You've got an interesting perspective on the ballot process--one I hadn't considered. I appreciate your knowledge, but I suggest that you avoid personalizing your comments, at least without some evidence to back up your accusations about Erika. I found her editorial intelligent and well-meaning. I also found your comments intelligent and well-informed. Leave out the hyperbole and people like me will take your views a lot more seriously.
Referendum O (2008 ballot) would have made it harder to pass a constitutional amendment and easier to pass a statutory amendment (which the legislature can then modify or repeal). Colorado voters rejected it. Unfortunately, direct democracy, at least as handled through ballot initiatives here in Colorado, has been co-opted by special interests (D. Bruce, Energy Companies, etc.) as a means of circumventing the usual legislative process. The "bail bond" initiative is only the most recent example. If I had it my way, I would cut off ballot amendment of the constitution entirely.
SNOW. SKI. NORDIC SKI. YES. GOOD. So yeah, that's what it all means to me.
I mean, Hello? Who needs marriage, anyway? I much prefer hanging out online with you guys, here on the D.C. comments section.
Another article on immigration. Another batched of uninformed and irrelevant comments. Why don't you try expending some of that energy in a positive way? Maybe channel into a cause, or a least use if to power light bulbs, or something...
So I take it you're anti-S.B. 1040? S-Comm is very much a local issue, both in its impacts and expenses. That much is clear from the data ICE was forced to release as a result of NDLON v. ICE.
S-Comm actually has LOTS of local impacts, part of the reason LOTS of localities are questioning it (including, recently, Arlington, VA, not exactly a bastion of liberalism). Read up a little, and I think you'll see.
I know that I am probably talking to myself here, but there are lots of problems with Secure Communities. Anyone who has read my past posts knows my position on immigration issues. But, even leaving these aside, there are plenty of economic, liability, and due process concerns that should make any local government nervous about Secure Communities. You need only read some of the FOIA documents that came out of NDLON v. ICE to learn about these.
Feel free to "thumbs down" my comment. Let's see if we can go for a record this time. I think my last record was negative 50 or something.
And this comment retains a positive rating? Cottice, was that just a poor choice of words, or you actual sentiment?
There are a lot of things that the market can't value. One example: good teachers. Another: good books.
![[Avatar]](/images/avatar26.png){kind=avatar}
Ruckus