Our opinion: Pondering our potpourri of propositions

Gay marriage doesn't stand a chance in Arizona. But local control should. Voters should oppose Proposition 107. Pondering our potpourri of propositions

ADVERTISEMENT

Most Commented Stories Today
Most E-mailed Stories Today
, , : a.m.

Among the five ballot propositions addressing isolated issues, perhaps none is more misleading than Prop. 107, "Protect Marriage Arizona."

Although Prop. 107 proposes to outlaw same-sex marriage in the Arizona Constitution, that provision is redundant, as state law already bans gay marriage.

What Prop. 107 would do, though, is overturn local decisions by school districts, cities and counties to give benefits to unmarried couples - straight or gay.

And it would ban health benefits for unmarried partners of state, county and city employees, including police, firefighters, school and college workers.

Elderly couples living together outside of marriage for financial reasons might face serious complications with pension and Social Security benefits, shared earnings and inheritance and property rights.

Gay marriage doesn't stand a chance in Arizona. But local control should.

The Tucson Citizen opposes Prop. 107.

Prop. 204: humane treatment

This measure - which would require farms to provide pregnant cows and veal calves with enough room to turn around and stretch their limbs - seems innocuous on the surface. And it is.

Despite a very vocal outcry from a very few opponents, Prop. 204 would pose no harm - financial or otherwise - to Arizona farmers. Indeed, Arizona's family farmers already adhere to such basic decency.

The Tucson Citizen supports Proposition 204.

Prop. 301: no meth probation

The epidemic of methamphetamine use in Arizona is an exceedingly serious concern, and all reasonable efforts must be made to eradicate this drug.

Prop. 301, however, would treat meth users differently than other users of illicit drugs by denying probation to meth users on the first or second offense.

The Legislature undoubtedly sent this proposal to the ballot with good intentions, but it has fatal flaws.

First, it is based on the assumption that meth users cannot experience recovery with treatment. That idea has been debunked repeatedly in recent years by the successful treatment and recovery of former meth addicts.

Second, Prop. 301 presumes judges need outside assistance in sentencing criminals who come before them. They don't.

The Tucson Citizen opposes Proposition 301.

Prop. 302: legislators' salaries

Whether state lawmakers deserve a raise, from $24,000 to $36,000, naturally is a subject of debate among residents.

Legislators spend four or five months in session, plus time in committee meetings before and after the session, most of them far from home. The good lawmakers respond to constituents' needs year-round.

Their duties are serious: set a budget of more than $10 billion and decide on our tax code, education, public safety, health care and myriad other issues.

We need intelligent, dedicated state leaders, and legislators haven't had a raise since 1998.

The Tucson Citizen supports Proposition 302.

Prop. 202: minimum wage

We said it on Labor Day (Sept. 4), and we reiterate: Boost Arizona's minimum wage to $6.75 an hour.

When the $5.15 minimum was set in 1997, gasoline was $1.30 a gallon. Times change. The current minimum provides the least purchasing power in 50 years.

Workers deserve honest pay for honest work.

The Tucson Citizen supports Proposition 202.

Read All Comments » 12 TOTAL COMMENTS
Nov 4, 2006 @ 2:56pm
Proposition 107 doesn't hardly have a thing to do with gay marriage...#1 is meaningless hook (redundant of a declaration that already exists, marriage=man & woman), #2 is the stealth knife that will ban domestic partnership benefits, the possibility of civil unions. It's really about taking choices and rights away from ALL families and couples. Stripping domestic partnership rights affects couples (mostly man/woman) who cannot or choose not to marry as well as their children. To all the Prop 107 supporters who say "Well, just get married then:"...In the real world, people scrape by on Social Security, 30-40% of Americans have no health insurance, millions of children are uninsured. In the real world, some people choose not to legally marry for their own ethical/moral/religious reasons. I am very tired of people who think they are so much higher than everyone else that they can push their morals onto mine and kick away another support leg that helps people survive in this society. I wish more people would embrace morals of giving and love than taking away and superiority. I wish more people would spend effort fixing the problems with Social Security, health care, education instead of ignoring or even exacerbating them.

Best wishes to all, regardless of your "side."

P.S. "Gay" marriage already exists. It existed when you were born, and it will exist when you die. Any legal battles are over rights and recognitions.

P.P.S. I prefer to simply call it marriage. I like to see people's humanity before I see a trivial thing like whether they are male, female, intersex, or transgender.
Oct 31, 2006 @ 6:37am
Thanks to the Citizens for supporting Proposition 204. Even animals raised for food deserve to be treated humanely. It is supported by mainline animal welfare groups like the Southern Arizona Humane Society. Vote YES on 205. Stop Cruety to Animals
Oct 30, 2006 @ 9:59pm
The 14th amendment is about slaves, but if you must stretch it out to include everyone, where in there does it talk about behaviors?


It doesn't.


There is a huge difference between making people equal and making behaviors equal.


I can just imagine how ****ed up everything would be if we started making behavior a right.

Post a Comment »