Looking at the ballot proposals

Halloween may have just passed but there are other things people could be scared of - reading ballot proposals.

With all the legalese each proposal must have to be placed on November's ballot some voters may be asking, “What am I voting on?” Michigan State University Department of Political Science Chair Richard Hula understands how a person could get confused by ballot language.

PROPOSAL 1

Proposal 1 is a constitutional amendment to require money be held in conservation and recreation funds. Basically, it is an accounting issue, according to Hula.

“You collect certain funds and it is designated or locked into certain budget categories,” he said. “It is the notion that since revenues are generated by hunting licenses it should be restricted to natural resource uses.”

If a voter believes that money generated from hunting and fishing licenses should go toward natural resource uses they should vote “yes.” If not vote “no.”

PROPOSAL 2

Proposal 2 would amend the state constitution to ban Affirmative Action programs that give preferential treatment to groups or individuals based on race, gender, color, ethnicity or national origin. In Hula's opinion, this proposal will be a tough one for many reasons. He also said it is not uncommon for people to be confused.

“What that will do is it will wipe out the language of Affirmative Action and the impact is unclear. The argument is what affirmative action is,” he said. “I don't think the confusion is lack of citizen sophistication. We don't know what the impact will be. It will create some interesting conflicts with federal law.”

The conflict the proposal will present, if passed, is with a federal mandate that says there has to be equal opportunity, he said. Likewise, Hula said if the proposal passes, the debate will not be over.

“What does it mean and what will it do? I don't know and I don't think anyone does. It will surely make it difficult,” he said. “Some would say you have to have some sort of Affirmative Action programs. If that is ruled illegal under the new amendment then the courts will have to figure it out.”

That being said, if a voter believes that there should not be preferential treatment to groups or individuals because race, gender, color and ethnicity they should vote “yes.” If not they should vote “no.”

PROPOSAL 3

After a voter is finished with trying to figure out what to do with Proposal 2, Proposal 3 is a little simpler to understand.

This proposal is a referendum on Public Act 160 of 2004 and it would allow a hunting season for mourning doves. Simply put if a voter thinks a person should be able to hunt mourning doves then they should vote “yes” and if they don't they should vote “no.”

“At the end of the day, they will be able to shoot at doves or they won't be able to shoot at doves,” Hula said.

PROPOSAL 4

Proposal 4 has to do with eminent domain. Eminent domain is when the government takes private property for public use, usually with compensation paid to the owner.

The basis of this proposal is rooted in Connecticut, Hula said.

“This comes out of the crazy case in Connecticut where local government took property and basically sold it to private developers for redevelopment,” he said. “That is an inappropriate use of eminent domain.”

Michigan already has a law that says government cannot do that and the net effect of this proposal will be very slight, Hula said.

“It is a law and this would make it constitutional. It is just not something that is likely to happen,” he said.

So if a voter believe the government should be prohibited from taking private property than they should vote “yes” and if they do not they should vote “no.”

PROPOSAL 5

Proposal 5 is a legislative initiative that would establish mandatory school funding levels.

The proposal would allow school funding to increase at a rate equal to or greater than inflation, Hula said. Basically, it would increase current funding by approximately $565 million and require the state to provide annual funding increases for public schools, intermediate school districts, community colleges and higher education. This includes state universities and financial aid/grant programs.

Although the proposal sounds good for education it does present some interesting issues.

“It no where says how it will be paid for. It means taxes go up or something will be cut,” he said. “I think it is fair to say there is not a lot of real obvious places for cuts these days.”

Possible things that could face cuts if this proposal passes include Medicaid, law enforcement or public health, Hula said.

If a voter believes that schools should have mandatory funding levels they should vote “yes” and if they believe schools should not they should vote “no.”

Your local connection

€ There are five proposals on the Nov. 7, General Election ballot.

€ Proposal 1 would require money be held in conservation and recreation funds.

€ Proposal 2 would amend the state constitution to ban Affirmative Action programs that give preferential treatment to groups or individuals based on race, gender, color, ethnicity or national origin.

€ Proposal 3 would have a referendum on Public Act 160 of 2004 to allow a hunting season for mourning doves.

€ Proposal 4 would prohibit the government from taking private property by eminent domain for certain private purposes.

€ Proposal 5 would allow for a legislative initiative that would establish mandatory school funding levels.

rcharmoli@cadillacnews.com | 775-NEWS (6397)