Rhode Island has several ballot questions this year.
Here’s how I plan to vote on them. I expect every single eligible voter to do at least this much research, and to vote.
QUESTION ONE
A constitutional amendment to allow the Narragansett Indian Tribe and its business partner, Harrah’s Entertainment, to build a casino in West Warwick. Rhode Island’s constitution now bans privately owned casinos.
NO.
This flies in the face of my generally libertarian leanings, which would lead me to say “sure, do whatever you want, as long as you’re not hurting anyone.” I think it’s a really bad idea to open up the state to the sharks from Las Vegas. I know for certain that this will damage the local arts and culture scene … drawing entertainment dollars down to big ticket shows at the reservation and away from Providence. I also know for certain that when you build a casino, bankruptcies and foreclosures in the surrounding areas increase. Finally, this will hurt local businesses, since people will take some of their disposable income and crap it away to Vegas … rather than spending it in their community.
QUESTION TWO
A constitutional amendment to permit felons to vote after they are released from prison. Right now, convicted felons cannot vote until they have completed their parole and probation sentences.
YES
I’m opposed on principal to any continuing penalty after the time has been served. As a society, we get no benefit from denying people the vote.
QUESTION THREE
A change to the state constitution mandating that excess money in the capital bond fund be dedicated for capital projects starting in July 2007. It would also increase funding to the state’s reserve or so-called rainy day account.
YES
Rhode Island has a balanced budget requirement in the constitution that requires that income exceed spending by 2%. The difference is deposited in this “rainy day fund” and used to cover unanticipated shortfalls. This has to continue until there is a spare 3% in the account. In the past, it has been tapped for capital projects, leading to an increasing “debt service” load on the rainy day fund … i.e: It’s already spoken for to cover loans. The change would increase the balanced budget requirement to 3%, and the total account to 5% of the budget. It would also require that capital projects be funded within the budget.
Going with my gut on this one: Yes.
QUESTION FOUR
This bond issue would allow state authorities to raise almost $73 million to construct a new building for the pharmacy college at the University of Rhode Island and to renovate the former Department of Children, Youth and Families facility at Rhode Island College.
YES.
I looked at the URI web site, and the college of pharmacy is actually doing a bunch of really good stuff, including a “brown bag” program for seniors to help them understand medicaid, and community education on medicines.
QUESTION FIVE
This bond issue would raise $88.5 million to pay for highway and bridge improvements and to service and buy more buses for the Rhode Island Public Transit Authority. Of the money raised, about $7 million would go toward expanding commuter rail service from Boston to communities south of Providence beginning in three years.
YES.
Our roads suck. Plus, I use commuter rail.
QUESTION SIX
This bond issue would raise $11 million to help fund a renovation of Roger Williams Park Zoo in Providence.
YES.
I love the zoo. The animals need better facilities, and the people who care for them do too.
QUESTION SEVEN
Seeks to raise $4 million for improvements to Fort Adams State Park in Newport. Half the money would be used to renovate worn-down parts of the fort, which dates from 1824, according to the Department of Environmental Management. The rest is earmarked for constructing a storage and meeting facility for groups that use the park’s athletic fields.
YES.
I like parks.
QUESTION EIGHT
This measure would authorize the DEM to raise up to $3 million for grants given to local communities interested in developing parks.
YES.
The idea is that people would get grants to build and care for local facilities. Local stewardship, blah blah.
QUESTION NINE
The measure would allow state authorities to raise $50 million to pay for affordable housing projects.
YES.
I’m torn on this one. I want people to have affordable housing, and this seems to be the alternative to government run housing … which always and everywhere sucks. I’m pretty convinced that there’s a third way, involving tax incentives rather than direct investment … but I have no idea how that would work.
Leave a Reply