities of arrests of African-Americans and other people of color compared to white residents, because it removes an easy way for police to arrest people in a car, in their home, or on their persons. Right now in Massachusetts, there is evidence that racial profiling exists, including in motor vehicle infractions. If a police officer sees a significant amount of marijuana in a car that he or she has pulled over for speeding, etc., those individuals can be arrested. Or, if police in a majority-minority neighborhood are practicing stop and searching a significant number of black or Latino youths, finding a certain amount of marijuana that a police officer can claim is being sold, is cause for arrest. There are very strong arguments that the “War on Drugs” (see: Tupac Shakur (“Instead of a war on poverty, they got a war on drugs so the police can bother me”), or Michelle Alexander’s “The New Jim Crow”) was created to incarcerate black people, after the end of Jim Crow laws and de jure segregation. The fact that marijuana is still illegal (except for under one ounce under decriminalization) is an example of this flawed War on Drugs.

      Finally, which jconway already stated in his post below, statistics so far in states like Colorado show that teen use has either stayed the same, or had a slight increase, post-legalization. Remember, Question 4 is about regulating,, taxing and legalizing marijuana for adults over age 21, and it’s my belief that an increase in teen marijuana use will be negligible. Meanwhile, the status quo is literally forcing grown adults who use marijuana to buy the drug from drug dealers, criminals, only contributing to chaos, unsafe communities, and in some cases violence in Massachusetts.

      Log in to Reply
      • kirth says

        November 5, 2016 at 1:31 pm

        Portugal decriminalized ALL drugs 15 years ago, and has seen no increase in drug use, by teens or anyone. They have seen a reduction in drug overdoses, which is not really germane to the current topic, but worth keeping in mind.

        The current round of scare ads opposing Q. 4 are really ridiculous, and hearken back to Ansliger’s “Reefer Madness” campaign that got us into this mess.

        Log in to Reply
  6. centralmassdad says

    November 4, 2016 at 10:43 am

    BMG is a great resource on things like the ballot questions.

    My positions will be:

    1. NO. Anything the casinos want, I oppose. Anything they oppose, I want.

    2. NO. Not because I oppose charter schools, which I do not, but because too much of a good thing is a bad thing.

    3. NO. I am inherently skeptical of these sort of things that attempt to blur the distinction between agricultural animals raised for food, and cute puppies. I note that there has been a suspicious lack of information about just how many farms located in Massachusetts will be affected. It seems like the market has been moving in this direction anyway, and so I conclude that the overall result of the measure will be to require the affected Massachusetts businesses to complete additional paperwork with respect to something that they are already doing anyway. Which is a waste of time and money by a government that will, forthwith, tell me that it requires more of same from me and others to complete its appointed tasks.

    4. YES. The war on drugs is a stupid failure. The vast majority of the ill effects of drugs to which our appointed law enforcement officials ominously describe are effects not of the drugs but of the war on drugs. Anything step in the direction of ending the war on drugs, no matter how small, is a step worth taking.

    Log in to Reply
  7. nopolitician says

    November 4, 2016 at 11:16 am

    Question 3 does prohibit “any farm owner or operator from knowingly confining any breeding pig, calf raised for veal, or egg-laying hen in a way that prevents the animal from lying down, standing up, fully extending its limbs, or turning around freely.” – but it “would also apply to business owners who knowingly sell pork, veal, or eggs from animals held in this way, even if the source is outside of Massachusetts.”

    That is very different from how this law has been sold to voters. We are told that it will impact just one chicken farm in the state, but it sounds to me like it will ban veal from being served in any restaurant in the state. It sounds like it could result in certain popular brands of foods being removed from our grocery store shelves.

    This sounds like a law that the legislature should craft, not one the voters should pass.

    Log in to Reply
    • centralmassdad says

      November 4, 2016 at 3:50 pm

      but I have a suspicion that that “outside Massachusetts” part is quite unenforceable. There are “reverse commerce cases” about oleomargarine, maybe? that cover this.

      Log in to Reply
    • centralmassdad says

      November 4, 2016 at 3:51 pm

      Rendered idle by the legalization of pot, will be gainfully employed conducting raids looking for illegally smuggled tortured hen eggs.

      Log in to Reply
  8. jconway says

    November 4, 2016 at 12:37 pm

    I buy cage free when I can, this week I didn’t have time to go to Market Basket so I bought regular eggs at Crosby’s instead. Many of the canvassers I have hired to help pass CPA in Chelsea are honestly living hand to mouth and I don’t see this bill making their lives any easier, even if it makes all of us feel like we did something to help the animals. I think the intention is good, the implementation needs work and I will totally support future laws that are better designed.

    Log in to Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Recommended Posts

  • Progressive Mass Shouldn’t Back Stupid Primaries (3)
  • There Is Not A Chance the White House is Happy With This Timing (3)
  • Promises made, promises kept (1)
  • Real “Center” is Economically Nationalist/Culturally Moderate (1)

Recent User Posts

Progressive Mass Shouldn’t Back Stupid Primaries

August 12, 2022 By jconway 7 Comments

There Is Not A Chance the White House is Happy With This Timing

August 10, 2022 By terrymcginty 8 Comments

Site issue: Unable to reply to comments

August 10, 2022 By SomervilleTom 2 Comments

Why do PUKES oppose $35 insulin for diabetics with private insurance?

August 8, 2022 By fredrichlariccia 3 Comments

Promises made, promises kept

August 8, 2022 By fredrichlariccia Leave a Comment

Schedule F

August 7, 2022 By johntmay 4 Comments

Recent Comments

  • SomervilleTom on Progressive Mass Shouldn’t Back Stupid PrimariesTommy Vitolo was directly responsible for the Brookline…
  • SomervilleTom on Progressive Mass Shouldn’t Back Stupid PrimariesThis comment exemplifies why I'm done with "Progressive…
  • Keith Bernard on Progressive Mass Shouldn’t Back Stupid PrimariesDon't get mad at Progressive Mass because Tommy Vitolo i…
  • fredrichlariccia on Progressive Mass Shouldn’t Back Stupid PrimariesThe other half of Wakefield (Precincts 4 - 6) is in the…
  • fredrichlariccia on Progressive Mass Shouldn’t Back Stupid PrimariesThe 9th Essex district James and I share as fellow Wakef…
  • fredrichlariccia on Progressive Mass Shouldn’t Back Stupid PrimariesYou hit the nail on the head here. Namely: Holier than T…
  • SomervilleTom on Progressive Mass Shouldn’t Back Stupid PrimariesI appreciate you writing this diary. This primary seems…

Archive

@bluemassgroup on Twitter

#mapoli

massauditor Suzanne M. Bump @massauditor ·
42m

You can help us make government work better. Tell us where you see waste and abuse by government agencies or contractors. https://www.mass.gov/how-to/report-waste-and-abuse #MAPoli

Reply on Twitter 1559249866194313218 Retweet on Twitter 1559249866194313218 Like on Twitter 1559249866194313218 Twitter 1559249866194313218
repsmitty34 Smitty Pignatelli @repsmitty34 ·
42m

AG and candidate for Governor @maura_healey is my guest on this week's episode of 'Let's Talk with Smitty.' She has taken on the biggest fights as the people's lawyer and will be a Governor for ALL of us. Visit https://linktr.ee/repsmitty to listen.
#mapoli

Reply on Twitter 1559249722644258821 Retweet on Twitter 1559249722644258821 Like on Twitter 1559249722644258821 1 Twitter 1559249722644258821
strat4youth Strategies for Youth @strat4youth ·
47m

Be an informed voter for youth justice! Join the voter education forum in-person or virtually on August 16 from 1:30-3 PM. Learn more and register today: https://lnkd.in/ejEaKtXB #mapoli

Reply on Twitter 1559248429624266756 Retweet on Twitter 1559248429624266756 Like on Twitter 1559248429624266756 Twitter 1559248429624266756
darraghcmurphy Darragh Murphy @darraghcmurphy ·
47m

I hope every voter in Suffolk Co reads and rereads this comment until they understand the implications of having a DA Arroyo so inexperienced that he is not qualified to sit as SECOND chair on a Suffolk Co murder trial as prosecutor or public defender. #BosPoli #MaPoli #NoArroyos

Jessamyn Jones @jessamynejones

@orennimni This comment is woefully ignorant & verifiably false. Hayden spent 2x as many years as a defense attorney than Arroyo. Arroyo has so little experience that he does not meet the reqs to lead a jury trial, or even sit 2nd chair on a murder trial, as a public defender or ADA.

Reply on Twitter 1559248399660195842 Retweet on Twitter 1559248399660195842 Like on Twitter 1559248399660195842 Twitter 1559248399660195842
darraghcmurphy Darragh Murphy @darraghcmurphy ·
54m

Substantive question for @RicardoNArroyo that would help voters differentiate his #SuffolkDA candidacy from DA Hayden’s. Will Ricardo answer? Go after illegal guns or nah, Ricardo? #BosPoli & #MaPoli

Jessamyn Jones @jessamynejones

This account also loves to criticize @dakevinhayden for enforcing gun laws in communities most grievously impacted by gun violence. Does @ricardonarroyo agree w/ @CourtWatchMA that DA should deemphasize illegal gun possession? Will it be on his expanded #DNPlist? #bospoli #mapoli https://twitter.com/CourtWatchMA/status/1559220406371995648

Reply on Twitter 1559246767107047425 Retweet on Twitter 1559246767107047425 Like on Twitter 1559246767107047425 Twitter 1559246767107047425
scmurnane Steven Murnane Jr @scmurnane ·
54m

Voting to tank the #NoCostCalls bill, and now endorsing DA Hayden over @RicardoNArroyo? I think its time for her to go. #mapoli

Lydia Edwards @LydiaMEdwards

Happy to endorse @DAKevinHayden for DA! https://twitter.com/dakevinhayden/status/1559176032732811267

Reply on Twitter 1559246757724315649 Retweet on Twitter 1559246757724315649 1 Like on Twitter 1559246757724315649 1 Twitter 1559246757724315649
Load More

From our sponsors




Google Calendar







Search

Archives

  • Facebook
  • RSS
  • Twitter




Copyright © 2022 Owned and operated by BMG Media Empire LLC. Read the terms of use. Some rights reserved.