**2012 Election Day thread**

[StrangeSox]

I in no way expect, or even believe it's possible for any voter to know everything about the candidates they support. I merely ask they know SOMEthing, even very basic things, versus nothing, or the opposite of what the person actually stands for.

 

Somin's been writing about political/rational ignorance at Volokh for years. He makes some interesting points, even if I generally disagree.

[Y2HH]

Then wouldn't it make sense to just go ahead and vote 3rd party?

 

There has to be a viable 3rd party first.

[StrangeSox]

There has to be a viable 3rd party first.

 

Not ever voting for them and ensuring that they remain locked out of the various avenues and ballot access isn't going to get one established.

[Y2HH]

Not ever voting for them and ensuring that they remain locked out of the various avenues and ballot access isn't going to get one established.

 

Again, there has to be a viable 3rd party first, and right now, there isn't. They aren't even on half the states ballots, and until something can be done about that, they will never be viable. Something has to be done about that, too...ballot access shouldn't be a thing like it is. I'm not saying it should allow for unlimited candidness, but it shouldn't be so hard to get a few alternates from D or R onto them.

[StrangeSox]

Well our system is dumb in that partisans control the entire electoral process. But not-voting isn't going to change that, and third parties aren't going to be built without actual electoral successes.

[CrimsonWeltall]

There has to be a viable 3rd party first.

 

How does a 3rd party becoming viable without people starting to show support for one?

 

They're not going to magically get 25% of the vote appearing overnight.

[LittleHurt05]

So what's the deal with Amendment 49 in Illinois? It's written so incoherently, I believe they are trying to trick the voters. On first read, it sounds like it can help limit lawmakers' ability to increase their pensions. But after doing some research, apparently it makes it easier, eliminating current restrictions. It's kind of tough to determine what is actually going on with it.

[StrangeSox]

So what's the deal with Amendment 49 in Illinois? It's written so incoherently, I believe they are trying to trick the voters. On first read, it sounds like it can help limit lawmakers' ability to increase their pensions. But after doing some research, apparently it makes it easier, eliminating current restrictions. It's kind of tough to determine what is actually going on with it.

 

Amendment 49 makes it so that any increase in pension benefits requires a 3/5's vote from the legislature instead of the typical 50%+1. Public-sector labor unions are primarily the target. I'll be voting no. We shouldn't be amending our state constitution to make one particular political preference a huge hurdle to overcome.

 

edit: It doesn't actually address the current pension mess at all.

Edited November 6, 2012 by StrangeSox

[Y2HH]

So what's the deal with Amendment 49 in Illinois? It's written so incoherently, I believe they are trying to trick the voters. On first read, it sounds like it can help limit lawmakers' ability to increase their pensions. But after doing some research, apparently it makes it easier, eliminating current restrictions. It's kind of tough to determine what is actually going on with it.

 

Cutting through all the bulls*** legalese, they want to make it possible to change pension rules on the fly, after the fact so the money they stole from the pensions never has to be repaid. I'm a pretty anti-union person, but f***ing with pensions isn't my game. These people paid into those pensions, and rather than holding up their end of the bargain, the governments decided to use the pension payments for other things.

 

Now, they are looking for a way to weasel their way out of their obligations.

Edited November 6, 2012 by Y2HH

[Y2HH]

Amendment 49 makes it so that any increase in pension benefits requires a 3/5's vote from the legislature instead of the typical 50%+1. Public-sector labor unions are primarily the target. I'll be voting no. We shouldn't be amending our state constitution to make one particular political preference a huge hurdle to overcome.

 

edit: It doesn't actually address the current pension mess at all.

 

I believe it's much more than that.

[CrimsonWeltall]

Again, there has to be a viable 3rd party first, and right now, there isn't. They aren't even on half the states ballots, and until something can be done about that, they will never be viable. Something has to be done about that, too...ballot access shouldn't be a thing like it is. I'm not saying it should allow for unlimited candidness, but it shouldn't be so hard to get a few alternates from D or R onto them.

 

Gary Johnson is on 47 ballots. Jill Stein is on 42.

[StrangeSox]

SECTION 5. PENSION AND RETIREMENT RIGHTS

Membership in any pension or retirement system of the

State, any unit of local government or school district, or

any agency or instrumentality thereof, shall be an

enforceable contractual relationship, the benefits of which

shall not be diminished or impaired.

(Source: Illinois Constitution.)

 

Amendment:

SECTION 5.1. PENSION AND RETIREMENT BENEFIT INCREASES

14 (a) No bill, except a bill for appropriations, that

15 provides a benefit increase under any pension or retirement

16 system of the State, any unit of local government or school

17 district, or any agency or instrumentality thereof, shall

18 become law without the concurrence of three-fifths of the

19 members elected to each house of the General Assembly. If the

20 Governor vetoes such a bill by returning it with objections to

21 the house in which it originated, the provisions of Article IV,

22 Section 9 shall govern the passage of that bill except that

23 such bill shall not become law unless, upon its return, it is

 

 

 

 

HC0049 - 2 - LRB097 21008 AMC 68312 e

 

1 passed by a record vote of two-thirds of the members elected to

2 each house of the General Assembly. If the Governor returns

3 such a bill with specific recommendations for change to the

4 house in which it originated, the provisions of Article IV,

5 Section 9 shall govern the acceptance of those specific

6 recommendations except that such recommendations may be

7 accepted only by a record vote of two-thirds of the members

8 elected to each house of the General Assembly, regardless of

9 the bill's date of passage or effective date.

10 For purposes of this subsection, the term "benefit

11 increase" means a change to any pension or other law that

12 results in a member of a pension or retirement system receiving

13 a new benefit or an enhancement to a benefit, including, but

14 not limited to, any changes that (i) increase the amount of the

15 pension or annuity that a member could receive upon retirement,

16 or (ii) reduce or eliminate the eligibility requirements or

17 other terms or conditions a member must meet to receive a

18 pension or annuity upon retirement. The term "benefit increase"

19 also means a change to any pension or other law that expands

20 the class of persons who may become a member of any pension or

21 retirement system or who may receive a pension or annuity from

22 a pension or retirement system. An increase in salary or wage

23 level, by itself, shall not constitute a "benefit increase"

24 unless that increase exceeds limitations provided by law.

25 (b) No ordinance, resolution, rule, or other action of the

26 governing body, or an appointee or employee of the governing

 

 

 

 

HC0049 - 3 - LRB097 21008 AMC 68312 e

 

1 body, of any unit of local government or school district that

2 provides an emolument increase to an official or employee that

3 has the effect of increasing the amount of the pension or

4 annuity that an official or employee could receive as a member

5 of a pension or retirement system shall be valid without the

6 concurrence of three-fifths of the members of that governing

7 body. For purposes of this subsection, the term "emolument

8 increase" means the creation of a new or enhancement of an

9 existing advantage, profit or gain that an official or employee

10 receives by virtue of holding office or employment, including,

11 but not limited to, compensated time off, bonuses, incentives,

12 or other forms of compensation. An increase in salary or wage

13 level, by itself, shall not constitute an "emolument increase"

14 unless that increase exceeds limitations provided by law.

15 © No action of the governing body, or an appointee or

16 employee of the governing body, of any pension or retirement

17 system created or maintained for the benefit of officers or

18 employees of the State, any unit of local government or school

19 district, or any agency or instrumentality thereof that results

20 in a beneficial determination shall be valid without the

21 concurrence of three-fifths of the members of that governing

22 body. For the purposes of this subsection, the term "beneficial

23 determination" means an interpretation or application of

24 pension or other law by the governing body, or an appointee or

25 employee of the governing body, that reverses or supersedes a

26 previous interpretation or application and either (i) results

 

 

 

 

HC0049 - 4 - LRB097 21008 AMC 68312 e

 

1 in an increase in the amount of the pension or annuity received

2 by a member of the pension or retirement system or (ii) results

3 in a person becoming eligible to receive a pension or annuity

4 from the pension or retirement system. The term "beneficial

5 determination" shall not include a beneficial determination

6 mandated by a final decision of a court of competent

7 jurisdiction.

8 (d) Nothing in this Section shall prevent the passage or

9 adoption of any law, ordinance, resolution, rule, policy, or

10 practice that further restricts the ability to provide a

11 "benefit increase", "emolument increase", or "beneficial

12 determination" as those terms are used under this Section.

 

Labor unions are worried that the language is confusing and imprecise enough that it'll allow back-door reductions in their guaranteed pensions, as Y2HH says.

 

[LittleHurt05]

Gary Johnson is on 47 ballots. Jill Stein is on 42.

 

How many is Roseanne Barr on?

[Y2HH]

Amendment:

 

 

Labor unions are worried that the language is confusing and imprecise enough that it'll allow back-door reductions in their guaranteed pensions, as Y2HH says.

 

Constitutional Amendment 49 would change Section 5 of the General Provisions clause in the State Constitution so that a 60 percent vote would be required to approve a benefits increase for state pension plans, from the state level all the way down to local school boards. The amendment is 700 words long, full of confusing legalese past its lead sentence, and labor unions across Illinois believe Amendment 49's true purpose is to be a backdoor to remove the protections on the benefits of state employees.

 

This is another problem with these law makers...using confusing legalese to pass laws that are completely grey area and full of potential for abuse.

[StrangeSox]

I believe it's much more than that.

Well that's the stated goal. It's a big confusing mess, and we should never amend our Constitution with big confusing messes.

[Y2HH]

Gary Johnson is on 47 ballots. Jill Stein is on 42.

 

They should both be on all 50, without having to jump through hoops to do so.

[SOXOBAMA]

Luke Russert ‏@LukeRussert

Democrats have a 66,527 advantage over Republicans in early voting in the state, a 10 point advantage

 

[Y2HH]

Well that's the stated goal. It's a big confusing mess, and we should never amend our Constitution with big confusing messes.

 

Agreed. And this sort of subterfuge annoys me about politics.

[StrangeSox]

There has to be a viable 3rd party first.

 

This obviously a leftist slant, but it makes the case for why voting is important, even if you don't like the top of the ticket:

 

There are 364 days of the year to argue about policy and lobby legislators. But today, all of that goes out the window. Grand Bargains, foreign policy errors and corporate policy are all important topics of conversation and action tomorrow.

 

But today only one thing matters: the vote. Unless you happen to be one of the deluded few who believe that there is no difference between Romney and Obama, you know that preventing a Republican takeover of the Presidency, the Congress, state and local governments is absolutely crucial. We can work on backsliders in our own fold, but there's almost nothing we can do to influence the actions of the fevered Right.

 

So please, even if you haven't taken any direct action for the election until now, take the time to vote and help get out the vote. If you would like to help the President, here's how you can do something to help no matter which state you live in.

 

Don't want to help the President? That's more than OK. I haven't done much for the President this year, either. My focus has been on keeping Tea Partiers out of Congress locally, electing a local climate change and progressive champion to Congress instead in one of America's top tossup districts, making sure that California gets a 2/3 majority in the State Senate (remember that we were 2 votes shy of that for single-payer healthcare in the state), and keeping local city and county elections out of the hands of Republicans and conservadems in the pockets of big developers and oil interests. And then there's the Millionaire's tax, Proposition 30, which sits on a knife's edge and determines whether we'll suffer billions of cuts to schools; Proposition 32 which would strangle labor unions in California if it passes; Proposition 34 to end the death penalty; Proposition 37 to label genetically modified foods; and much more.

 

And that's all just in California alone. No one is so jaded so as to believe that none of those things matter enough to get involved or to vote just because they're unhappy with some politician somewhere. If they say so, they're full of BS.

 

Chances are that there is at least one important race having in your backyard. Look at your ballot. Check your local Democratic Party's endorsements, and read up on the candidates and issues.

 

And please get involved to convince people and turn out the vote. It's all that matters today.

[Jenksismyhero]

http://www.wcax.com/story/20012087/nh-town...t-first-ballots

 

DIXVILLE NOTCH, NH -

In the tiny town of Dixville Notch, N.H., the presidential vote ended in a historical first.

 

In a tradition that started more than 40 years ago, the town of 10 registered voters all cast their ballots right after midnight on Election Day, and the results are tallied immediately.

 

This year, President Barack Obama and Governor Mitt Romney each received five votes from Dixville Notch.

 

The tie is a historical first for the midnight vote.

 

And in another tiny New Hampshire town-- Hart's Location-- the president picked up a win.

 

The earliest voters can go to the polls in other communities is 6 a.m., with the last polls closing at 8 p.m.

 

 

Edit: Last year Obama won 15-6.

Edited November 6, 2012 by Jenksismybitch

[HuskyCaucasian]

Chrysler gave its entire work force the day off to vote today.

That's absolutely a middle finger to Romney.

[StrangeSox]

Chrysler gave its entire work force the day off to vote today.

That's absolutely a middle finger to Romney.

 

It should be a national holiday anyway

[Jenksismyhero]

http://washingtonexaminer.com/philly-gop-p...14#.UJk57W_A-b6

 

Court-appointed Republican poll inspectors are being forcibly removed from voting stations in some Philadelphia wards and replaced in some cases by Democratic inspectors and even members of the Black Panthers, according to GOP officials.

 

Secrets just received this memo from GOP officials:

 

The Philadelphia GOP is reporting that court appointed Minority (read GOP) Inspectors are being thrown out of polling locations in several Wards.

 

These Inspectors are election officials - again, court appointed -- and are reportedly being thrown out by the Head Judges of Elections (these Judges are elected Democrats) and being replaced by Democrats.

 

This has happened at the following locations:

 

Ward 32, Div 13

 

Ward 43, Div 14

 

Ward 56, Div 1

 

Ward 56, Div 22

 

Ward 32, Div 28

 

Ward 32, Div 28

 

Ward 12, Div 17

 

Ward 39, Div 1

 

Ward 24, Div 9

 

Ward 18, Div 25

 

Ward 43, Div 14

 

Ward 29, Div 18

 

Ward 65, Div 19

 

Ward 20, Div 1

 

Ward 6, Div 11

 

Another official told Secrets: "one of our female inspectors was physically thrown out."

 

Presidential candidate Mitt Romney decided at the last minute to make stops in Pennsylvania, believing that the race there was close enough that he could win.

 

Well that's awesome.

Edited November 6, 2012 by Jenksismybitch

[MexSoxFan#1]

Luke Russert ‏@LukeRussert

Democrats have a 66,527 advantage over Republicans in early voting in the state, a 10 point advantage

what state?

[Jenksismyhero]

It should be a national holiday anyway

 

Agreed. Or make it a Saturday.