OwlStorm's Day
(Latest entries) (Calendar) (Friends) (User info)
Navigate: (Previous day | Next day)
Saturday, September 9, 2006
6:33AM
Daily extended (by Astrology.com)
The hunger, impatience and irritation you've been feeling lately is about to come to an end. You're entering a new phase of reward and contentedness. It's very important for you to keep your eyes open and look for opportunities. This may require you to push situations in certain directions. But as long as you respect other people's comfort zones, you should feel free to urge things along in whatever way you see fit. Just be prepared for people to maintain their own motivations.
[This would be nice to see.....]
7:43PM - Prop 202
PROPOSITION 202
I-13-2006; ARIZONA MINIMUM WAGE ACT
ANALYSIS BY LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
Based on the federal law, the current minimum wage in Arizona is $5.15 per hour.
Proposition 202 would establish a state minimum wage law and raise the minimum wage to $6.75 per hour beginning January 1, 2007. The state minimum wage would be increased each January 1 for changes in the cost of living.
The new state minimum wage law would apply to all employers except:
1. Any person who is employed by a parent or a sibling.
2. A person who is employed performing babysitting services in the employer's home on a casual basis.
3. Employees who regularly receive tips and who are otherwise exempt under federal minimum wage law.
4. The State of Arizona government. But political subdivisions of this state would have to comply with the state minimum wage law.
5. The United States government.
6. A business that has less than $500,000 in gross annual revenue and that is exempt from having to pay a minimum wage under federal law.
Proposition 202 also contains employer notice and record keeping requirements and enforcement and civil penalty provisions. The Legislature, a county, a city or a town may enact a law providing for a higher minimum wage than established by this proposition.
[The standard arguement against this is that if wages increase, business owners will have to raise prices so they can pay the increased wages. I think the only entity who truly benefits from something like this is the government agencies that collect the taxes on this increased income. "The more ya make, the more they take", or so it is said. I think there are too many people earning too little. They need tax cuts slightly more than pay rate increases....OR we need all of the "sellers" out there to drop their prices....I doubt that will happen. Basing my thoughts on non-emotional aspects of this issue, I will have to say "no" on 202.]
7:50PM - Prop 203
PROPOSITION 203
I-16-2006; FIRST THINGS FIRST FOR ARIZONA'S CHILDREN
ANALYSIS BY LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
Proposition 203 would establish an Early Childhood Development and Health Fund, consisting of revenues generated by an increase in the state tax on tobacco products, donations and state appropriations. The state tax on cigarettes would increase from $1.18 per pack to $1.98 per pack, and the tax on other types of tobacco products would be increased by a similar amount.
The Early Childhood Development and Health Fund would be administered by the new Arizona Early Childhood Development and Health Board (Board) appointed by the Governor, with the consent of the State Senate. 10% of the monies would be used for administrative costs and 90% would be used for program costs. No more than 10% of the program monies could be used to fund statewide grants or programs undertaken directly by the Board. The Board would distribute the remainder of the program monies in the following manner:
1. At least 35% would be spent on regional plans based on the population of children up to five years of age in the region.
2. At least 40% would be spent on regional plans based on the population of children up to five years of age in the region whose family income does not exceed one hundred per cent of the federal poverty guidelines.
3. Up to 25% of the monies could be used to fund regional programs without consideration of regional population.
Proposition 203 would prescribe requirements for programs and grants that increase the quality of and access to early childhood development and health services for children up to five years of age and their families.
Under Proposition 203, the Board would divide the state into an undetermined number of regions and would establish a regional partnership council for each region. The Board would appoint and set the compensation of the executive director. The executive director would hire regional directors and set the compensation of the regional directors. The councils would identify childhood development and health services needs and assets at a local level and spend monies that were budgeted annually by the Board.
[Another level of Buerocracy(sp?) in the state's health care segment. Just what we need.... I suppose this wouldn't be a bad thing. I think that they should increase the taxes on other "unhealthy sins" besides tobacco all the time, however. How about on Expensive Cars, Expensive jewelry, Golf or Country Club memberships and/or Alcohol. I think the state is limiting it's potential. Even with these limitations, I'm going to say "yes" on 203. Couldn't hurt...
10:46PM - Prop 204
PROPOSITION 204
I-07-2006; HUMANE TREATMENT OF FARM ANIMALS ACT
ANALYSIS BY LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
Beginning January 1, 2013, Proposition 204 would amend the Arizona criminal code to make it a class 1 misdemeanor to tether or confine a pig during pregnancy or a calf raised for veal on a farm for all or the majority of a day in a manner that prevents the animal from lying down and fully extending its limbs or turning around freely. The law would not apply to:
1. Pigs or calves during transportation.
2. Pigs or calves in rodeo exhibitions, state or county fair exhibitions or other similar exhibitions.
3. The lawful slaughter of pigs or calves.
4. Pigs or calves involved in lawful scientific or agricultural research.
5. Pigs or calves while undergoing an examination, test, treatment or operation for veterinary purposes.
6. A pig during the seven day period before the pig's expected date of giving birth.
Proposition 204 would tentatively establish an enforcement and administration fund consisting of fines, penalties and other monies generated by the enforcement of this proposition and donations made to the fund. This fund would only be fully implemented if a court ultimately determined that creation of this fund is required by a separate state law dealing with the funding of programs created by a vote of the people.
[I never knew this continues to be such a big problem...the PETA people were everyplace a few years ago. What was done then?.... There are signs all over Phoenix saying that Prop 204 is "Hogwash". Treating animals badly is not the way to go. However...for some reason I'm a little unsure about who's behind this one & why it's such an issue NOW. I may have to look into this one a little more, but, for now, I am leaning towards "Yes" on 204.."Hogwash & all"...]
10:51PM
Got home this morning & got about 4 hours of sleep. I groggily got enough of my fleeting sanity restored & went out to Ozzy's place (actually the park NEXT TO Ozzy's place) to be at her youngest monster's 8th birthday party. It was a nice outing. The cake was yummy. The pinata held together just long enough to give most everyone at least 2 tries at it. Ozzy had just returned to town after an extended work shift in Sedona last night. I'm sure she was glad to see everyone go away & get some sleep...assuming her household would LET HER. If they know what's good for them......
I also got to meet their newest addition...a cute widdle kitty cat named "Smoky" (when "Hubby" is around) or "Demon" when he's not. Kitty & I got along really well. I had her laying across my shoulder & she was purring. I left there a little after 6:00pm & went home to get a few things that needed washing & went over to the parent's house. [I had 4 messages on my home answering machine - 3 were political recorded messages (I'll be SO glad when this election season is over!!) and 1 from Mom wanting to know when I was going to get over there.] Mom, being the College Football Junkie that she is, had 2 games on 2 TV sets going. We had ASU & Nevada in the living room and Ohio & Texas in the kitchen. It was kinda sad in a way....maybe a 12 Step program is needed here??
Bill & I went out to Tower Records and roamed around. I found a few things of interest to add to my already-too-extensive collection of tunes. I have wash in the washer & another batch spinning in the dryer. Hopefully I won't be spending the night on the couch over here again. The room is warm, the couch is lumpy & I'd rather be home in my own bed anyways....
Such has been my day.
Owl
P.S. Hurry up & get back here Jon!!! It's getting a little too quiet & dull in here!!
Current mood: 
amused
Current music: Castles in the Air - Don McLean
11:09PM - Prop 205
PROPOSITION 205
I-11-2006; YOUR RIGHT TO VOTE BY MAIL ACT
ANALYSIS BY LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
Proposition 205 would require every state, county and local election to be conducted by mail-in ballots, while allowing an absolute minimum number of countywide polling places to be used as well. Each registered voter would automatically be mailed a ballot not fewer than 15 days before the election, along with a pre-paid, stamped envelope for the return of the voted ballot. All ballots sent to voters would be by non-forwardable mail, with address correction requested. Voters would be instructed to return their ballots no later than the close of the election on election day.
Proposition 205 would require elections officials to maintain only the absolute minimum number of polling places, each of which would be open to any voter in the county, instead of being limited to voters in that election precinct. These countywide polling places could be located in election offices or other locations, other than school buildings. Existing provisions for voting by mail and on-site early voting remain unchanged.
Proposition 205 would repeal the existing requirement to mail sample ballots to voters.
[I don't see the need tor this one...unless you happen to live miles away from the closst polling place. My location is just around the corner from me. I could walk there in about 10-15 minutes if I weren't so lazy. Ballots lost in the mail could be fun. I don't need this. Me Say "No".]
11:14PM - Prop 206
PROPOSITION 206
I-22-2006; ARIZONA NON-SMOKER PROTECTION ACT
ANALYSIS BY LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
Currently, state statutes provide that smoking tobacco is prohibited in certain areas and most state buildings. A person who smokes where smoking is prohibited is guilty of a petty offense. Several cities and towns also have restrictions on smoking in public places.
Proposition 206 would prohibit smoking in all public places and places of employment, except as provided by the proposition. These exceptions include:
1. Bars, including parts of restaurants, hotels and other establishments that sell alcoholic beverages and are physically separated with a separate ventilation system.
2. Retail tobacco stores that are physically separated and independently ventilated.
3. Veterans and fraternal clubs when they are not open to the public.
4. Hotel rooms designated as smoking rooms.
5. Outdoor patios.
Proposition 206 would prohibit a minor from entering a bar that permits smoking.
Proposition 206 also would prescribe notice and other requirements for operating establishments to implement the smoking restrictions. In addition, an employer could not retaliate against an employee for exercising any rights provided by the proposition.
A bar owner who violated the proposition would be guilty of a class 3 misdemeanor. Any other violation would be a petty offense.
Proposition 206 would preempt all city, town and county laws relating to smoking in bars and retail tobacco stores.
[As far as those non-smoking proposals that are always popping up, this is one that I can get behind cuz it makes sense. "Clean Air Breather, Beware..." "Yes on 206"]
11:20PM - Prop 207
PROPOSITION 207
I-21-2006; PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS PROTECTION ACT
ANALYSIS BY LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
Eminent domain is the power of the government to take private property for public use. Proposition 207 sets forth the rights of a property owner when the state or a local government exercises the power of eminent domain. (These rights are in addition to the current statutory and constitutional rights.)
Proposition 207 would limit the use of eminent domain to situations where eminent domain is authorized by the state and the property taken is put to a public use. The proposition defines "public use" to include:
1. The use of land by the general public or by public agencies.
2. The use of land for utilities.
3. The acquisition of property to eliminate a direct threat to the public health or safety caused by the current condition of the property.
4. The acquisition of abandoned property.
Proposition 207 excludes from the definition of public use the public benefits of economic development.
The Arizona constitution prohibits a government from taking private property, unless the government provides just compensation to the property owner. Proposition 207 provides that as just compensation when a person's primary residence is taken by the government, the person must be provided a comparable replacement dwelling that is decent, safe and sanitary. The property owner may choose to receive money compensation instead of the replacement dwelling.
Proposition 207 also provides that a property owner is entitled to just compensation if the value of a person's property is reduced by the enactment of a land use law. A land use law is defined as a law that regulates the use or division of land, such as municipal zoning laws, or regulates accepted farming or forestry practices. The proposition sets out seven types of land use laws that are exempt from the compensation requirement.
If a property owner were successful in an eminent domain law suit, Proposition 207 would require the government to pay the land owner's attorney fees and costs. If a property owner were successful in a law suit for reduction in the property's value, the court could award attorney fees and costs.
["Eminent Domain" just plain scares me for some reason. The Government vs The Property Owner. Not a nice situation...However, after that mess back east about property being stolen...er... "eminately domained" by the Gov't. for a retail/residential complex, I just don't know if there's some way for it to happen again. I hope not. The "Government" is getting a little too greedy for my tastes lately. "Yes" on 207.]
11:29PM - Prop 300
PROPOSITION 300
SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 1031
public programs; citizens
ANALYSIS BY LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
Proposition 300 would make the following changes related to eligibility, enforcement and reporting for certain state funded services:
1. Provides that only United States citizens, legal residents or persons otherwise lawfully present in this country are eligible to participate in adult education classes offered by the Arizona Department of Education.
2. Provides that in accordance with the federal Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996, a person who is not a United States citizen or legal resident and who does not otherwise possess lawful immigration status in this country may not be classified as an in-state student or county resident for community college or state university tuition purposes.
3. Provides that a state university or community college student who is not a United States citizen and who does not otherwise possess lawful immigration status in this country is not entitled to waivers, grants or any other financial assistance paid in whole or part with state funds.
4. Restricts eligibility for child care assistance from the Arizona Department of Economic Security to parents, guardians and caretakers who are United States citizens, legal residents or persons otherwise lawfully present in this country.
5. Requires that the family literacy program, the adult education class requirements, the state university and community college financial assistance requirements and the child care assistance program be enforced without regard to race, religion, gender, ethnicity or national origin.
6. Requires that the state agencies administering the provisions of Proposition 300 report statistics regarding the number of persons denied participation in the above described programs due to citizenship or immigration status.
[1. If they pay, they should be allowed to participate.
2. I agree with this. Legal Citizenship has its perks.
3. No free ride.
4. Most of the people this is directed at come from very large families. There are usually a couple of people in their family who can keep an eye on the kids if there's a need.
5. Definately! I thought this was the case already, but...maybe not???
6. Gotta have those statistics....
"Yes" on 300
11:37PM - Prop 301
PROPOSITION 301
SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 1033
methamphetamine; probation ineligibility
ANALYSIS BY LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
In 1996, the voters passed the Drug Medicalization, Prevention and Control Act of 1996. This law states that in most cases, a person who is convicted for the first or second time of personal possession or use of a controlled substance, including methamphetamine, is eligible for probation and cannot be sentenced to a term in jail or prison. Only when a person has been convicted three times of personal possession or use of a controlled substance, including methamphetamine, can that person be sentenced to jail or prison. However, that person may be eligible for probation pursuant to the general probation laws for convicted persons.
Proposition 301 would amend the current law so that a person who is convicted for the first or second time of personal possession or use of methamphetamine can be sentenced to a term in jail or prison.
This change in the law will allow judges to use a jail term as a condition of probation to force methamphetamine users to comply with court mandated drug treatment and rehabilitation.
[Works for me. I say "Yes" on this too...]