Comments on: Can’t Fight City Hall and Win

By: Randy

Randy — Tue, 16 Nov 2010 20:44:54 +0000

If the airports and hospitals are cash flowing so well, why not change over from a government entity to an association? As a non-profit they could also raise cash from investors and philanthropists. But we all know the reason: after the money is BORROWED and the entity can’t pay it…the taxpayers will pay. We essentially co-signed a blank check loan.

By: 8th Street

8th Street — Mon, 08 Nov 2010 18:57:46 +0000

I voted against the amendments, but as I did so I remembered a discussion I had with one of the region’s more successful environmental attorneys.

He remarked that he occasionally would not pursue an easily winnable case for fear that the repercussions of his victory would entail a change in the law that would make things worse.

Oops.

By: 64.01%

64.01% — Sun, 07 Nov 2010 05:59:24 +0000

Every county with a commercial airport supported the amendment HJR 5.

In addition, several counties in eastern Idaho that have publicly owned electric utilities voted in favor of the airport amendment, perhaps out of an understanding that airports, like municipal utilities, have a revenue stream that will be the source for the financed projects.

I think that as the debate on HJR 5 aired over the fall with the news coverage voters realized we were debating the right to vote v. the cost of putting on an election so people could vote on mundane things like a parking garage.

There are comments above about the number of votes on the constitutional amendments as less than for the races at the top of the ticket. This is normal. The experts’ term for this phenomenon is “ballot fatigue” because people burn out over a long ballot. Or, in the case of Ada County, a second sheet.

The ballot fatigue rates fall within the normal range for these types of ballot measures. An initiative or a referendum typically garners a higher participation rate (we didn’t have any this year), and constitutional amendments less.

By: Kappa TA

Kappa TA — Sat, 06 Nov 2010 14:18:53 +0000

Although the majority voted yes on the HJRs, the bills could possibly be found inviolate of certain provisions of the federal Voting Rights Act of 1965 and amendments. Also, in 2000, the U.S. Supreme Court repealed California’s Proposition 198 (blanket primaries) on grounds that it violated political parties’ rights to free association. (California Democratic Party, et al v. Bill Jones, 2000). This is not sour grapes, just a discourse on passage of laws that deny voter rights and potential remedies.

KTA

By: Spongebob

Spongebob — Sat, 06 Nov 2010 05:02:45 +0000

Dave,

I must say, it appears to me that you got what you wanted. Idaho exercised its right to vote on the issues and well my friend your side lost! No one can help the fact that some people decided not to fill out the second half of the ballot that is just the way it happened. If you don’t like it then maybe you should continue on with the political process and try to have it repealed (lawsuits are not the political process but a losers last ditch effort to fight the majority.) I would guess that further ballot attempts to repeal such resolutions would also fail. Move on folks, the world will not end because the airport can now spend money to make our lives easier and hospitals can now buy much needed equipment from their revenues. I would bet if you were to need medical assistance in Cascade you would really want the new x-ray machine instead of the one straight out of the Korean War.

EDITOR NOTE–You won, but your perceptions remain as deceptive as the $750,000 hospital ads. The courts are where we seek JUSTICE rather than a “last ditch effort.”

By: Seriously Awkward

Seriously Awkward — Fri, 05 Nov 2010 19:17:40 +0000

These passed because they make sense. They were supported overwhelningly in the legislature, and now overwhelmingly by the voters. Time to find your next cause.

By: JJ

JJ — Fri, 05 Nov 2010 14:55:20 +0000

Rod in SE Boise, you think Walt Minnick’s voting with republicans 30% of the time makes him not a Democrat. Look at the other side of the coin, he voted with Democrats 70% of the time. Seems to me like a rationale position and we need more people who are not afraid to vote with either party based on the value of the law being considered. Link in article to voting record %:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/04/15/walt-minnick-tea-party-en_n_538837.html

By: cyclops

cyclops — Fri, 05 Nov 2010 04:42:11 +0000

What if a 16,000 unexplained vote in any other race happened? All hell would break loose. You are correct in that it wouldn’t have changed the outcome, but I maintain 16,000 votes are indeed substantial. The Guardian made the proponents look rather silly in the “face to face” debates. The problem is that the 10’s of thousands of dollars poured into the question could not be overcome. It truly saddens me when anyone gives away their right to vote!

EDITOR NOTE–It saddens me more when they give away MY right to vote!

By: Zippo

Zippo — Fri, 05 Nov 2010 04:28:00 +0000

We will soon see the flight of the wealthy away from the giant sucking sound of the cities. You were not fighting the city as much as all the freeloaders in the city. Just another buy the vote program.

By: Sisyphus

Sisyphus — Thu, 04 Nov 2010 22:24:04 +0000

My friend, I know you are formidable but there were forces arrayed beyond a blogger’s capacity. For reasons which still escape me these provisions had the R stamp of approval. I thought you might have a chance when Moyle turned. But nobody followed.