on the Role of Government

The care of human life and happiness, and not their destruction, is the first and only object of good government.- Thomas Jefferson

some Tmes a Picture is Worth a Thousand Words

Obama's Vacation Choice Reveals Much

I was reading online newspapers and came across a story that shocked me. The opening paragraphs reads as follows, "KAILUA, Hawaii — While on vacation in Hawaii, the Obama family is staying in a $9 million single-story oceanfront home in a laid-back neighborhood over the mountain from downtown Honolulu where the president-elect grew up.

The five-bedroom wood frame house sits on almost an acre of land fronting Kailua Beach, a favorite spot for windsurfers, kayakers and dogwalkers."

It would seem to me in a time of economic trouble that was created in large part by greed and excess that what is needed form our president elect is not the renting of a 9 million dollar beach house in Hawaii on top of spending millions and millions to win election but instead a display of modest living and restraint. I am not saying that it is wrong to rent a vacation home, or to go on vacation. What I am saying is that this particular choice seems a poor choice in light of the public nature of his position. He had an opportunity to show constraint in his vacation choice but instead Obama has demonstrated to me that no matter how much he will tell me in that he relates and understands my economic situation, he indeed does not understand and can not sympathize with those in foreclosure. He can not relate with those who have lost jobs or their retirement funds or both.

on the History of Liberty

The history of liberty is a history of resistance. The history of liberty is a history of limitations of governmental power, not the increase of it. - Woodrow Wilson

Responding to the 2008 Presidential Election: a Christian Perspective (part 5)

The last kind of ruler I would like to discuss starts out like the Pharaohs and Harad of the world and end up like David. To see this last type of ruler lets look at the book of Daniel.

“All this happened to King Nebuchadnezzar. Twelve months later, as the king was walking on the roof of the royal palace of Babylon, he said, "Is not this the great Babylon I have built as the royal residence, by my mighty power and for the glory of my majesty?" The words were still on his lips when a voice came from heaven, "This is what is decreed for you, King Nebuchadnezzar: Your royal authority has been taken from you. You will be driven away from people and will live with the wild animals; you will eat grass like cattle. Seven times will pass by for you until you acknowledge that the Most High is sovereign over the kingdoms of men and gives them to anyone he wishes." Immediately what had been said about Nebuchadnezzar was fulfilled. He was driven away from people and ate grass like cattle. His body was drenched with the dew of heaven until his hair grew like the feathers of an eagle and his nails like the claws of a bird. At the end of that time, I, Nebuchadnezzar, raised my eyes toward heaven, and my sanity was restored. Then I praised the Most High; I honored and glorified him who lives forever. His dominion is an eternal dominion; his kingdom endures from generation to generation. All the peoples of the earth are regarded as nothing. He does as he pleases with the powers of heaven and the peoples of the earth. No one can hold back his hand or say to him: "What have you done?" At the same time that my sanity was restored, my honor and splendor were returned to me for the glory of my kingdom. My advisers and nobles sought me out, and I was restored to my throne and became even greater than before. Now I, Nebuchadnezzar, praise and exalt and glorify the King of heaven, because everything he does is right and all his ways are just. And those who walk in pride he is able to humble.”

Nebuchadnezzar was a proud man who was a ruler of the greatest nation in the world and God humbled him and saved him. This is my Pray for Obama; God save him and then allow him to lead with humility. There is so much hope for the workd in this section from Daniel, there is hope for the leaders of the world to do righteousness. Let us pray to that effect.

on True Nature of Conservativism

It is well known that the most radical revolutionary will become a conservative on the day after the revolution.- Hannah Arendt

Is There an Advantage of Incumbency in Congressional Elections and if so what Explains why it is Taking Pace?

There has been a strong advantage for incumbents for the last 100 years and margin of victory has been increasing since the 1960’s . This widening of the margin of victory is known as the vanishing margins. House incumbents perform slightly better than senate incumbents in their reelection efforts, wining reelection 90% of time to the incumbent senators’ 75% reelection rate. The reason for senators being defeated more often is that it is a bigger prize to be won than a house race. As a result there are better challenges due to the fact that the election is state wide allowing for more to run than in a given house district that only represents 480,000 people. What explains this advantage is fourfold; the four things reasonable for the high reelection rate of incumbents is that they discourage quality challengers, they have name recognition, they serve there districts though constituent services, earmarks, and pork and lastly, they are helped through partisan gerrymandering of district lines for the house. First in regard to the incumbent being able to discourage quality challengers, a quality challenger is defined as anyone who has run for public office before and won. Two factors allow for incumbents to discourage quality challengers. The first is cost; it costs about $1 million to be competitive in a house face and $30 million in a senate race. The second is the fact that politicians are linked and they have to vacate there current office to run for a higher office, politicians are on a strategic ladder, if you hope off to soon and lose you may not be able to get back on. In light of these challengers most quality challengers wait for an open seat to run for. The second element working to tilt the advantage towards the incumbent is name recognition. This recognition can be split into two measures; recall following two terms in the senate an incumbent senator has 90% name recognition. After 6 years in the House, a house incumbent has 75% name recognition. Third, Congressman spend lots of time on what is called constituents services. Constituent services are non partisan in nature. Examples are John McCain or Harry Mitchell helping Veterans with a getting there benefits. By engaging in this symbolic work on behalf of there constituents they are building favorable feelings and increasing there name recognition. Lastly, Partisan Redistricting has helped to create house districts that have large concentration of one party afflation, allowing for wider victory margins and few quality challengers. For example in Arizona District 4, Ed pastor wins reelection by 75% every time, this is due to the make up of his district electorate. The Republicans part has been helped most by this partisan Gerrymandering.

update

conclusion of perspective series coming later this week, until then enjoy selected essays on congressional elections.

on the moral weightiness of the statement, "does not want child at this time"

In Minnesota , from 1973 to 2002, 461,026 abortions were reported. There were 14,186 in 2002. 50% on women under age 24. 79% were unmarried. 40% has had an abortion before. 60% reported that the reason for their abortion was either economic or “does not want child at this time...” I do not want a child at this time”—we are near the heart of the issue. At this time in American history, that is one of the most powerful sentences a person can speak: “I do not want a child at this time.” It's powerful, because in a world without God, and without submission to his will, the will—the “want”—of a mother has become the will of a god. I say it carefully and calmly and sadly: Our modern, secular, God-dethroning culture has endowed the will (the “want”) of a mother not just with sovereignty over her child, but with something vastly greater. We have endowed her will with the right and the power to create human personhood. When God is no longer the Creator of human personhood, endowing it with dignity and rights in his own image, we must take that role for him, and we have vested it in the will of the mother. She creates personhood. In this sense: Minnesota , along with 33 other states has a fetal homicide law. A crime against a mother that injures or kills her unborn baby will be treated as a crime with two victims, not just one. The law makes it murder to kill an embryo or fetus intentionally, except in cases of abortion.” That is an accurate sentence and should make us tremble. Why? Because it shows that in a world without God, the will of the strong creates (or nullifies) the personhood of the weak. How can there be a fetal homicide law that is not broken by abortion? Why is abortion not fetal homicide? There is one essential answer. In the case of the fetal homicide, the mother wants the baby. In the case of abortion, she does not. The will of the mother is god.
And the awesome thing is that we endow her will not just with sovereignty over her unborn baby, but with the authority to define it: If she wants it, it is a baby, a person. If she does not want it, it is not a baby, not a person.
In other words, in our laws we have now made room for some killing to be justified not on the basis of the rights or crimes of the one killed, but decisively on the basis of the will, the desire, of a stronger person. The decisive criterion of personhood and non-personhood, what is right and wrong, what is legal and what is illegal, is the will of the strong. Might makes right. Might makes personhood. Might makes legal. This is the ultimate statement of anarchy. It is the essence of the original insurrection against God, and against objective truth and right and beauty.
- John Piper from his sermon,” Abortion and the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil"
I don't normally comment on the quotes I post, but in this case I can not help it; abortion is the slavery of our day and I pray and invite you pray that a day will come soon when we look back on it with the horror that we look back on the ownership of African Americans in the south. This is a great evil and it must be stopped.

Responding to the 2008 Presidential Election: a Christian Perspective (part 4)

The next kind of ruler I want to look at is the one who fears God. David is an example of this. So is Josiah. I think it is important to note two things about public, openly Christian leaders. They are men and they are sinful. First, they are men, not God and we must keep this in the forefront of our minds so as to protect our collective spiritual well being. Secondly, they are sinful. David used a war to commit murder.. The response for us when lead by this type of leader is to remember they are fallible and that God not them is our savior and help in time of trouble.

On Political Principle

There are many men of principle in both parties in America, but there is no party of principle. -Alexis de Tocqueville

Responding to the 2008 Presidential Election: a Christian Perspective (part 3)

I would now like to look at three types of rulers God has established and moved through in different ways. The First I would like to look are those Leaders who do not worship God whose opposition to Him He uses in the redemption of his people. I have two New Testament and one Old Testament examples. They are Pharaoh, Pilot, and Herod. Pharaoh was used by God to demonstrate his power by hardening his heart so that God might display his love for people and his Control over all things by sending the plagues and ultimately delivering the Israelites to the land He had promised them after years of slavery in Egypt. Similarly God used both Pilot and Herod in advancing his redemptive plan during the life and misty of John the Baptist and Jesus. Acts 13:27-30 says, “The people of Jerusalem and their rulers did not recognize Jesus, yet in condemning him they fulfilled the words of the prophets that are read every Sabbath. Though they found no proper ground for a death sentence, they asked Pilate to have him executed. When they had carried out all that was written about him, they took him down from the tree and laid him in a tomb. But God raised him from the dead.” God used all three men, all of whom were opposed to his puposes, used them to fulfill those puposes. The take home lesson is that, yes, while some Obama's policies are opposed to God He may use these proposed evils for our redemptive good.

Responding to the 2008 Presidential Election: a Christian Perspective (part 2)

We will first look at God’s Sovereignty over rulers and government. I would like to turn to a few texts to show that God not only selects who rules but has shown that He is more than willing to use the rulers he puts in place for his purposes. We will begin by looking at God’s control over government.
The first text I would like to look at to show that God controls government and the selection of rulers are Romans 13:1, which states, “Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God.” The Second Text for consideration is 1st peter 2:13-17, “Submit yourselves for the Lord's sake to every authority instituted among men: whether to the king, as the supreme authority, or to governors, who are sent by him to punish those who do wrong and to commend those who do right. For it is God's will that by doing good you should silence the ignorant talk of foolish men. Live as free men, but do not use your freedom as a cover-up for evil; live as servants of God. Show proper respect to everyone: Love the brotherhood of believers, fear God, honor the king.” These texts are very straight forward. We are to submit to the governing authority as far as it does not violate Christian principles, regardless if it is a democratically elected Barack Obama or an Iron fisted Caesar, which was the case during the writing of Romans. We owe Barack Obama our honor and submission simply due to his winning the election.

Responding to the 2008 Presidential Election: a Christian Perspective (part 1)

In the days leading up to and following Barack Obama’s victory I noticed that evangelicals around me and nationally were behaving like his election was a grave evil and must be opposed as such. I have heard politically minded Christians sounding the battle cry to oppose his administration’s efforts at each and every turn. While I share their concern and disdain for President Elect Obama’s proposed policies, I fear that the scope of alarm and response to him is somewhat misplaced. I have heard very little discussion of prayer in combating his policies. In the same vain the idea of fasting has not come up once. I am all for political action in all lawful forms, but it seems that if political action is all we take we miss out on so much of what God has called us to in allowing the election of Barack Obama. I would like to take this opportunity to remind evangelical America of a few things. I would like to explore over the next few days two themes:
1. God’s sovereignty over all things including government and elections.
2. The appropriate Christian response to God’s wise, perfect choice as to who rules where and when.

On Thievery

We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office.
-Aesop

On Reading

The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the man who can't read them. - Mark Twain

who votes: what decides who turns out?

I wanted to look at three things that effect who votes. Social scientist call this things variables. The three variables I am going to look at the age of voter, educational level of the voter and race of the voter. By doing this I hope to help explain who votes and in turn help you all look at why Obama won. We'll begin with age. The effect of age on turn out is one of the strongest indicators of who votes and can be seen by looking at life cycles. Young people by and large do not vote like 40 year olds. The reason for this is that young people are less sedentary, more mobile. they have less invested in there communities than those who are married with families. for example a father of two elementary school age children is much more likely to vote for his school board than a 20 year old.With age turnout increases steadily and plateaus at around age 40. If you are not voting by 40 you most likely never will. The second variable is educational level. educational level is an even stronger indicator than age. for example some one with a collage degree has a 94% likelihood of voting as compared with a 58% likelihood among those lacking a high school diploma. This can be explained in three ways. First, those who have complete college have an increased sense of civic duty. Second, they are able to more easily overcome social hurdles such as being able to lose half a day's income to go and vote. Those lacking a diploma are more likely to be in lower paying jobs and cannot afford to lose money to vote. lastly, the cost of information gathering is lower. Additionally, this is all coupled with an increased interest in civic affairs that is corollary to educational level. Lastly we will address race. While hard to believe when you control for educational level and age both race fall out of the equation. They have no bearing on who votes in light of the educational level and age. The one exception to this is called the empowerment effect. the empowerment effect is when a minority candidate is running for office and his or her minority group turns out and trumps the age and eduction of the minority group in question. We saw this in the 2008 election of Obama.

After The Election

“We are people that know politics is important, but not ultimate. We know that politics has its place, an urgent and important place where, in the City of Man, decisions are made that can make the difference between life and death, injustice and justice, mercy and no mercy, commonweal or common disaster.

But we also know that there is in this world at its very best only a hint of the kingdom that is to come, where God’s reign is supreme.

No government will ever be able to say, ‘Every tear has been wiped away.’ No government will ever be able to say, ‘The blind have received sight and the deaf have received hearing and the lame now walk.’…That power is God’s alone.”

—Albert Mohler, “After the Election”

On communism

Communism is the corruption of a dream of justice. - Adlai Stevenson

whats on tap the next few weeks

In the next few weeks I'll be covering:

1. A few models as to why the electorate voted the way it did. This hopefully will be helpful in explaining to that annoying guy at work why things ended upthe way they did in under two minutes, so as to free you up to go back to trying to avoid him/her.

2. Looking at what the future holds for Obama and the country. More specifically, looking at his proposed economic polices effects short term and long. Additionally, looking at and evaluating his choices of who he puts in his cabinet and on his staff.

3. Looking at where conservatism as a movement should head next and where the republicans as a party will most likely head instead.

4. More collections of quotations.

on voting.

"Let each citizen remember at the moment he is offering his vote that he is not making a present or a compliment to please an individual--or at least that he ought not so to do; but that he is executing one of the most solemn trusts in human society for which he is accountable to God and his country. "
-Samuel Adams

"A share in the sovereignty of the state, which is exercised by the citizens at large, in voting at elections is one of the most important rights of the subject, and in a republic ought to stand foremost in the estimation of the law. "
-Alexander Hamilton

"Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers, and it is the duty, as well as the privilege and interest of our Christian nation , to select and prefer Christians for their rulers. "
-John Jay

"Should things go wrong at any time, the people will set them to rights by the peaceable exercise of their elective rights. "
-Thomas Jefferson

I will be voting for...

I will be voting to keep my commitment to the Iraqi people because we owe them that and their lives depend on the U.S. giving them a country.
I will be voting to support future generations of Americans having protection under the 14th amendment who now do not because of Roe vs. Wade.
I will be voting to keep the government out of my life and trusting me enough to do the right thing.
I will be voting begrudgingly for McCain. I don't like him but I fear the alterative.

Why I can not for...Obama.

He is the most pro choice candidate in history. He is a proponent of partial birth abortion. “He opposed the ban on partial-birth abortion -- a practice a fellow Democrat, the late Daniel Patrick Moynihan, once called "too close to infanticide." Obama strongly criticized the Supreme Court decision upholding the partial-birth ban. In the Illinois state Senate, he opposed a bill similar to the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act, which prevents the killing of infants mistakenly left alive by abortion. And now Obama has oddly claimed that he would not want his daughters to be "punished with a baby" because of a crisis pregnancy -- hardly a welcoming attitude toward new life…. These trends reached their logical culmination during a congressional debate on partial-birth abortion in 1999. When Democratic Sen. Barbara Boxer was pressed to affirm that she opposed the medical killing of children after birth, she refused to commit, saying that children deserve legal protection only "when you bring your baby home." It was unclear whether this included the car trip.” – the Washington Post
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/01/AR2008040102197.html

His plan for Iraq is short sighted.

His declared plan to intervene in the case of genocide in places like Darfur while commendable for its humanity is also shortsighted. I would love to see how he would answer the following question “Mr. Obama do you plan on reinserting troops into Iraq after you pull them out when the death squads and militias start ethnic cleansing again to stop the insuring genocide.(NOTE: to all of you who tuned out the last four years, before the surge Iraq was an inch away for all out ethnic civil war. It would have made Rwanda or the Balkan wars of the 1990’s look tame. This could and most likely WILL happen if we pull troops out prematurely.)

Biden is only helpful to America when his party is in the minority. In this role he is an annoying and effective counterbalance to corruption and rubber stamp policies.

He has used language in a criminal manner, pumping slogans and lacking substance. (yes we can, I believe in hope, Hope we can believe in. I can go on. What do these saying tell me about what he will do? Nothing.)

He has prayed on the idealism of youth. I have so many friends who love him for no reason other than he is young and black and a good public speaker and supporting him makes them feel good and cultured and like they are part of something bigger than them. None of these feelings and warm fuzzies will set national policies that will effect them.

He has painted himself as an outside when in fact he is a Chicago insider.

I don't want to be tucked in by the government every nite.

Government is not the solution it is the problem.

why I can not for...McCain.

He is an opportunist not a maverick.
He moved closer to the bush position on issues where the wise thing to do was move away.(torture, rights for enemy combatants, Guantanamo Bay, Iran.)
His most noteworthy policy is to not bring pork home to AZ.
There is some truth to Obama's claim that he will be more of the same, in some ways this will be fine but in others it will prove painful.
Sarah Palin is a poor choice.
He is not the same kind of conservative as me.
Huckabee was my man.

On being right

It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong. – Voltaire

why I will not vote for...Bob Bar

I need more market regulation.

Because he says stuff like this on energy and the environment, "The free market, driven by consumer choice and reflecting the real cost of resources, should be the foundation of America’s energy policy."

Has a fundamental misunderstanding of foreign policy issues. Is a classic isolationist. this will not work in a unipolar world run by the U.S.

Wants to cut and run in Iraq.

why I can not for..Nadar

why I will not be voting for nadar:
I already made this mistake once.
I'm not from cananda.
I don't want to live in socialized europe.
because the big three didn't kill my baby.
he even freaks the green party out.

why I can not for..

I will be doing a series on why I can't vote for the national candidates who are runnig for president. I would recommend you all write someone in becasue these guys are all nuts.

On being proud to be an American

Patriotism is not a short and frenzied outburst of emotion but the tranquil and steady dedication of a lifetime. - Adlai E. Stevenson, Jr.

We, the people, are the rightful masters of both congress and the courts - not to overthrow the constitution, but to overthrow men who pervert the constitution. - Lincoln

on liberty

No constitution, no court, no law can save liberty when it dies in the hearts and minds of men. - John Perkins

Liberty means responsibility. That is why most men dread it. - George Bernard Shaw

on the protection of freedom

He that would make his own liberty secure, must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty, he establishes a precedent which will reach to himself. - Thomas Paine, Dissertation on First Principles of Government, 1795

I believe there are more instances of the abridgment of freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations. - James Madison

I would remind you, that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. And... moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue. - Barry Goldwater

A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. - Edward Abbey

on freedom

Americans are so enamored of equality that they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom.
- Alexis de Tocqueville "Democracy in America" (1835)

no on 105!

One of the reasons why I find prop 105 wanting is that it is attempting to abandon the traditional democratic mechanism that have served us so well for so many years. The bill says that to “A "yes" vote shall have the effect of requiring that a majority of registered voters approve any initiative measure establishing, imposing or raising a tax, fee, or other revenue, or mandating a spending obligation, whether on a private person, labor organization, other private legal entity, or the state, in order to become law.” This is not how it works. If you don’t vote you are not counted as a no. that is exactly what this prop is trying to do.
If this bill was in place today a number of props that passed by larger margins would not be law. The average turn out for election in America is very low. For example only about 50% of Americans vote in presidential elections. This number gets smaller and smaller the more removed for that national context one gets. If prop 105 passes there is little chance that any prop with a money increase will pass.
Additionally, I believe that because we have an expressed right as American citizens to vote, this implies a right to abstain from voting. There have been times in the past were I have exercised this implied right. If Prop 105 were to pass this right to not vote would be infringed upon because my vote would count as a “no” vote. When I chose to abstain I am choosing to do just that. I am not choosing to abstain to vote no. If I wanted to vote no I would have gone to my polling location and voted no. at the end of the day this prop is infringing on my voting rights.
This can only lead to people staying home and not participating in the political process at all. This is so dangerous to our civic virtue. At a time in which our poltics are so polarized we need to be creating incentives for the middle to vote not creating obstacles. In his 1830 work entitled democracy in America, Alexis de Tocqueville talks the dangers of this. He calls it a soft despotism. In Volume II, Book 4, Chapter 6 of Democracy in America, de Tocqueville writes the following about soft despotism:
“After having thus successively taken each member of the community in its powerful grasp and fashioned him at will, the supreme power then extends its arm over the whole community. It covers the surface of society with a network of small complicated rules, minute and uniform, through which the most original minds and the most energetic characters cannot penetrate, to rise above the crowd. The will of man is not shattered, but softened, bent, and guided; men are seldom forced by it to act, but they are constantly restrained from acting. Such a power does not destroy, but it prevents existence; it does not tyrannize, but it compresses, enervates, extinguishes, and stupefies a people, till each nation is reduced to nothing better than a flock of timid and industrious animals, of which the government is the shepherd.”
This soft despotism leads to a tyranny of the majority. A tyranny of the majority is when the majority creates political situation in which it takes advantage of the political minority or minorities.
This is exactly what would happen if prop 105 passes. Those who do not want to increase government spending of any kind become unlikely bed fellows with registered voters who choose to not vote to prevent the most noble employment of the direct Initiative system; the betterment of the common good of Arizonans.

Vote no on prop 105 part 1: what does it propose?

To prevent myself from becoming victim to one of my own pet pevs I'm going to start by looking at the orginal document and not just start talking about it. So here it is in its own words:

The Constitution of Arizona is proposed to be amended by adding Section 1.1 to Article IV, Part 1 as follows, if approved by a majority of the votes cast thereon and on proclamation of the Governor:
Section 1. Article IV, Part 1, Constitution of Arizona, is amended by adding Section 1.1, as follows:
§1.1. FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY THROUGH TRUE MAJORITY RULE
SECTION 1.1. TO PRESERVE AND PROTECT THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY THROUGH TRUE MAJORITY RULE, AN INITIATIVE MEASURE THAT ESTABLISHES, IMPOSES OR RAISES A TAX, FEE, OR OTHER REVENUE, OR MANDATES A SPENDING OBLIGATION, WHETHER ON A PRIVATE PERSON, LABOR ORGANIZATION, OTHER PRIVATE LEGAL ENTITY OR THIS STATE, SHALL NOT BECOME LAW UNLESS THE MEASURE IS APPROVED BY A MAJORITY OF QUALIFIED ELECTORS THEN REGISTERED TO VOTE IN THIS STATE.
Section 2. Short Title: This Constitutional Amendment shall be known as the "Majority Rule--Let the People Decide Act."


ANALYSIS BY LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
Proposition 105 would amend the Arizona Constitution to provide that an initiative measure that establishes, imposes or raises a tax, a fee or other revenue or mandates a spending obligation on a private person, a labor organization, other private legal entity or this state shall not become law unless the initiative measure is approved at the election by a majority of qualified electors registered to vote in the state.
FISCAL IMPACT STATEMENT
State law requires the Joint Legislative Budget Committee (JLBC) Staff to prepare a summary of the fiscal impact of certain ballot measures. The fiscal impact cannot be determined in advance. Ballot propositions are currently approved by a majority of votes cast on a measure. By increasing the current vote threshold for an initiative that increases a tax or fee or creates a mandatory spending obligation, Proposition 105 may reduce the number of such initiatives that are approved in the future.

BALLOT FORMAT

PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION
BY THE INITIATIVE RELATING TO THE INITIATIVE
OFFICIAL TITLE
MAJORITY RULE-LET THE PEOPLE DECIDE ACT
PROPOSING AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION OF ARIZONA: AMENDING ARTICLE IV, PART 1, CONSTITUTION OF ARIZONA, BY ADDING SECTION 1.1 RELATING TO INITIATIVE MEASURES AND REQUIRING THAT ANY MANDATORY TAX OR SPENDING INCREASE BE ENACTED BY A MAJORITY OF QUALIFIED ELECTORS.
DESCRIPTIVE TITLE
REQUIRES AN INITIATIVE MEASURE THAT ESTABLISHES, IMPOSES OR RAISES A TAX, FEE, OR OTHER REVENUE, OR MANDATES A SPENDING OBLIGATION, WHETHER ON A PRIVATE PERSON, LABOR ORGANIZATION, OTHER PRIVATE LEGAL ENTITY OR STATE, SHALL NOT BECOME LAW UNLESS THE MEASURE IS APPROVED BY A MAJORITY OF QUALIFIED ELECTORS REGISTERED TO VOTE.


A "yes" vote shall have the effect of requiring that a majority of registered voters approve any initiative measure establishing, imposing or raising a tax, fee, or other revenue, or mandating a spending obligation, whether on a private person, labor organization, other private legal entity, or the state, in order to become law.

A "no" vote shall have the effect of retaining the current law under which an initiative measure is enacted upon approval of a majority of registered voters that vote on the measure.

here is who is in support of this messure:

Chad Kirkpatrick, Arizona Chairman, Americans for Prosperity, Phoenix
Tom Jenney, Arizona Director, Americans for Prosperity
Kevin Rogers, President, Arizona Farm Bureau, Gilbert
Jim Klinker, Chief Administrative Officer, Arizona Farm Bureau, Gilbert


source: http://www.azsos.gov/election/2008/Info/PubPamphlet/english/Prop105.htm

VOTE NO ON PROP. 105

Over the next few days I'll be commenting on why prop 105 is bad for political participation, bad for preventing taxation, bad for democracy and bad for Arizona. Stay tuned.

why write? why blog?

Why on Gods green earth would I want to do this? There are a few reasons.
1. I need the structure and effort that writing some thing down provides me to see if it is worth thinking about. If I'm not willing to commit it to the writing process maybe I should put my mind on other things.
2. I am a Christian of the reformed tradition. I am finding that there is not a lot of political writing coming out of this rich theological tradition. there may be publications out there, I just haven't seen them yet. In an effort to answer some of my theological/political/ethical questions. I thought a blog would be a helpful tool in that it allows me to write it out and receive feed back.
3. To improve as a writer and communicator.
4. Most important to try and bring glory to Jesus by using my mind.