As everyone knows voting time is just around the corner and we have so many things to vote on. So with that in mind, I thought I would make a post of some of the propositions, and what they are about, to make voting easier. Considering I live in Arizona, these propositions are specific to Arizona. So if you are a resident of Arizona, please read below…
Proposition 114…. Protects crime victims from liability for damages suffered by a person who was injured while that person committed or attempted to commit a felony against the victim.
The easier version… Basically it stops the bad guy from suing their victims. Currently, if someone breaks into your home and they get hurt while doing it, they can sue you. It’s sad but true. This bill will make it so that you can’t be sued as a victim of a felony crime. I don’t think anyone would oppose that so, I’m voting yes.
Proposition 115… Increases the term length and raises the retirement age for justices and judges; modifies membership of court appointment commissions; requires Arizona supreme, appellate, and superior courts to publish decisions online and to transmit a copy of judicial performance reviews of each judge up for retention to the state legislature.
The easier version… Basically it increases the length of time a justice or a judge are in office from the current 4 years to now 8 years! That’s doubled, hum? It also raises the retirement age of justices and judges from 70 years to 75 years. It also gives the Arizona Governor more power. Under this proposition, a Governor would get to appoint 14 out of the 15 appointments to the Commission on Appellate Court appointments. The last 1 is appointed by the State Bar (therefore almost eliminating the input of Arizona’s legal professionals). Currently the law gives the Governor 10 slots and the State Bar 5 attorney nominations. Hum? Do you think this proposition gives too much power to one office? You be the judge.
Proposition 116…Sets the amount exempt from annual taxes on business equipment and machinery purchased after 2012 to an amount equal to the combined earnings of 50 Arizona workers.
The easier version… basically its tax relief for small businesses. Currently businesses can write off up to $68,079 for any big equipment or machinery a year. (That number started at $50,000 years ago and has risen with inflation to what it is this year, $68,079, but it’s not high enough). That stuff usually cost way more than that. This is causing small business and farmers to have to pay major taxes on this equipment before even making a profit. This proposition would make it so that they don’t have a major tax on this equipment. Thus allowing a much-needed tax relief in this down economy. In addition it should bring more jobs. There were no ‘against’ arguments in the Arizona general election guide. And I think tax relief would help our farmers and agriculturalists a great deal and I like food. So I’m voting Yes along with many other I’m sure.
Proposition 117… Beginning in 2014, sets a limit on the annual percentage increase in property values used to determine property taxes to no more than 5% above the previous year, and establishes a single limited property value as the basis for determining all property taxes on real property.
The easier version… Basically this proposition will put a 5% yearly cap on the assessed value of your home. Currently there is no limit on full cash value. Whether or not that’s good, don’t know. You be the judge.
Proposition 118…Changes the distribution formula for the state land trust permanent endowment fund, which funds various public institutions. Including schools, to be 2.5% of the average monthly market values of the fund for the immediately preceding five calendar years.
The easier version… Basically it simplifies the current flawed formula they now use and changes it to a flat 2.5% of the average monthly market values of the fund. Currently it states: that the average total rate of return for the previous five years, less percentage change in inflation, multiplied by the average market value, over the previous five years... Complicate I know. None the less, this formula has made in complicated for the schools to know just how much to budget. It has also left unpredictable outcomes and there has even been a year when zero dollars were distributed for K-12 education. There are no ‘against’ arguments in the Arizona’s general election guide.
Proposition 119… Authorizes the exchange of state trust lands if the exchange is related to protecting military facilities or improving the management of state trust lands; outlines the process for exchanges, including independent appraisals and analyses, public hearings and approval by public vote.
The easier version… Basically it gives the okay for the government to exchange the land they own for other public land in this state if these requirements are met: 1. The exchange must be in the best interest of the state land trust. 2. The purpose of the exchange must be to either assist in preserving and protecting military facilities or to improve the management of state lands for the purpose of sale or lease or conversion of state land to public use. 3. There has to be two appraisals that show that the property that is being exchanged is equal to or of greater value than what they have currently. 4. A public hearing must be held. 5. The exchange can’t happen unless it is approved by the voters at a statewide November general election. So vote at will.
Proposition 120… Repeals Arizona’s disclaimer of all right and title to federal public lands within the state and declares Arizona’s sovereignty over public lands and all natural resources within its boundaries.
The easier version… Basically it declares that Arizona has sovereignty over all land and natural resources in their state (air, water, public lands, minerals, wildlife, the Grand Canyon, etc.) except under certain specific and limited circumstances (like Indian reservations and federal dock yards etc.). This proposition takes away federal ownership of land and turns in over to its true owner, Arizona. Currently Arizona exercises control of only 29% of its land. Shouldn’t we own all our land anyway? I for one, am all for less control of the federal government. So we are voting yes! But you be the judge.
Proposition 121… Replaces the current party primary election with a “two-top” primary election in which all voters, regardless of party affiliation, vote in a single combined primary and the top two vote-getters for each seat advance to the general election ballot.
What does that mean?… Basically they will be changing the primary election voting system here in our state. Currently we elect along party lines. For example if you are a republican, you get to vote for a republican candidate for the general election. If you are a democrat you get to vote for a democrat candidate for the general election. And so on. In short each ‘recognized’ political party in Arizona gets to select its own nominee’s for the general election. The bad side is if you’re an Independent you don’t get a say in the matter until the general election.
The new system would make it so all registered voters, regardless of political affiliation, would get to vote. So all democrats, republicans, green party, independents, and libertarians will be on one ballot. Then once everyone votes, the top two people win. Now, it could happen that the top two people who win are in the same party or in opposing parties, it doesn’t matter. The top two, be them who they may, would then go head to head in the general election. If passed this proposition would also make it where candidates no longer have to list their party affiliation. It would become optional to list if you are republican, democrat, etc. Making it harder to know a true stance of a candidate, which could cause voter deception because there is no party backing their words. But the flip side is Independents would now have a vote in the primary election. This proposition has its good side and its bad. At the moment I’m on the fence. Good luck!
Proposition 204… Effective June 1, 2013, permanently increases the state sales tax by one cent per dollar for the purpose of funding educational programs, public transportation infrastructure projects, and human services; forbids reductions to current K-12 and university funding levels and forbids reductions to the current state sales tax base.
The easier version… Basically they want to permanently increase the state sales tax by one cent per dollar for the purpose of funding more education programs, transportation infrastructure projects, and human services. It doesn’t allow reductions to the current K-12 and university funding levels and forbids reductions to the current state sales tax base. Want more taxes? You be the judge.
Rule of thumb… when in doubt vote no, it will keep the current laws in place. Good Luck!