|Headlines · Briefs · Sports · Editorial/Letters · Court Report · Webcams · Weather · Archives · Submissions · Contact Us||May 23, 2013|
2006 State Ballot Questions
Question 1 : Sale of Wine by Food Stores
As provided by law the 150-word arguments are written by proponents and opponents of each question, and reflect their opinions. The Commonwealth of Massachusetts does not endorse these arguments, and does not certify the truth or accuracy of any statement made in these arguments. The names of the individuals and organizations who wrote each argument, and any written comments by others about each argument, are on file in the Office of the Secretary of the Commonwealth.
Voting "yes" on Question 1 will:
The liquor lobby and its allies use scare tactics and false claims against this measure. The truth is, they just want to protect the current package store monopoly system.
Other states allow grocery stores to sell wine without any problems. There's no legitimate reason why Massachusetts consumers shouldn't be allowed to buy wine at their local grocery stores.
Vote "yes" for consumer choice and fair competition in wine sales.
Authored by: YES on 1:
AGAINST: Today there are over 2800 licenses to sell wine, beer and liquor in Massachusetts. A "yes" vote on Question 1 would radically alter current law and would result in over 2800 more licenses to sell alcohol in Massachusetts with no funding for increased enforcement. This will increase underage youth's access to alcohol, and research demonstrates that more alcohol outlets inevitably lead to increases in drinking related problems, and drunk driving fatalities.
Voters should also know voting "yes" would allow most convenience stores to sell wine, a controlled substance. Young people frequent convenience stores where alcohol could be more readily available for purchase. Also, store clerks in convenience stores do not have the training and experience that experienced package store owners have to stop an underage drinker from purchasing alcohol.
Existing law limits supermarkets and convenience stores to hold only three licenses to sell alcohol. Vote "no" and keep this law.
Authored by: Wine Merchants and Concerned Citizens for S.A.F.E.T.Y. (Stop Alcohol's Further Extension to Youth)
A sample ballot might look like this...
Because she sees that 10% of her vote came from the Good Jobs Party, she'll have to prioritize that issue. So whether you care about jobs, taxes, schools or health care, voting "yes" will let you send politicians a message they can't ignore. Vote "yes" for more power at the polls.
Authored by: Mass Ballot Freedom Campaign, 1486 Dorchester Ave., Dorchester, MA 02122. (617) 282-2002
AGAINST: If Question 2 is approved massive voter confusion will be the result.
Under present law a candidate may only have their name printed on the ballot once. A "yes" vote would change this law. Counting votes will be more complicated.
This change is only a benefit to fringe political parties and designations at the expense of voters. It makes it more difficult for voters to make a clear choice.
Remember the mess in Florida's 2000 Presidential Elections. One of the contributing factors was a confusing ballot layout. Let's keep the clear, orderly voter friendly layout we now have. Elections should be about voters, not political movements and candidates. Keep voter's rights first.
Vote "no" on Question 2.
The Honorable Anthony W. Petrucelli
Voting yes will give child care providers the ability to unite and speak with one voice in favor of improvements including:
* Higher safety standards to protect children;
Without raising taxes or costs to Massachusetts residents, it will ensure that public resources invested in child care help make quality child care services more accessible and affordable for working families.
Vote yes for our children's future.
Authored by: Andrew Tripp
AGAINST: A "no" vote will allow home-based child care providers to retain their independent status with respect to negotiations for state-subsidized provided care.
This proposed law would allow home-based child care providers to form a union to negotiate terms and conditions of child care provider services instead of continuing to negotiate such terms on a case by case basis based on the individual needs for the child.
Authored by: The law requires the Secretary to seek arguments for and against each ballot question from the principal proponents or opponents of each measure. If no argument is timely received, the law requires the Secretary to prepare an argument.
Authored by: Associate Commissioner for Coordination and Outreach
Question 4 :
Charter Study Commission