State Wins and Losses: Ballot Initiatives Roundup

Jonathan Adams

State Wins and Losses: Ballot Initiatives Roundup

Immigration

While immigration was all but ignored by both presidential candidates, voters in several states were presented with ballot measures on immigration enforcement and English-only requirements. In Oregon, an English-only initiative failed though one passed in Missouri. A harsh criminal justice proposition in California that included a provision on immigrants failed, as did an iffy proposition in Arizona.

Wins

Oregon Ballot Measure 58: Failed
The measure would have limited English as a Second Language education in the state’s public schools to 2 years or less.

California Proposition 6: Failed
In addition a lengthy list of other draconian measures, Prop 6 would have included a provision denying bail to any undocumented immigrant charged in a gang related crime. The provision would have opened the door for a bolstering of collaboration between local criminal justice agencies and ICE.

Losses

Missouri Constitutional Amendment 1: Passed
Amendment 1 passed with in a landslide. The amendment makes English the state’s official language.

Neither Here Nor There

Arizona Proposition 202: Failed
Prop 202 would have been a mixed bag as it would have simultaneously loosened sanctions against those who employ undocumented immigrants while bolstering identity theft penalties against undocumented workers who use social security numbness that are not their own.

LGBT Rights

Wins

Question 1 in Connecticut: Failed
This initiative would have allowed the state constitution to be changed -- essentially clearing the way for anti-gay and anti-choice amendments to be tacked onto it. Glad it didn't pass.

Losses

Proposition 8 in California: Passed
A state constitutional amendment to define marriage in California as "only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California." As of Wednesday, 5 November, it was passing roughly 52.5% to 47.5%.

Amendment 2 in Florida: Passed
The most punitive of the marriage amendments on the ballot this time. It specifically states: "This amendment protects marriage as the legal union of only one man and one woman as husband and wife and provides that no other legal union that is treated as marriage or the substantial equivalent thereof shall be valid or recognized."

Proposition 102 in Arizona: Passed
Amends the Arizona State Constitution to define marriage between one man and one woman. Passed with 56.5% of the vote.

Act 1 in Arkansas: Passed.
Now gay couples are unable to adopt or foster-parent children. This from a state with 3700 children in the foster-care system, and only 1000 foster homes. (side note: This bill, which was targeted at gay couples, will now also prohibit single parents, relatives and even single parents who are the biological parents of their children, and people who are equipped to raise special-needs kids from adopting.)

Reproductive Justice

Wins

Proposed Amendment 48 in Colorado: Failed
73% of Colorado citizens saw this amendment for what it was and voted against granting fertilized eggs full legal rights. This measure was designed to criminalize abortion and outlaw contraception. This measure also could have been used to block stem cell research and in vitro fertilization, among other reproductive health services.

Measure 11 in South Dakota: Failed
For the second time, South Dakota voters rejected a ban on abortion by 55 to 45 percent, finding inadequate its narrow exceptions for cases of rape, incest or threats to the mother’s health or life. This ballot initiative would have forced women in South Dakota to carry pregnancies to term against their will at the risk of their physical and psychological health.

Proposition 4 in California: Failed
California voters, for the third time, defeated an initiative that would have required teens either to inform their parents before having an abortion or would have charged the abortion-seeking teen’s parent with abuse.

Affirmative Action

Wins

Amendment 46 in Colorado: Failed
Colorado rejected a ballot initiative that would have amended their state constitution to ban equal opportunity initiatives in the higher education, employment, and contracting.

Losses

Initiative 424 in Nebraska: Passed
Voters passed the anti-equal opportunity initiative 52-48%

Posted at 7:11 AM, Nov 07, 2008 in Politics | Permalink | View Comments

Comments

I am curious about the Race Wire perspective on the POC vote in regards to "morality" propositions like abortion and gay marriage. In California, there has been much talk about the strength of the POC conservative religious communities' influence on the passing of propositions like Prop 8. I do believe this communities' vote was a strong one, but if it was the true force that tilted the scales towards a passing of Prop 8 then a similarly "moralistic" issue like abortion (parental notification for teen abortion - Prop 4) would have passed as well. These issues are often the key voting points for the conservative religious community, so why would one pass and another NOT if the religious vote (esp. the POC religious community) was so powerful. My theory is that heterosexism trumps anything in "moral issues". its the skeleton in many people's closet and i feel it was the heterosexism of some of those who would normally consider themselves Democrats or moderates that tipped the scales against gay marriage. I couldn't find any intelligent discussion of these issues; mostly it was sensationalist journalism and photos of church going people of color coming out in support of Prop 8 and prophesying that they would be the ones who got it passed.

If you read Prop 202 you will see that their definition used to establish stolen identity is in direct contrast to federal law. Under Prop 202 the burden of proof requires that the person receiving the stolen identity must know before hand that the person(s) are giving false or stolen identity information and that the person(s) supplying the fraudulent information does not have the authority to do so. This was the burden of proof required under Prop 202 before investigation and or prosecution could begin.

Federal law states (paraphrasing see 8 U.S.C. 1324a) that anyone giving or receiving fraudulent identity information is guilty of identity theft.

Prop 202 was not a mixed bag it was "Employer Amnesty". For more information go to http://www.dongoldwater.info and click on the Prop 202 link at the top of the page.