Comments on: What Others Say About Amendments

By: Kappa TA

Kappa TA — Mon, 04 Oct 2010 15:05:52 +0000

I will be voting NO on these amendments that would eliminate voter oversight. I’ve read all the opinions and arguments, and find that the only way to stop public officials from misuse of public dollars is to restrict their access without voter approval. I am taking this stand for two reasons:

1. SUPPORT OF the FRAZIER LAW based on the constitution.

2. PUNITIVE measure as a voter against rampant corruption in public offices and agencies in general.

Stop the madness; VOTE NO!

KTA

By: ya right

ya right — Fri, 01 Oct 2010 17:20:55 +0000

awkward,

“Ya Right, state law requires voter education on these issues, and that uses taxpayer dollars. I would prefer the people I elected make these decisions, and not waste my money. Your ad hominem attack doesn’t change this”

So what your saying is: I should just suck it up and take it because you or some shady lawyer types LIKE YOU decided to pass a law in the past supporting the criminal tricky behavior? Gimme a break will you! next you will proudly proclaim you authored the fine print at the bottom of all those shady “ambulance chaser” laywer ads on TV and try to convince me that THOSE are all for my own good too right?

It is shady crap like this and the shady lawyers/politicians that have flushed this country down the toilet year after year, about time for some serious FLUSHING of lawyers/politicians!

We need a new constitutional ammendment BANNING lawyers from political office! this putting the perverbial fox in charge of the hen house has got to stop.

By: cyclops

cyclops — Thu, 30 Sep 2010 04:20:08 +0000

Yea! What he said! Trusting politicians is probably what has gotten the “9 other western states” into their current situation. Sorry, but I still don’t trust ANY politician (with the current exception of Minnick) as far as I could throw them.

By: Chris Mitchell

Chris Mitchell — Wed, 29 Sep 2010 14:40:49 +0000

Cyclops, my point is that 9 other western states trust their elected officials to make important fiscal decisions. I’d prefer Idaho be as different from California as possible. As for HJR5facts.com, the website you say is designed to “sway voters on these issues”, I would challenge you to find one thing there that is not factual.

The system in place worked fine until 2006, I’d like to go back to the way it was.

EDITOR NOTE–The “system” prior to 2006 was illegal, unconstitutional, and outside the law. The simple truth is the bad guys got caught. Chief Justice Eiseman told a legal seminar, “Nothing changed with the decision. The constitution has always mandated voter approval of debt.”

By: Paul

Paul — Wed, 29 Sep 2010 03:36:50 +0000

Idaho is in a fairly decent finaincial position because of the strictures on debt. I say if it is a good deal voters will approve it and if not the project will not fly.

Take a good look at the states where the elected officials are allowed to go into debt. Wall Street Journal has a very nice front page article on California now facing $19 billion is budget shortfalls due to no control by the people to approve debt.

I think I will be voting no on all three amendments. I like the idea of “pay as you go” or get voter permission to go into debt.

By: cyclops

cyclops — Wed, 29 Sep 2010 03:10:05 +0000

Awkward, you don’t really believe that it is mandated by state law that Boise spend $60,000.00 on a website to sway voters on these issues,do you?

By: Awkward

Awkward — Tue, 28 Sep 2010 19:07:59 +0000

Ya Right, state law requires voter education on these issues, and that uses taxpayer dollars. I would prefer the people I elected make these decisions, and not waste my money. Your ad hominem attack doesn’t change this.

By: ya right

ya right — Tue, 28 Sep 2010 14:52:18 +0000

GRRRRRRRRR!!!!!! is it NOVEMBER YET!!!

By: ya right

ya right — Tue, 28 Sep 2010 14:50:00 +0000

Seriously Awkward,

“”(even consolidated elections will require large voter education campaigns)””

Do you even pay attention to the comments you make? Can you honestly believe it is OK to spend MY tax money on these “voter education campaigns” to try to “educate” me to vote in support of YOUR pet project? HOLY FREAKIN COW MANURE!!!

People like you (obviously a shady lawyer/politician type) are what is wrong with this country right now. You find it perfectly ok to spend other people’s money to get what YOU decide is best for the rest of us…. when more often than not the truth is someone’s pocket is getting well lined and their retirement income getting better and better at the tax payer’s expense. GET A REAL JOB!!!!!

By: cyclops

cyclops — Tue, 28 Sep 2010 14:32:03 +0000

Excellent argument presented in the Statesmen this morning. Kudos to the Guardian! Very concise, logical, and informative. Now if the $60,000.00 website (that’s correct folks) would add it to the effort to get these passed, we could actually believe that the money Boise spent to “educate the public” was “fair and balanced”!