I also got to thinking about propositions. Here in California we had a lot of propositions to vote on. The issue with propositions is that most of them look good on the surface. Nobody would look at a proposition that aims to increase funding for education and say that it’s a terrible idea. But you have to look at how the proposition would work. Does it call for increased taxes on people who can’t afford an increase? Are there exemptions that render the proposition useless? Will the money actually go to the cause, or are there allowances for it to be used for other purposes? It’s never as simple as saying “yea, we should increase funding for education.”
And yet you hear all the time politicians bad mouthing each other for their voting record, saying that the other guy voted against some law that on the surface sounds like a good idea. And we eat that stuff up. Why don’t we let our own experience voting on local and statewide initiatives inform us of how complicated these laws are and cut politicians a little slack? Have you actually read any of the laws our politicians in Washington are voting on? If not, then I think you should give politicians the benefit of the doubt that most of the time when they vote against something, it’s because of how it’s written, not because of the intended purpose.