A-Infos (en) US, Boston, Anarchist journal BAAM #14 - If Voting Could Change Anything... It Would be Through Ballot Initiatives The Anarchist's Guide to Mass. '08 Ballot Questions

People generally assume that anarchists are against voting in elections. In many 
ways, for many anarchists at least, this is true. We strive for a world where 
the decisions that affect our lives are made in open public meetings with ample 
time for discussion and compromise, and in a process that is extremely 
decentralized and organized on a community level. We call this Direct Democracy, 
and it stands in stark contrast to the current form of Governance in the US, 
namely Representative Democracy, where we vote for the Reps who will make those 
decisions behind closed doors, taking the power out of the public realm. The way 
we see it, with Money as the master and the politician easily bought and sold, 
only the extremely rich and powerful are truly represented by Representative 
Democracy.

One can argue that the lesser of evils will make life better for some people 
somewhere down the road, and this may be true, but many of us don't bother to 
vote for Presidents, Governors, Mayors, Congress etc, because we don't think 
these people could ever represent the working, lower or even middle class.

    Well, in the current Capitalist Republic we
live in, Ballot Initiatives are as close to Direct
Democracy as we're going to get (outside of
neighborhood or workers' meetings). In tak-
ing a half hour out of our day, we can vote
on issues that directly affect our communi-
ties. This time around, there are some pretty
important questions on the ballot. Read about
them below and hit up the polls. While you're
at it, you could even cast a ballot for the
Lesser of Evils, or not. As always, the most
important thing is to be involved in your com-
munity and struggle to build a popular move-
ment for collective liberation. Anarchists and
others dreaming of a world beyond the ballot
box can use initiative voting strategically to
make our lives a little more bearable while we
build the Revolution.

Question 1 by Adrienne

Ballot question 1 is the Small Gov-
ernment Act to End the Income Tax,
which would cut income taxes in
half for the tax year beginning 1 January
2009 and eliminate income taxes the fol-
lowing year. This ballot measure was made
possible by a handful of libertarians calling
themselves the Committee for Small Govern-
ment [whose website is yellow, of all tasteless
color schemes. You've been warned]. They
are convinced that, following the passage of
this act, every citizen in Massachusetts will
pocket an additional $3,600 every year. They
squawk that 41% of Massachusetts' budget
is `wasted,' which number they derive from
asking people how much of Mass' budget
they feel is `wasted.'
    This ballot measure and the ideology be-
hind it reeks of cruel, narrow-sighted libertar-
ian greed and truly got me angry enough to
go down to the neo-brutalist eyesore that is
Boston City Hall and register to vote. See, I
like public schools. I like public libraries. I
like public transit. I love MassHealth. Roads
and bridges are kinda useful, too. Granted,
tence of each.
    Furthermore, the claim that we'll
all `get' an additional $3,600 a year
is bogus. If you earn $50,000/year
or less, as about 2/3 of Mass does,
you'll only be keeping an extra $850
a year, which is about $70 a month,
which is about $17 a week. If, how-
ever, you are one of the few who make
$100,000+/year, you'll be keeping an
additional $16,000 a year. I just dug
up my own 2007 tax return and found
that Massachusetts only withheld $327
from me last year. I don't shed a tear
over those lost earnings and I'm sure
as shit not crying for whatever was
held from the profits of the wealthy.
Certainly I am not pleased that this
money also goes towards prisons and
police and the salaries of politicians,
yet it's a tradeoff I'm willing to make
if it means that there are still avenues
of public education, transit, healthcare,
and other means of public assistance.
The passage of question 1 would mean far-
reaching devastation for the people of Mas-
sachusetts, an ever-increasing number of
whom are impoverished and unemployed and
getting evicted. Though irrespective of its
passage, the governor just announced deep,
painful cuts in budget and public services, so
people who use public services are probably
all screwed anyway.
    Here's what's true, though: Libertarians
talk a lot of shit about how they hate gov-
ernment. Anarchists talk a lot of shit about
how they hate government. The difference?
Libertarians hate government because it can,
from time to time, prevent them from screw-
ing people over as hard and from becoming
as superlatively wealthy as they would oth-
erwise, what with its pesky regulations and
socialist schools. Anarchists hate govern-
ment because it starts catastrophic wars,
supports and protects the ruinous dealings
of the private sector, and institutionalizes
the intersecting oppressions afflicting the
world and its denizens.
    So whatever. I'm going down to ward 13,
precinct 8 on 4 November and voting no on
question 1 because as much as I abhor re-
pressive institutions, this one is still perform-
ing needed and enriching functions for real
people in our Commonwealth that might be
otherwise unavailable. I'm still writing in
`NOBODY' for president, though.

         Question 2 by Jake Carman
Basically, if Question 2 passes, people
over the age of 18 caught with up to
one ounce of weed would be issued a
$100 citation, similar to a speeding ticket, in-
stead of being arrested and sent to trial. Even
if you don't smoke pot, consider this: Whit-
ney Taylor, Campaign Manager for the Com-
mittee for Sensible Marijuana Policy, wrote
in the 2008 Massachusetts Voter Information
Manual, "Police would be freed up to focus
on serious crimes, rather than arresting 7,500
people annually...Taxpayers would save $30
million in arrest costs."
    On top of that, smokers and other taxpayers
would be spared the costs of court and prison
time, and arrestees would avoid a black mark
on their CORI (Criminal Offender Record
Information), which often bars working class
folks from getting jobs and student loans.
The only drawback is tougher penalties for
minors caught with weed (including manda-
tory notification of parents and drug aware-
ness programs). All laws involving vehicles,
drug dealing or possession of quantities more
than an ounce would stay the same.
    As Marianne Manzler wrote in her article
for the Suffolk Journal, contrary to the opposi-
tion's claims, "the only US government study
to assess the impact of strict legal penalties
on marijuana use concluded that `decrimi-
nalization has had virtually no effect either
on marijuana use or on related attitudes and
beliefs about marijuana use among American
young people.'" The opposition also claims
the marijuana of today is nine times as po-
tent (we wish) than 30 years ago, and its users
are ten times more likely to be in car crashes.
Luckily for all of us, the drivers would be go-
ing 60% percent slower than sober or drunk
drivers, minimizing risk of injury or property
damage.
    According to Tony Lee of the Boston Met-
ro, "all 11 of Massachusetts' district attor-
neys, Gov. Deval Patrick and Boston Mayor
Thomas Menino," are opposed to Question 2.
Can we get 13 anarchists to vote and cancel
out their votes? Massachusetts has the high-
est percentage of pot smokers in the country,
and not just among College students, either.
Manzler reports that the Federal Government
estimates 10% of Mass. residents "pursue this
once a month... and that over half of us have
tried marijuana, placing Massachusetts first
in the nation for monthly and lifetime use."
Between working on construction sites and
attending preschool through college in Mass.,
my estimates are considerably higher.
    According to the National Organization
for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, "a poll
analysis released (in September) by 7NEWS/
Suffolk University shows that seventy-two
percent favored the proposed law. Alaska,
California, Colorado, Hawaii, Maine, Mon-
tana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode
Island, Vermont and Washington all have de-
criminalization laws on the books, and have
seen no resulting rise in crime.
    Opponents claim that this bill would in-
crease violent crime, but is violence against
candy bars and pizza really that tragic? Vote
Yes on Question 2.

         Question 3 by Cady

Question 3 on the Massachusetts ballot
in November 2008 decides the future
of greyhound racing in our state, and
it should be a no-brainer for any half-decent
person of any political persuasion. Racing
greyhounds in Massachusetts are warehoused
in cages too small to fully stand up for twenty
hours a day and many have tested positive
for cocaine. They are fed raw meat which has
been deemed unsafe for human consumption
and which dogs can usually only stomach if it
has been cooked. They are injured at the rate
of about fourteen dogs per week, with most
of the injuries serious and many dogs getting
euthanized. While most serious injuries are
broken legs with varying degrees of severity,
dogs also regularly suffer from fatal neck and
head injuries and cardiac arrest as a result of
being forced to compete in the races.
    Efforts at reform and better treatment for
the dogs have been stymied by a Racing
Commission that exists to protect the inter-
ests of business over the interests of suffer-
ing living creatures. The only compassion-
ate response to the level of cruelty shown at
Massachusetts' two greyhound racing tracks
is to vote yes on question three and begin the
process whereby racing will be phased out
before 2010.

----------------------------------------
See also:
http://baamboston.org (not allways avilable)
Email: wordup (nospam) riseup.net
_________________________________________
A - I N F O S  N E W S  S E R V I C E
By, For, and About Anarchists
Send news reports to A-infos-en mailing list
A-infos-en@ainfos.ca
Subscribe/Unsubscribe http://ainfos.ca/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/a-infos-en
Archive: http://ainfos.ca/en