2012 ballot measures

[Donerail]

Excellent news in Florida. All the Amendments (save three) have failed, including the ones destroying an independent judiciary, the anti-abortion one, and the one that basically repeals the Blaine Amendment. The only ones that passed were largely inoffensive and dealt with property tax relief for low-income seniors, wounded vets, and widows of first responders.

[greenforest32]

Not all returns are in but:

Redistricting measures:
Ohio commission fails 37-63
Maryland House map passes 64-37
(Existing) California State Senate map passes 72-28

Gay marriage initiatives:
Maine passes 53-47
Maryland passes 52-48
Washington passing at 52-48
Minnesota ban fails at 48-52

Marijuana initiatives:
Colorado (legalization) passes 55-45
Washington (legalization) passes 55-45
Oregon (legalization) fails 45-54 ( )
Massachusetts (medical) passes 64-37
Arkansas (medical) fails 49-51
Montana (repeals existing medical program and establishes a new more restrictive one) passes 57-43

Legislative supermajority requirement for tax increases:
Washington passes 65-36
Michigan fails 31-69

California death penalty repeal failing 47-53

Massachusetts physician-assisted suicide failing 49-51

[Kaine for Senate '18]

Prop 7 in Maryland (expansion of gambling) passed 52-48

[they don't love you like i love you]

I have to say, even though the margins on the Voter ID and Gay Marriage Ban amendments' defeats here were similar, the maps are soooooo fascinatingly different. In fact outside the Twin Cities and urban liberal outstate areas the two almost ran as inverses of each other. To put things into perspective. I'll do more of an analysis later but for now here are the maps (green = pass, orange = fail):

Marriage:


Voter ID:

[greenforest32]

New Hampshire has constitutionally banned an income tax: http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/New_Hampshire_Income_Tax_Amendment,_CACR_13_%282012%29

The state's Tax Pledge* probably contributed to the push.

* http://www.pewstates.org/projects/stateline/headlines/tax-pledge-permeates-new-hampshire-politics-85899425483

Edit: actually wait I'm wrong on this. Constitutional amendments need 2/3 supermajority approval in NH so it's actually failing at 57% approve: http://www.nhpr.org/post/all-three-nh-ballot-measures-appear-fail

[BM]

I'm thrilled Los Angeles voted to require porn stars to wear condoms

[Silent Hunter]

I'm thrilled Los Angeles voted to require porn stars to wear condoms

I just looked at the LA Times article on it. Now residents can claim that they're monitoring legal compliance.

[Hash]

Any other links to maps or at least county results for the gay marriage and marijuana stuff? Too lazy and busy to check out the respective SOS websites.

[World politics is up Schmitt creek]

I have to say, even though the margins on the Voter ID and Gay Marriage Ban amendments' defeats here were similar, the maps are soooooo fascinatingly different. In fact outside the Twin Cities and urban liberal outstate areas the two almost ran as inverses of each other. To put things into perspective. I'll do more of an analysis later but for now here are the maps (green = pass, orange = fail):

Marriage:


Voter ID:

God bless the Iron Range.

Hashemite, politico.com has county results for almost every ballot measure of significance.

[politicallefty]

So, in Minnesota, urban areas voted down both amendments while suburbs are somewhat gay-friendly and supportive of voter ID. That's to be expected, as with the rural vote against gay marriage (that map looks entirely expected considering the vote). However, what's with South/Southwest MN's vote against voter ID? That looks pretty odd.

[nclib]

Any other links to maps or at least county results for the gay marriage and marijuana stuff? Too lazy and busy to check out the respective SOS websites.

The areas in Maryland where gay marriage passed:

Montgomery 65%
Howard 59%
Baltimore City 57%
Anne Arundel 52%
Baltimore County 51.31%
Prince George's 50.64%
Frederick 50.59%

Pro-Obama counties were pro-gay and visa versa except Anne Arundel and Frederick (Romney, pro-gay) and Charles (Obama, anti-gay).

[Thomas D]

The anti gay side in Washington has conceded.

[they don't love you like i love you]

God bless the Iron Range.

Unfortunately that marriage restriction failure in St. Louis County is just due to a 2:1 thrashing in Duluth, the mining areas up north voted for it, but quite narrowly (like 52-53%) I wonder if the DFL machine's "Vote No twice" campaign had a bit effect here. And Cook County (the most NE one) is basically just latte liberals on lakeside homes now, it was actually the third most anti-amendment county (after Hennepin and Ramsey).

So, in Minnesota, urban areas voted down both amendments while suburbs are somewhat gay-friendly and supportive of voter ID. That's to be expected, as with the rural vote against gay marriage (that map looks entirely expected considering the vote). However, what's with South/Southwest MN's vote against voter ID? That looks pretty odd.

I'm going to go into more detail in another thread, but a big component of the anti-Voter ID campaign's message was that it was going to cost an estimated $50 million to implement and would put a big strain on rural communities. In addition it effectively ended mail-in absentee balloting, any absentee voting would have to be done in person at a county office which is obviously more difficult in a rural area where I also suspect that more absentee voting by mail happens. Also casting a provisional ballot under the amendment's provision would've been far more difficult in a rural area than an urban one.

[Linus Van Pelt]

The amendment in MI to block the new bridge failed 59-41.

The strongest no votes were in the odd couple of Washtenaw and Ottawa. The longstanding Atlas Forum dream of an election that was actually populist vs. non-populist has finally been realized!

[Antonio the Sixth]

Apart from death penalty and GMO labeling (f**king agrobusiness moneybomb), everything went well in California. Prop 30 (raising taxes to finance education) passed, prop 32 (disgusting attempt by big corporations to ban union campaign finance) massively failed and prop 36 (softening 3-strikes) was massively adopted.

San Francisco values prevailed!

[Marston]

So happy that the MI electorate overwhelmingly defeated Prop 5 (the 2/3rds majority for tax increases thing) 69-31. It restored a bit of my confidence in my state.

[greenforest32]

So happy that the MI electorate overwhelmingly defeated Prop 5 (the 2/3rds majority for tax increases thing) 69-31. It restored a bit of my confidence in my state.

The whole dynamic on the Michigan measures (vote them all down!) probably helped but it's interesting that it failed. At least Washington's is statutory and has been declared unconstitutional (probably will be again).

Oregon's 3/5 requirement passed with 5x% back in the 1990s and it's been a pain in the ass since. It will probably rear its head again in the legislative session here regarding the ACA's Medicaid expansion since Democrats didn't win a 3/5 supermajority in either chamber of the OR legislature.

On that note, Democrats in California have finally overcome Prop 13's 2/3 requirement since they won a 2/3 supermajority this week. That 1/3+1 block has been the lifeblood of California GOP. They're probably hoping they won't have to moderate since they could potentially take away the Democrats' 2/3 supermajority by winning a few seats in the 2014 midterms due to lower voter turnout but they'll have to deal with 2016 and a higher turnout from an upcoming election-day registration bill. Interesting to watch, not that it really matters much for them at the end of the day. Too little, too late.

[rob in cal]

       Anyone have any insight on the ethnic breakdown of the vote on California's prop 30, the tax increase vote.  Republicans nationwide have a fantasy that if they can support an amnesty inclusive immigration bill (with "strict enforcement" of course) they can do significantly better with hispanics. I'd argue that they are a Democratic leaning group regardless, and I'd love to know exactly how they voted on this as a case study of my argument.

[Sbane]

       Anyone have any insight on the ethnic breakdown of the vote on California's prop 30, the tax increase vote.  Republicans nationwide have a fantasy that if they can support an amnesty inclusive immigration bill (with "strict enforcement" of course) they can do significantly better with hispanics. I'd argue that they are a Democratic leaning group regardless, and I'd love to know exactly how they voted on this as a case study of my argument.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/elections/2012-exit-poll/CA/Issue1

According to the exit poll, they voted almost the same as whites. Asians, inexplicably in my opinion, favored it 60-40. I suspect Asians were close to being tied, Hispanics voted for it but not more than 55-45 and whites likely voted against it by the same amount as they voted against Obama. I don't know if you were going for the "non-whites are ruining this country" argument, but if you were, the facts aren't very convenient for you in this case.

Looking at the county results, it seems like it was the inland areas where prop 30 held up the best as compared to the Obama vote. One of the biggest swings from voting Obama to voting no on 30 happened in Los Angeles County. There are a subset of non-white voters who vote Democrat because they don't like Republicans but that doesn't mean they favor more taxes or giveaways to unions. Republicans have an opportunity with this set of voters if they get their act together.

In any case, we will know even better when the city results are released. I think there will be some huge swings against prop 30 in places like Diamond Bar, Walnut and Irvine, where there are lots of affluent Asians who likely voted Obama. And perhaps in middle class areas where Hispanics are predominate such as West Covina. I'm less sure about this.

[politicallefty]

In the case of Asians, I'll bet they viewed Prop 30 as a pro-education measure. They probably saw it as a good investment and didn't want to see the entire education system in the state of California collapse. I could be wrong, but that seems like the simplest explanation to me. I just don't think steep education cuts appealed to Asians in particular, even if it meant paying a little more in taxes.

[rob in cal]

Sbane, thanks for the link.  Don't know how accurate that exit poll is, but assuming it is fairly accurate, it offers some really positive news for fiscal conservatives, and yes it does undercut my argument that hispanics are democratic leaning in these matters.  Glad to see that I may be overstating the case.  People of all ethnicities in California who voted for Obama but against Prop 30 would represent just the type of voters who may be reachable for the GOP.
   Personally I was torn by Prop 30, and almost voted for it, but ended up voting against though my wife voted yes, so we were a split.  And yes, I do have two kids in Cal public education.

[Holmes]

Apart from death penalty and GMO labeling (f**king agrobusiness moneybomb), everything went well in California.

The genetically modified labeling proposition was frivolous. I'm glad it failed. Here's a fun fact, the vast majority of food you eat is genetically modified, and if it's not, it's probably stated in some way or another on the package. And genetic modification is not a bad thing for many reasons, including increase in food size and taste, increase in progeny or fertility in foreign or harmful soils.

[cwt]

Apart from death penalty and GMO labeling (f**king agrobusiness moneybomb), everything went well in California.

The genetically modified labeling proposition was frivolous. I'm glad it failed. Here's a fun fact, the vast majority of food you eat is genetically modified, and if it's not, it's probably stated in some way or another on the package. And genetic modification is not a bad thing for many reasons, including increase in food size and taste, increase in progeny or fertility in foreign or harmful soils.

I agree. It would have ended up like California's "This product contains substances known to the State of California to cause cancer" warning, it would show up on everything and therefore be completely ignored.

[Small Business Owner of Any Repute]

The genetically modified labeling proposition was frivolous. I'm glad it failed. Here's a fun fact, the vast majority of food you eat is genetically modified, and if it's not, it's probably stated in some way or another on the package. And genetic modification is not a bad thing for many reasons, including increase in food size and taste, increase in progeny or fertility in foreign or harmful soils.

That's the scary thing: The vast majority of food produced is genetically modified, but the majority of people don't know it. And I firmly believe that people absolutely have a right to know what's in their food. Let people make their own decisions about GMOs. What's frivolous about a truth-in-labeling scheme? Why should we stop a law like this just to protect Monsanto, a company terrified that their sales will fall through the floor when the public realizes what goes on behind the food curtain?

Genetic modification can be seen as a good thing -- it certainly has cut the food cost for the average family in half over the last generation. It's why starvation is not a major problem in this country. But at the same time, genetic modification has led to insanely large harvests -- more, certainly, than the country has use for. And since most farmers don't actually make money off growing, the federal government needs to provide large subsidies to farmers. It's led to the obesity crisis, since we needed to manufacture a new way to deal with absolutely insane corn harvests: High-fructose corn syrup.

Oh, and as for taste, I can assure you that genetic modification seldom improves the quality of the food you eat. The bulk of the effort is to increase yield at any cost to quality, and to improve the food's shelf life, again, at any cost to quality. Ever wonder why most apples taste like mealy garbage? Because it's been bred to -- an unfortunate side effect of allowing them to be stored for up to a year without going bad. Think that food at McDonalds uses "high quality ingredients?" Freshness no longer matters, and if you think that doesn't show up in the quality of the food you eat, you're crazy.

Please don't be distracted by the "Frankenfood" / "Fishmato" brigade. They're terrified GMOs are poison, and they're not. But that doesn't mean the public shouldn't have the right to make a decision about whether or not they think buying a box of cereal made with GMO grain for $4.99 is better than buying a non-GMO version of $5.99.

[Small Business Owner of Any Repute]

I never thought I'd be mature enough to vote in favor of a tax increase on myself. But that's exactly what I did with Prop 30, and I'm proud I did. California desperately needs the money.