Florida abortion rights bill at 57%, needs 60% to pass. Predicted to fail based on that.
this post was submitted on 03 Nov 2024
102 points (99.0% liked)
politics
19144 readers
4883 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Missouri voted to increase the minimum wage and add sick pay.
I am STUNNED... STUNNED that Oregon said No to ranked choice balloting and it wasn't even close. 60/40.
NY Equal Rights Amendment (inc. pregnancy) passing.
Maryland votes for abortion rights 3-1.
Ohio has Issue 1 regarding gerrymandering...
...which the Ohio Supreme Court already told them to unfuck and the GOP was like, "nah, fam"...
...and which LaRose obfuscated (just like he did with the abortion amendment) via confusing language and outright lies (under the guide of free speech, apparently) to trick people into voting No
So, a No vote keeps the same crap we have now where a majority of the state has no voice. A Yes vote gives everyone a more equal say
A friend of mine from high school ran unopposed for state rep. Feels pretty good having someone I know well, and whose kids go to the same school as mine, so terrify the Republicans that they didn't bother running anyone.
Here in ky, to nobody's surprise, we have some Republican bullshittery.
Prop 1 adds wording to the state constitution that makes it illegal for all non-US citizens to vote... Which is already the State law. Vote NO.
Prop 2 is a doozie - enables the state to funnel public funds to charter schools under the guise of "educational freedom" or some bullshit like that. HARD NO on that one!
WKYT is calling Amendment 2 as a No, with a 30 point margin.
My wife and I tried, looks like we lost the presidential for KY, not super surprised, but disappointed.
Glad we won prop 2 though. We don't have kids, and they're not in our future, but they already keep taking too many funds from public schools.
Anyone have the result for prop 1?
It appears that it passed
https://www.kentucky.com/news/politics-government/article294703464.html
Ahh bummer, thanks for the update. Hopefully it doesn't make it too difficult to vote
Yeah, 1 is already illegal and 2 sounds like they want to take public dollars away from public schools and feed it to religious ones. 🙄
Already happened in TX. It’s gone about as well as you’d expect.
Kentucky's state constitution has uniquely strong protections for public school funding, and amendment 2 nullifies all of them in one go.
Here's the wording:
To give parents choices in educational opportunities for their children, are you in favor of enabling the General Assembly to provide financial support for the education costs of students in kindergarten through 12th grade who are outside the system of common (public) schools by amending the Constitution of Kentucky as stated below?
IT IS PROPOSED THAT A NEW SECTION BE ADDED TO THE CONSTITUTION OF KENTUCKY TO READ AS FOLLOWS:
The General Assembly may provide financial support for the education of students outside the system of common schools. The General Assembly may exercise this authority by law, Sections 59, 60, 171, 183, 184, 186, and 189 of this Constitution notwithstanding.
I genuinely think most KY voters don't know what notwithstanding means, if they even bother to read that far.
100% it's gonna go to religious schools. I'm not even sure that any non-religious private schools even exist in this backwards-ass state
They do. There are a few elite non-religious private schools in Louisville.
But they are far outnumbered by parochial schools.
We have the same thing as your prop 1 on the ballot in South Carolina. It's already illegal at the state and federal level. It's just on there to help get low information conservatives to the polls, since they are convinced the Democrats want to change the law to let "the illegals" vote.
Hello fellow Kentuckian!
I saw a story this week that pointed out in Arkansas, 80% of students who got vouchers didn't enroll in private schools. In other words, if your parents couldn't afford private schools before, they most likely still couldn't even with vouchers.
That's what's on the ballot for KY. NO ON 2!
You want to vote Yes on 1 because it doesn't change anything and then they can't whine about Demoncrats trying to let illegals keep voting.
Until they use it as a reason to require you to bring proof(s) of citizenship when registering to vote.
Please get Ted Cruz out of office Texans. He's at risk of getting murdered on the senate floor according to Lindsay Graham and others. Save Ted Cruz
He's at risk of getting murdered on the senate floor according to Lindsay Graham and others.
...it's not like they haven't had plenty of chances.
...
Idk maybe this is a win/win situation.
I live in Oregon and there are a couple to watch here:
117 enables ranked choice balloting:
118 taxes companies who make more than $25 million in the state and kicks it back to residents, $1,600 per resident.
I'm strongly in favor of 117. I like 118 in theory, but after reading it, I voted against it, because I think the end result would be to damage small Oregon businesses, while large conglomerates would be fine. I don't want Walmarts to be the only businesses that can afford to operate here.
Well, I don't think anyone making more than $25 million a year is a "small business", that's $68,493.15 a day...
It's still an awful idea, but the idea that it would hurt small business is a smoke screen. :)
the idea that it would hurt small business is a smoke screen.
Yeah, the ultra wealthy are always claiming that if they have to pay their fair share then all of society will suffer. 🙄 118 honestly sounds fine to me, but the array of groups I trust that were against it gave me pause. I voted no, hoping to avoid another case of doing the right thing the wrong way.
I buy all my supplies from companies making more than 25m, who buy from other companies making more than 25m, and so on. My COGS will go up a minimum of 3%, more than likely closer to 10% when you compound the entire supply chain. I don't care that I won't pay into the general tax fund, but I sure as hell care that I'll have to convince my retail customers to pay 10% more on my products after already struggling with inflation cost increases the last few years.
What do you think of DC's initiative 83?
I voted for a similar measure in Colorado!
Ranked choice? I'm all for it!
In Texas: Ted Cruz vs. Colin Allred for the senate seat.
Yup, we're tracking all the Senate races in a separate thread.
Oops, sorry!
Is the referendum on Puerto Rico becoming a state also taken into account?
Found it:
https://ballotpedia.org/Puerto_Rico_Statehood,_Independence,or_Free_Association_Referendum(2024)
"The ballot measure asks voters to choose one of the following three options for Puerto Rico's political status:[1]
(A) Statehood;
(B) Independence; or
(C) Sovereignty in free association with the United States.
The different options are as follows; however, the results of the referendum are nonbinding because any changes to Puerto Rico’s statehood require action by the United States Congress."
Yup! That would belong here!
I’m really curious how Californians feel about Prop 34. It’s kind of bizarre to see a prop that is actively targeting a single organization, even if that org is super sketchy. I felt icky voting on it, for or against.
Not in CA so not following that... but looking it up:
"requiring health care providers... to spend 98% of revenues from the federal discount prescription drug program on direct patient care"
I removed the qualifications to simply boil it down to the ask here... mathematically is this even possible?
I don't think any business model survives on 2% overhead.
https://www.wphealthcarenews.com/understanding-the-complexities-of-overhead-in-a-physician-practice/
"Most physicians believe that their practice’s overhead is somewhere between 40% and 50% of their charges. The truth is that in today’s medical practices, it is actually between 60% and 70%.
The reasons? In the past 15 years, health insurance costs for employees rose over 200%. Reimbursements from third-party payers decreased substantially. Technology has become much more expensive. Documentation for malpractice purposes has caused physicians to do more paperwork. The billing process to third-party payers has become much more complicated. Physicians have been forced to hire more staff. With all of these changes, some physicians have taken a 50% cut in pay – or more."
The thing is, there’s only one org that meets the threshold for it and that’s the AIDS Healthcare Foundation, which throws a lot of money at props in California and has some questionable stuff about being a landlord. From calmatters.org:
Proposition 34 would require some California providers to spend at least 98% of that net drug sale revenue on “direct patient care.” Providers that don’t risk having their state license and tax-exempt status revoked and losing out on government contracts.
But the proposition doesn’t apply to all providers — only those that spend at least $100 million on expenses other than direct care, that also own and operate apartment buildings and that have racked up at least 500 severe health and safety violations in the last decade.
As far as anyone can tell, that only applies to one organization: The AIDS Healthcare Foundation. \
The measure would also put into law a Newsom administration policy that requires all state agencies to negotiate for lower drug prices as a single entity.
In THAT case, it seems specifically designed to put them out of business... Which I guess would be the basis of the vote...
You'd think the regulatory agencies would have a better way of dealing with it.
It’s nuts, right? That’s why it felt icky. My husband and I talk through all the stuff on our ballots together and we really went back and forth on this one. Ultimately we did vote for it, probably because we kept reading that the AHF had funded at least half of all the other props we were voting on, most of which had nothing to do with healthcare. But I’m still not sure that was the right vote. I’ll be curious to see how it shakes out.
I’m also watching prop 36 because I see all these signs for it in my neighborhood, but I’m against it.
I voted for it, going back now I think I would vote against.