Missourians to Vote on Several Ballot Issues on Tuesday, November 6, 2012
To help you learn more about the issues that will appear on the November 6th ballot, I will endeavor to summarize each issue and, where applicable, give you my thoughts on them.
One constitutional amendment, Amendment 3, will be on the ballot. This measure will help ensure more public accountability over judicial selection at the appellate level by making the following changes to the Missouri Plan:
- adding an additional gubernatorial appointee to the Appellate Judicial Commission, bringing the total number to four members of the seven member commission
- removing the sitting judge from the commission and replacing them with a retired judge, ensuring that judges will not be able to pick their co-workers
- requiring the commission to present the governor with one more nominee for each judicial vacancy, bringing the total to four
- re-staggering commission appointments to allow the Governor to appoint two members during the first year of their term and two during the third year
The amendment only deals with judicial selection for the Supreme Court and appellate courts - local and circuit level judicial selection will not be impacted.
Unfortunately, Secretary of State Carnahan chose to put her political agenda ahead of the responsibilities of her position when writing the ballot summary and produced clearly biased, misleading ballot language for Amendment 3, completely misrepresenting the purpose of the amendment.
There are also three propositions on the ballot - Proposition A, Proposition B, and Proposition E.
Proposition A is a measure to allow the City of St. Louis to control the city's police force. Currently, the St. Louis Police force is managed by the St. Louis City Board of Police Commissioners. The Board consists of four members appointed by the Governor and the Mayor of St. Louis. Proposition A would eliminate the St. Louis City Board of Police Commissioners and set up a municipal board responsible for managing the police force.
Proposition B would raise the tax on cigarettes and other tobacco products - the amount would be 3.65 cents and 25 percent of the invoice price on cigarettes and 15 percent on other tobacco products, a drastic increase over current prices.
This proposition is nothing more than an interest-group backed effort to use taxation to dictate personal behavior, and I do not support it. Government should not use such tactics to interfere in personal choices. I do not smoke, but that is my individual choice so I will not use taxes to impose my beliefs on others or penalize them for making a different choice.
Proposition E is a legislature-passed measure (originally SB464), that I fully endorsed and supported, which will prohibit the Governor or a state agency from setting up a health insurance exchange unless authorized by the people or the legislature. Health insurance exchanges are a key part of Obamacare, and preventing one from being created without the permission of the public will be yet another way to protect our state from this massive expansion of federal government power.
If you would like to view what your local ballot will look like or find your polling place, you can do so using the following directions. First, visit the Secretary of State's "Find a Polling Place" page and put in your address information. Once your address is entered, just click "Lookup" and you will be brought to a page with information on your polling location. On this page, you can click a link labeled "View Sample Ballot" and you can see a sample copy of the ballot you will get on Election Day.
I hope that this information will be helpful as you head to the polls on Tuesday, November 6th. If you have any further questions or would like any additional information as to any of these matters or any other issues as we head to one of the most important elections in our nation's history, truly "A Time of Choosing", please do not hesitate to contact me.
Dennis Broadbooks
2:41 pm on Thursday, November 1, 2012
Thanks, Tim! Keep up the good work you're doing for us in Jeff City & here at home.
PaulRevere
5:49 pm on Thursday, November 1, 2012
Thanks for explaining the issues.
Prop B has many ramifications and deserves deeper considerations.
Tobacco tax increases has one good GOAL. (Tax only Businesses)
That is: 100% of ALL PUBLIC SCHOOL FUNDING SHOULD COME FROM BUSINESSES.
I would support a Prop B, if it increased sales tax rates in full support of our public schools. Remove All Real Estate taxes on individuals.
Our public schools have gone beyond the MO Constitution requirement to provide "for the gratuitous "INSTRUCTION" of all persons in this state".
Our Legislature needs to address whether "sports stadium" , Auditoriums, tennis courts and other non-instructional facilities should be supported by the General assembly or supported by "USERS".
Prop B is an attempt to expand the support of "non-instructional" infrastucture taking hold in all public schools.
Funding through the Home-ownership is a wealth tax.
Having Individuals support a public school system this way is absurd.
Any public service should tax based on "income affordability".
Prop B Tobacco tax is 50% in the right direction.
But is not a solution to Missouri's Public school funding needs.
Therefore, I will vote NO!
RDBet
8:38 pm on Thursday, November 1, 2012
Amendment 3 with the Judges is a complete waste of time. It would diminish the system of checks & balances. There is potential for more partisan politics injected into the judicial system by this amendment, with control over the panel given to a governor.
What if we have a birther or the likes elected governor? Not good.
AHB
12:10 pm on Friday, November 2, 2012
I would like to add my own biased opinion to Tim's biased opinion on Prop B.
Tim says: "I do not smoke, but that is my individual choice so I will not use taxes to impose my beliefs on others or penalize them for making a different choice." Well, it is my "individual choice" not to smoke either, but it is NOT my "individual choice" to have my tax dollars support the poor choice and inevitable health care needs of smokers. It is also NOT my "individual choice" to be subjected to second hand smoke and its consequences on my own well-being (or pocket book, if that's what matters to you).
Tim says that "This proposition is nothing more than an interest-group backed effort to use taxation to dictate personal behavior, and I do not support it." Well, count me in as one of those interest groups because I do support it. I'm sure the tobacco industry has no interest in opposing this proposition to continue to profit from hurting the health of smokers and non-smokers while tax payers pick up the health care bills, right, Tim?
And finally, Tim says that "Government should not use such tactics to interfere in personal choices." Well, I respectfully disagree. Government, please do your job and use effective tactics to discourage harmful and unnecessary behavior in order to save the lives of the people you serve (or at the very least, to save them from future, higher expenses). My lungs and pocket book thank you in advance.
AHB
12:46 pm on Friday, November 2, 2012
A quick addendum since I just came across this Letter to the Editor in support of Prop B: http://kirkwood.patch.com/articles/tobacco-taxes-save-lives-protect-kids#comments
Is this why Tim refers to Prop B as "nothing more than an interest-group backed effort to use taxation to dictate personal behavior [...]," which he does not support? If so, maybe I should reconsider my earlier comments; because who would want to be seen as siding with the questionable motives of the American Cancer Society and American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network?
RDBet
5:48 pm on Friday, November 2, 2012
Tobacco company (Altria) was one of Tim Jones top five campaign donors in 2008.
http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/Timothy_Jones
AHB
8:13 pm on Friday, November 2, 2012
"Proposition B ... This proposition is nothing more than an interest-group backed effort."
Tim, don't you finance your campaign through donations from special interest groups? So, isn't your opposition to Prop B nothing more than an interest-group backed effort itself? Just a different interest group? You are an elected official. Since you've taken money from a tobacco company, shouldn't you make that clear when advocating for the tobacco industries' interests over the health of the people you represent? Seems a little shady if you express such strong opposition but don't tell people where your campaign money comes from. And what's Rex Sinquefield's stand on Prop B as he seems to have given your campaign a lot of money?
I support Prop B and I can honestly say that no person, group, or company has contributed to me financially that would bias my opinion on the subject so I think that gives my opinion credibility. Can you make the same statement Tim?
Eileen Tyrrell
8:20 pm on Saturday, November 3, 2012
@AHB and RDbet
Cheap shots hiding behind screen names. Your opinion has not weight or credibility when you HIDE. If you are going to be critical of The Speaker's opinion, than own it!
Typical.