By Craig McDermott, cross-posted from Random Musings
This year, this is going to be a simple post – there are only three state-level ballot questions*, and none were proposed through the petition process, In contrast, in 2006, there were 18, with only six of the questions referred to the ballot by the legislature.
* = In many jurisdictions, there will be local-level questions (school district overrides, city charter updates, etc.). However, there are only three questions that will be every ballot in the state.
Voting decisions on two of the questions will be very easy:
– Proposition 122, referred by the lege in 2013 as SCR1016. If passed, it would allow the AZ legislature to ignore any federal law, regulation, or rule that it doesn’t like, and to bar any official in the state from supporting/enforcing said law, regulation, or rule.
This probably isn’t legal anyway, but passing it would send a message to late-night comedians everywhere that they can continue to count on Arizona for a steady stream of punchline material.
In other words, HELL NO.
– Proposition 304, a proposal from the Commission on Salaries for Elective State Officers to raise the annual legislative salary from $24K to $35K.
As with most things in life, you get what you pay for. And we pay our legislators crap.
$35K isn’t great, but it’s better than $24K, and it might attract a better quality of candidates for the lege. Which is something that Arizona needs.
This one is a Yes.
– The tough one is Proposition 303, referred by the lege in 2014 as HCR2005. If passed, it would create a section in AZ law called “The Patients’ Right To Try Act”. It *sounds* “warm and fuzzy” good – it would allow eligible patients to make use of “investigational” drugs and medical therapies if such is made available by a manufacturer of such. Basically, desperate patients could take a chance on unproven treatments, if they so desire and a possible treatment is made available.
Sounds good, until you realize that the measure is being proposed by the Arizona legislature in a way that cannot be corrected or repealed by a future legislature (because of the Voter Protection Act)…and the next time that the members of the Arizona legislature support an idea that is beneficial for the average Arizonan will be the very first time for the majority of them.
Cynicism now thoroughly piqued, further examination of the measure is warranted.
Upon which one finds a few interesting facts about the proposal –
1. In this context, “investigational” means “not approved by the FDA”. In essence, this would allow Big Pharma (and its relations) to use desperate patients as guinea pigs for untested medical therapies.
2. The proposal does NOT require a manufacturer to make available untested medical therapies, only provides them legal cover if they do so.
3. It would bar state regulators from penalizing physicians or health care facilities that administer those therapies.
4. The legislative intent section clearly states that the act applies to all patients, not just those with terminal illnesses (the language of the act states that eligible patients must have a terminal illness).
5. The proposal would allow a manufacturer to pass on to the patient the cost of manufacturing an untested medical therapy. If a specific therapy hasn’t reach the “economies of scale” part of its existence, that number is going to be huge.
6. This proposal (or something similar) is popping up in legislatures all over the country – Michigan, New Jersey,and Colorado, among others. That kind of coordination indicates that this idea has some deep-pocketed supporters.
7. The political committee formed to support the measure reeks of “dark money” – the largest single contributor is the corporate lobbying firm “free market think tank”, the Goldwater Institute (providing $35K out of $35,504.30 in contributions reported in its most recent campaign finance report) and the largest single expenditure reported in the most recent campaign finance report is to Sherpa Public Affairs of Phoenix ($14.5K out of nearly $28K)…under the heading “Reimbursements”.
Since GI’s sources of money are secret and the word “reimbursements” is so all-encompassing yet vague, this committee has effectively anonymized both its contributions and expenditures. They’ve made sure that no one can follow the money trail here.
To sum up: this proposal was shepherded to the ballot in a way that circumvents the already minimal oversight provided by the normal legislative process, looks to be designed more to enhance industry profits than to enhance patient outcomes, and has deep-pocketed supporters who wish to remain in the shadows.
In the final analysis: this is a No vote.
As seems to be normal for AZ elections, the questions referred by the legislature merit a no vote, while the question referred to the ballot by something other than the lege merits a yes vote.
Note: more on a similar drug proposal that was implemented in Colorado from a contributor to Forbes.com here.
If the one party Kim Jung-il, legislature voted to send it to the ballot you can guarantee it is designed to: 1. Enrich some hidden corporate interest, 2. Screw the average voter, 3. Restrict the ability of the average voter to override the Legislature, 4. Keep brown and black people from voting, 5. Waste incredible amounts of tax money defending the indefensible. (See anything Judy Burgess, or Sylvia Allen think is just a great idea)
It is astounding that you can consider yourself informed and yet know nothing about who Kim Jung Il is and what he has done. But I find such ignorance is typical of Democrats who are equally ignorant of who the Taliban and the Nazis are and what they did, as well.
Right. The right wing Republicans are as pure as the driven snow , and only want what’s best for the State, and have no interest in helping their corporate masters ( see Deb Lesko). And please don’t blame everything on Janet N., Obama, and probably Raul Castro, too. Everything Arizona is and isn’t is on the Republicans who have run this State for 40 years.
You failed to address my complaint. Which Republican(s) had an uncle executed because they didn’t trust him anymore? Which Republican(s) have a slave labor camp where Democrats and their families are sent for a lifetime of slave labor? Which Republican(s) use the National Guard to seize harvests so that the population starves while the National Guard and the ruling class have plenty to eat? Which Republican(s) have ordered the execution of hundreds of Arizonans out of concern they weren’t loyal enough? Which Republican(s) are threatening the Southwest with nuclear weapons if they don’t gey their way? The answer, of course, is NONE. Yet in your overwrought hysteria you feel the need to call them Kim Jung Il because it make you feel better to call them names. How childish!
Really stuck on this metaphor? Trivial issues? I rest my case on the constant comparisons of Obama to the same tribe of villains to which you object.
I have not seen it, but if you say they have, I am sure it has occurred and they were WRONG to do so. Evil should be recognized for what it is, not trivialized for convenience.
To Frances Perkins: You stated I am stuck on this “metaphor” and as I thought about that I decided I needed to make it a little clearer although I suspect you will find a way to make fun of me for it.
To you it is a metaphor, an abstract; to me it is reality. I spent two years of my life with my men chasing and hunting Taliban all over Afghanistan. I saw what they did first. I saw what they did to young girls just trying to get an education. I saw what they did to women outside their homes without a bhurka or without a male member of their house accompanying them. I saw what they did to families who had radios or televisions in their homes. And I saw what they did out of sheer meanness to anyone they came across that wasn’t Islamic enough for their tastes. It isn’t abstract at all and people who call some political group the Taliban this or the Taliban that are displaying their ignorance that this wonderful country allows them. It made me aware of how easily we throw around words without a clue as to what we are saying.
Yes, I am stuck on the “metaphors” and will be wherever I find them.
“Ignorance is typical of Democrats.” A few days ago you wrote that your parents taught you “never to lump a group of people together and assign stereotypes to that group. Such stereotyping was not only unfair to the group of people you lumped together, it was probably wrong. Further, it made you look small minded and ignorant. ”
Yes, you caught me. I have one pet pieve: People who compare others to the Taliban, the Nazis, Kim Jung Il, and other truly evil groups or individuals. It demeans what true evil is for for rather trivial issues. Anyway, I let my anger get ahead of my brain. Thank you for reminding me.
Thank you for providing more information on Prop 303. I was having trouble determining what it actually was going to accomplich. After reading your explanation, I will give it a “NO” vote.
As to the other two propositions, your explanations were hekpful, but I will likely be a contrarian on those.