Fall 2006 Elections, Alachua County, Florida
Fall 2006 Elections, Alachua County, Florida
I apologize for not writing something on this earlier. But I am just not at all enthusiastic about these elections. I was just sad when I got my ballot. There are only two people I can vote for in good conscience: Cliff Stearns for Representative, and Lloyd Bailey for county commission. Let me extrapolate in more detail.
U.S. SENATE
It's either going to be Bill Nelson, or it isn't. Harris has the best chance of defeating him, so it's Harris or Nelson. Nelson is unresponsive, and not in favor of lowering taxes, or the FairTax. Harris, while not an endorser of the FairTax, is favorable to it (or so she says). That makes her better than Nelson. We will not make headway with staying free of government tyranny until we take away their ability to steal money from one group of voters to buy votes from another group of voters.
U.S. HOUSE
No question here. Stearns is a responsive and helpful representative. He helped a (Democrat) family I know when they were having serious legal troubles and not even their Democratic Senator Nelson would do anything for them. Cliff Stearns has your back and it doesn't matter if you voted for him or not. That says something. He takes his job as our representative seriously, and Democrats would do well to remember that. If we loose him, the public, not just Republicans, loose a valuable resource and friend in Washington. Stearns is a sponsor of the FairTax, and that is enough reason to vote for him without knowing anything else. If more people knew how much the FairTax would reduce the Federal government's control over our lives, Stearns would get a supermajority of the vote without having to campaign at all (unless democrats, as I suspect, actually like the government to be able to oppress us -- unless it's Republicans doing the oppressing).
GOVERNOR
Charlie Crist. Well, what can I say about Mr. Crist? I don't like his campaign web site... it takes too long to load, largely uninformative, difficult to navigate, and lacking a search function (but that's normal); but that isn't really relevant [note to the Crist campaign: if any of this information is inaccurate, try making your own site more accessible; I had to go to secondary sources to get most of this stuff]. In his favor, he disagrees with the Kelo v. New London Supreme Court ruling and would like to see stronger protections for ordinary citizens against eminent domain abuse. He is strong on gun rights and appears to think the second amendment should be limited only by citizens' fundamental property rights. On illegal immigration, he is in favor of stronger borders, but to his discredit, he is in favor of giving amnesty to people who have broken the laws of these United States to be here. Interestingly, he is in favor of abolishing joint and several liability; I'm not sure that's a good idea at all. When people are jointly and severally liable, it means that injured parties can recover against them as a group or as individuals. He is in favor of stronger hate crimes laws -- this means punishing people for what they think as opposed to what they do. If Mr. Crist has his way, someone who kills you or your child based on sexual orientation will receive stronger a stronger punishment than someone who kills you or your child for money. On the medical front, he favors policies to ensure that prescribed drugs sold in the state meet basic quality standards and he has been endorsed by the Florida Doctors Association and the Florida Nurses Association (do not underestimate this... these are the people who take care of you when you are critically ill and they are not going to endorse someone who would hinder them in the performance of their jobs). He opposes expansion of gambling, drilling for oil off our coast, and presumably against abortion but has indicated that he won't change the law (although some sources say he might sign a law banning it if the legislature passes one). In his favor, he is in favor of vouchers and standardized testing [and contrary to popular fallacies, giving parents the money that the government would spend on their education anyway in the form of vouchers to send children to different schools is not the same thing as having the state fund religion. Anyone who thinks otherwise should be required to take remedial logic. Likewise, don't buy that stupid argument about standardized tests. If teachers are teaching children what they are supposed to be learning anyway, there should be no need to "teach to the test." If the curriculum needs to be altered to improve children's performances on standardized tests, then the curriculum is not effective at teaching in the first place].
Jim Davis Typical Democrat. His web site is a little more informative and user friendly than Mr. Crist's. It seems like Mr. Davis is in favor of compelling insurance companies to simultaneously lower rates and provide coverage to people who make an informed decision to place their property in harms way. This will drive insurers out of the state. They are private companies and if they are required to do something that will destroy their businesses, they will leave the state. Davis boasts that he will reduce property taxes by $1 billion. Don't be fooled; do you have any idea how much is paid annually in property taxes for this state? You will not feel a $1 billion reduction. Mr. Davis is opposed to standardized testing in schools, implying that it does not prepare children to compete in the global economy. I'm sorry to rain on his parade, but if children were learning reading, writing, and arithmetic, they would do well on standardized tests. If they can't read well, write well, or do math, they will fail in the global economy. That is the ugly truth. I repeat, if teachers need to change their curriculae in order to teach children reading, writing, and arithmetic, which they should already be learning anyway, then the curriculum is the problem, not the test. The only problem with the FCAT is how it is scored, not the text itself. I have also heard that teachers are being encouraged to take time to teach children how to guess the right answers on the FCAT without knowing the material. This is unacceptable -- those teachers and those who encourage them to behave in this way should be fired. Children should be taught to read, write, and do math; not guess -- that defeats the whole point of the test. Like all of the candidates I've looked at, Davis is against offshore drilling. Mr. Davis ins increased of greater government bureaucratic control of Medicine. This will lead to decreased quality of care for you and also higher taxes. Mr. Davis also is proudly committed to advancing opportunities for all groups except for white males who aren't senior citizens -- well, that's the only group who he didn't single out for a special message on his web site. I'm sorry... I'm trying to be fair, but this is all garbage from his own web site. This guy, like most politicians, doesn't seem to get it -- if the government wants to help us thrive, it should provide us with police, firemen, roads, sanitation, and a few other universal services, but otherwise, stay out of our way. Another source says that Davis supports a balanced budget. Good for him... as long as it doesn't include raising taxes, I approve. On the other hand, I don't see how he can enact his plan to bring broadband to all rural areas (I have dialup), and balance the budget without raising taxes. No word on whether Mr. Davis wants to violate our second amendment rights, but the NRA gives him an F.
Max Linn I decided to support this guy. Partly because he's not Crist or Davis, but mostly because of where he says he stands on the issues. He is in favor of halting illegal immigration, or suing the federal government if they don't. He is in favor of measures to dampen new development in Florida and encourage "responsible growth that doesn't destroy the fabric of the economy and our quality of life though gridlock, overcrowding and environmental and social stress."
Like the other candidates, he is going to try to fix the insurance crisis... his plan includes compelling insurers to cover homes built in places known to be susceptible to seasonal property destruction. This will not work. A big thing is that he is in favor of keeping non-violent offenders out of prison. I am 100% in favor of this.
He is also in favor of encouraging alternative energy sources, like solar and ethanol. I highly approve. He is in favor of the right to keep and bear arms. In the whole, he is a strong candidate and I agree with him more than I disagree with him (which is not true of Mr. Crist, or Mr. Davis).
CABINET
I don't have anything to say about these guys.
STATE SENATE
In my opinion, both Oelrich and Jennings are not the sort of people we want. This is why we should have a 'none of the above' selection on our ballot. Steve Olerich is proudly in favor of asset forfeiture laws (which steal money from ordinary citizens without probable cause) -- or, I assume him to be in the absence of any disapproval of his sheriff department's seizure of a large sum of money from a passing motorist. Jennings is known for using state funds to pay for private trips and the way he made his money might raise a few eyebrows.
COUNTY COMMISSION
Vote for people who are not currently on the county commission. The people who are there now seek to do mean things to us, like narrow Main Street to two lanes. Plus, they seem to want do their best to turn us into the Peoples' Republik of Alachua Kounty. I am voting for Lloyd Bailey. We need more libertarians in local government, not more socialists.
JUDGES
I am not voting to retain any of those people currently sitting on any bench. It's ridiculous to have us vote on judges anyway since we aren't allowed to know what they think. On the Supreme Court, only Wells and Bell are worth anything and neither of them are up for reelection.
I am voting for Pennypacker for circuit court. He has more experience, and he was endorsed by the third candidate who lost the primary (I spoke to her and she was very concerned about the government tyrannizing the people).
AMENDMENTS
NO. 1
The wording on this one is rather opaque, but it intends to keep the legislature from padding the budget with one-time windfalls (like meeting state education funding requirements with lottery funds instead of the general revenue like they're supposed to). I have no idea if it'll work, but if it doesn't, it's harmless. I voted yes.
NO. 3
This one requires 60% of votes cast in order to pass a constitutional Amendment. Most of the more inappropriate amendments passed with more than 60%. Also, while I'm in favor of something like this, I also want an amendment that allows the voters to put actual legislation on the ballot that, if passed in the general election, the legislature would be compelled to implement. I ended up voting no.
NO. 4
This requires the funding of a state wide anti-tobacco education program. The answer is no. It's stuff like this that makes people want to vote for Amendment No. 2. You do not put specific things like this in the Constitution, it's not what a constitution is for. I voted no.
NO. 6
This increases the homestead exemption for the elderly. While it sounds good, and we all have a grand parent... the county is going to make up that lost revenue from somewhere... specifically form you and me. I voted no.
NO. 7
Extra homestead exemptions for a narrow class of disabled veterans. I voted no; for the same reasons found under Amendment No. 6.
NO. 8
This is to prohibit the state from taking land from you and me and giving it to developers. The disturbing thing about this one, now that I've thought about it (I originally voted yes), is that it specifically allows the legislature to make exceptions with a 3/5 vote. While a 3/5 vote is hard to get, I don't like a precedent in our state constitution allowing the government to abuse eminent domain in such a way. I should have voted no, but I voted yes.
Florida Gainesville Alachua County Elections 2006 Elections
I apologize for not writing something on this earlier. But I am just not at all enthusiastic about these elections. I was just sad when I got my ballot. There are only two people I can vote for in good conscience: Cliff Stearns for Representative, and Lloyd Bailey for county commission. Let me extrapolate in more detail.
U.S. SENATE
It's either going to be Bill Nelson, or it isn't. Harris has the best chance of defeating him, so it's Harris or Nelson. Nelson is unresponsive, and not in favor of lowering taxes, or the FairTax. Harris, while not an endorser of the FairTax, is favorable to it (or so she says). That makes her better than Nelson. We will not make headway with staying free of government tyranny until we take away their ability to steal money from one group of voters to buy votes from another group of voters.
U.S. HOUSE
No question here. Stearns is a responsive and helpful representative. He helped a (Democrat) family I know when they were having serious legal troubles and not even their Democratic Senator Nelson would do anything for them. Cliff Stearns has your back and it doesn't matter if you voted for him or not. That says something. He takes his job as our representative seriously, and Democrats would do well to remember that. If we loose him, the public, not just Republicans, loose a valuable resource and friend in Washington. Stearns is a sponsor of the FairTax, and that is enough reason to vote for him without knowing anything else. If more people knew how much the FairTax would reduce the Federal government's control over our lives, Stearns would get a supermajority of the vote without having to campaign at all (unless democrats, as I suspect, actually like the government to be able to oppress us -- unless it's Republicans doing the oppressing).
GOVERNOR
Charlie Crist. Well, what can I say about Mr. Crist? I don't like his campaign web site... it takes too long to load, largely uninformative, difficult to navigate, and lacking a search function (but that's normal); but that isn't really relevant [note to the Crist campaign: if any of this information is inaccurate, try making your own site more accessible; I had to go to secondary sources to get most of this stuff]. In his favor, he disagrees with the Kelo v. New London Supreme Court ruling and would like to see stronger protections for ordinary citizens against eminent domain abuse. He is strong on gun rights and appears to think the second amendment should be limited only by citizens' fundamental property rights. On illegal immigration, he is in favor of stronger borders, but to his discredit, he is in favor of giving amnesty to people who have broken the laws of these United States to be here. Interestingly, he is in favor of abolishing joint and several liability; I'm not sure that's a good idea at all. When people are jointly and severally liable, it means that injured parties can recover against them as a group or as individuals. He is in favor of stronger hate crimes laws -- this means punishing people for what they think as opposed to what they do. If Mr. Crist has his way, someone who kills you or your child based on sexual orientation will receive stronger a stronger punishment than someone who kills you or your child for money. On the medical front, he favors policies to ensure that prescribed drugs sold in the state meet basic quality standards and he has been endorsed by the Florida Doctors Association and the Florida Nurses Association (do not underestimate this... these are the people who take care of you when you are critically ill and they are not going to endorse someone who would hinder them in the performance of their jobs). He opposes expansion of gambling, drilling for oil off our coast, and presumably against abortion but has indicated that he won't change the law (although some sources say he might sign a law banning it if the legislature passes one). In his favor, he is in favor of vouchers and standardized testing [and contrary to popular fallacies, giving parents the money that the government would spend on their education anyway in the form of vouchers to send children to different schools is not the same thing as having the state fund religion. Anyone who thinks otherwise should be required to take remedial logic. Likewise, don't buy that stupid argument about standardized tests. If teachers are teaching children what they are supposed to be learning anyway, there should be no need to "teach to the test." If the curriculum needs to be altered to improve children's performances on standardized tests, then the curriculum is not effective at teaching in the first place].
Jim Davis Typical Democrat. His web site is a little more informative and user friendly than Mr. Crist's. It seems like Mr. Davis is in favor of compelling insurance companies to simultaneously lower rates and provide coverage to people who make an informed decision to place their property in harms way. This will drive insurers out of the state. They are private companies and if they are required to do something that will destroy their businesses, they will leave the state. Davis boasts that he will reduce property taxes by $1 billion. Don't be fooled; do you have any idea how much is paid annually in property taxes for this state? You will not feel a $1 billion reduction. Mr. Davis is opposed to standardized testing in schools, implying that it does not prepare children to compete in the global economy. I'm sorry to rain on his parade, but if children were learning reading, writing, and arithmetic, they would do well on standardized tests. If they can't read well, write well, or do math, they will fail in the global economy. That is the ugly truth. I repeat, if teachers need to change their curriculae in order to teach children reading, writing, and arithmetic, which they should already be learning anyway, then the curriculum is the problem, not the test. The only problem with the FCAT is how it is scored, not the text itself. I have also heard that teachers are being encouraged to take time to teach children how to guess the right answers on the FCAT without knowing the material. This is unacceptable -- those teachers and those who encourage them to behave in this way should be fired. Children should be taught to read, write, and do math; not guess -- that defeats the whole point of the test. Like all of the candidates I've looked at, Davis is against offshore drilling. Mr. Davis ins increased of greater government bureaucratic control of Medicine. This will lead to decreased quality of care for you and also higher taxes. Mr. Davis also is proudly committed to advancing opportunities for all groups except for white males who aren't senior citizens -- well, that's the only group who he didn't single out for a special message on his web site. I'm sorry... I'm trying to be fair, but this is all garbage from his own web site. This guy, like most politicians, doesn't seem to get it -- if the government wants to help us thrive, it should provide us with police, firemen, roads, sanitation, and a few other universal services, but otherwise, stay out of our way. Another source says that Davis supports a balanced budget. Good for him... as long as it doesn't include raising taxes, I approve. On the other hand, I don't see how he can enact his plan to bring broadband to all rural areas (I have dialup), and balance the budget without raising taxes. No word on whether Mr. Davis wants to violate our second amendment rights, but the NRA gives him an F.
Max Linn I decided to support this guy. Partly because he's not Crist or Davis, but mostly because of where he says he stands on the issues. He is in favor of halting illegal immigration, or suing the federal government if they don't. He is in favor of measures to dampen new development in Florida and encourage "responsible growth that doesn't destroy the fabric of the economy and our quality of life though gridlock, overcrowding and environmental and social stress."
Like the other candidates, he is going to try to fix the insurance crisis... his plan includes compelling insurers to cover homes built in places known to be susceptible to seasonal property destruction. This will not work. A big thing is that he is in favor of keeping non-violent offenders out of prison. I am 100% in favor of this.
He is also in favor of encouraging alternative energy sources, like solar and ethanol. I highly approve. He is in favor of the right to keep and bear arms. In the whole, he is a strong candidate and I agree with him more than I disagree with him (which is not true of Mr. Crist, or Mr. Davis).
CABINET
I don't have anything to say about these guys.
STATE SENATE
In my opinion, both Oelrich and Jennings are not the sort of people we want. This is why we should have a 'none of the above' selection on our ballot. Steve Olerich is proudly in favor of asset forfeiture laws (which steal money from ordinary citizens without probable cause) -- or, I assume him to be in the absence of any disapproval of his sheriff department's seizure of a large sum of money from a passing motorist. Jennings is known for using state funds to pay for private trips and the way he made his money might raise a few eyebrows.
COUNTY COMMISSION
Vote for people who are not currently on the county commission. The people who are there now seek to do mean things to us, like narrow Main Street to two lanes. Plus, they seem to want do their best to turn us into the Peoples' Republik of Alachua Kounty. I am voting for Lloyd Bailey. We need more libertarians in local government, not more socialists.
JUDGES
I am not voting to retain any of those people currently sitting on any bench. It's ridiculous to have us vote on judges anyway since we aren't allowed to know what they think. On the Supreme Court, only Wells and Bell are worth anything and neither of them are up for reelection.
I am voting for Pennypacker for circuit court. He has more experience, and he was endorsed by the third candidate who lost the primary (I spoke to her and she was very concerned about the government tyrannizing the people).
AMENDMENTS
NO. 1
The wording on this one is rather opaque, but it intends to keep the legislature from padding the budget with one-time windfalls (like meeting state education funding requirements with lottery funds instead of the general revenue like they're supposed to). I have no idea if it'll work, but if it doesn't, it's harmless. I voted yes.
NO. 3
This one requires 60% of votes cast in order to pass a constitutional Amendment. Most of the more inappropriate amendments passed with more than 60%. Also, while I'm in favor of something like this, I also want an amendment that allows the voters to put actual legislation on the ballot that, if passed in the general election, the legislature would be compelled to implement. I ended up voting no.
NO. 4
This requires the funding of a state wide anti-tobacco education program. The answer is no. It's stuff like this that makes people want to vote for Amendment No. 2. You do not put specific things like this in the Constitution, it's not what a constitution is for. I voted no.
NO. 6
This increases the homestead exemption for the elderly. While it sounds good, and we all have a grand parent... the county is going to make up that lost revenue from somewhere... specifically form you and me. I voted no.
NO. 7
Extra homestead exemptions for a narrow class of disabled veterans. I voted no; for the same reasons found under Amendment No. 6.
NO. 8
This is to prohibit the state from taking land from you and me and giving it to developers. The disturbing thing about this one, now that I've thought about it (I originally voted yes), is that it specifically allows the legislature to make exceptions with a 3/5 vote. While a 3/5 vote is hard to get, I don't like a precedent in our state constitution allowing the government to abuse eminent domain in such a way. I should have voted no, but I voted yes.
Florida Gainesville Alachua County Elections 2006 Elections
posted by AC Sentinel at 11:13 PM
0 comments
