The Sun Chronicle endorses YES ON 1 ! The Sun Chronicles take on ballot questions - The Sun Chronicle : Opinion We urge votes to vote Yes on 1; No on 2; No on 3; and Yes on 4 Posted: Thursday, October 30, 2014 12:00 am With a history of direct democracy going back to the earliest town meetings, citizens of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts enjoy the right to enact ballot referenda any time they feel the states Legislature has fallen short of its responsibilities to represent them. Each election year, voters are faced with a roster of issues, some important and some obscure, many of which would puzzle the best-read legal scholars. This year, however, the list is fairly straightforward, as are the responses we believe voters should provide. Question 1: The gas tax. A yes vote on this question would stop the automatic increase on taxes per gallon, which are currently linked to the consumer price index. While we agree with opponents that the state should devote more money to the repair of our crumbling highway infrastructure, we dont think an automatic tax increase is the way to do it. If its important to have good roads and bridges - and we think it is, both from a standpoint of safety and as a lure to business growth - members of the legislature should stand up and be counted if they want to charge gasoline consumers extra. We urge a yes vote. Question 2: The bottle bill: By most measures the current bottle bill has been a success, if only in terms of the number of beer and soda cans you dont see littering the sides of our roads anymore. So if deposits on a few types of containers are good, then deposits on all types must be better, right? Thats the logic behind the campaign to get a yes vote that would require consumers to pay a deposit on bottles of juice, water and other beverages not currently covered by the law. In fact, it may have the opposite effect from what proponents say they want, a cleaner environment. What the commonwealth really needs is to develop a recycling industry that is both self-sustaining and profitable - and the best, most efficient way to accomplish that is by doubling down on curbside. Rather than redirecting redeemables out of the recycling stream, the state should mandate curbside programs where they dont exist, while expanding and making them more user-friendly where they do exist. We urge a no vote. Question 3: Casino repeal: In 2011, the state Legislature approved, after much debate, a law authorizing casino gambling in Massachusetts, effectively throwing out the welcome mat to gaming industry development. A yes vote on this question would effectively repeal that law, rolling up the welcome mat while some developers are standing on it. Casino gambling is no panacea for any communitys economic woes and the gaming industry as a whole is experiencing what can only be called a very unlucky streak right now. But the fact is millions of gambling dollars leave the state every day, heading to the slot machines and blackjack tables of Rhode Island and Connecticut. That money is going to be spent. Theres no reason some of it should not be spent here. And well leave aside for the moment the moral arguments against gaming, since, if the state ever decides that placing a bet so shocks the conscience it will have to shut down the Massachusetts Lottery at once. But there has already been a referendum on gambling around here. The people of Plainville overwhelmingly voted to allow a slot parlor at Plainridge Racecourse in the belief it will bring much needed revenue to their town. They deserve to see that particular gamble get a fair chance. We urge a no vote. Question 4: Sick leave. A yes vote will let workers at all but the smallest companies earn up to 40 hours of paid sick leave per year. Thats a week of paid time off to recover from an illness or care for a family member. Most conscientious employers offer this benefit, but a yes vote would make it mandatory. We dont think anyone should have to choose between their job and caring for a dependent, or simply to get better themselves. The arguments against a yes vote are, frankly, unpersuasive. Yes, it may be an added cost to some companies, but the state routinely mandates certain measures for employee health and safety. We think the benefits outweigh any burdens. We urge a yes vote.
Posted on: Thu, 30 Oct 2014 12:44:09 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015