![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Advisory vote
Apr. 3rd, 2007 10:28 amOkay, Alaska people reading this ... today is the advisory vote on yet another pointless and discriminatory constitutional amendment, so PLEASE get out there, vote NO and let the legislature know that we don't appreciate seeing time and taxpayer money wasted on witch hunts and frivolous messing with the state constitution. Besides, the advisory vote isn't binding anyway; it's basically a $1.2 million opinion poll. And please note the language that the bill's supporters use on their official "Statement in Support" from the Division of Elections website:
A YES on the Advisory Vote does not change state law – it simply asks the Legislature to let the people decide, rather than un-elected judges. In contrast, a NO vote means that five unelected lawyers on the Alaska Supreme Court will decide this issue for the rest of us.
In other words, they're trying to tell us that if we vote yes, we're exercising our right to choose our own destiny and yatta yatta; if we vote no, then we're letting the court decide for us -- which is a load of COMPLETE CONDESCENDING GARBAGE. It's my vote and my decision either way: if I vote no, I'm making my own goddamn decision, and I don't appreciate a bunch of smug bastards in Juneau telling me that my "no" vote doesn't count.
The "people" didn't decide to have this advisory vote; it was pushed through by a bunch of arrogant legislators who disagreed with a state supreme court decision and decided to play the old "let's see how the voters feel about this" card. Fine, let's show them how we feel about this and send them a resounding "no" vote to leave the goddamn constitution alone.
Yes, I feel rather strongly about this issue; why do you ask...?
A YES on the Advisory Vote does not change state law – it simply asks the Legislature to let the people decide, rather than un-elected judges. In contrast, a NO vote means that five unelected lawyers on the Alaska Supreme Court will decide this issue for the rest of us.
In other words, they're trying to tell us that if we vote yes, we're exercising our right to choose our own destiny and yatta yatta; if we vote no, then we're letting the court decide for us -- which is a load of COMPLETE CONDESCENDING GARBAGE. It's my vote and my decision either way: if I vote no, I'm making my own goddamn decision, and I don't appreciate a bunch of smug bastards in Juneau telling me that my "no" vote doesn't count.
The "people" didn't decide to have this advisory vote; it was pushed through by a bunch of arrogant legislators who disagreed with a state supreme court decision and decided to play the old "let's see how the voters feel about this" card. Fine, let's show them how we feel about this and send them a resounding "no" vote to leave the goddamn constitution alone.
Yes, I feel rather strongly about this issue; why do you ask...?