I voted No!

116 posts / 0 new
Last post
democrat
Offline
Last seen: 9 years 4 months ago
Joined: 11/15/2003 - 1:01am
I voted No!

I had four ballots to fill out in my town. One had local issues. One was the bonds. Two were on the school budget. We have line item school budget votes here - kind of nice. I was once again amazed at how complicted the school budget items were. There were 10 items on one ballot, i.e. regular elementary spending, regular secondary spending, special ed., extra curricular, etc. One item was specifically whether the town should exceed the LD 1 limits. Of course, the school board recommended a yes vote on everything.
Wouldn't it send a great message to the legislature if the bonds were voted down? They'd be shaking in their boots!

gopcollegestudent
Offline
Last seen: 1 month 2 weeks ago
Joined: 10/16/2005 - 5:38pm
I voted No!

If they fail they should all pack there bags and go home because the message would be they don't have our best interest in mind...

Edit Mainetoday.com must have had some sketchy numbers because they have taken the numbers they did have down from their website...

Bob Stone
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 1 month ago
Joined: 06/08/2003 - 12:01am
I voted No!

About 50% in and the bonds are winning 2:1. Very few people even bothered to vote. People get the government they deserve.

laMaine
Offline
Last seen: 9 years 3 weeks ago
Joined: 05/18/2004 - 12:01am
I voted No!

I voted yes, along with the majority of Maine people.

What roads are you guys driving on? Mine are full of pot holes and worse. Time to make investments in Maine's infrastructure. Besides, there are many projects slated to happen in the LA region. I want them to get done. While I agree that gas tax money shouldn't be siphoned off for other purposes, in my mind, that is another issue altogether. It should be addressed when it happens.

I also voted yes for the other bond. Many service center communities are struggling with seperating storm drains from the rest of their sewerage. This bond will go a long way towards helping making this happen.

Maine voters showed reason once again today.

MGReilly
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 11 months ago
Joined: 10/25/1999 - 12:01am
I voted No!

I voted no for the state bonds. Yes, the roads are in horrible shape. Yes there are gas taxes that we pay to fix the roads. No it is not my fault that the powers that be in Augusta have used that money for other uses. I will not vote ever to borrow more when the money should be there from those taxes.

Bob Stone
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 1 month ago
Joined: 06/08/2003 - 12:01am
I voted No!

laMaine's post is a great example of the failure of Maine's voters to understand what is happening when it comes to the financial management, or lack thereof, of the state of Maine.

1. "the majority of Maine people" voted "Yes"

This is false. The majority of the people [u]voting yesterday[/u] voted "yes". The majority of the Maine people continued blissfully about their business yesterday, totally unaware that it was even a voting day. The mis-managers in Augusta count on a numb electorate to do precisely what they did. Comfortably numb comes to mind.

2. "What roads are you guys driving on? Mine are full of pot holes and worse. Time to make investments in Maine's infrastructure."

Agreed. The roads are in terrible shape. The majority of the voters chose the MOST EXPENSIVE way possible to fix those roads. Nice job, voters.

3. "This bond will go a long way towards helping making this happen."

Again, the most expensive way possible. Think about it, laMaine. The legislature just told you there were $13.5 billion more important things that they had to spend [u]your[/u] money on over the next two years over sewage stormwater separation. You bit for their story.

Good to know that you voted yes. I am pleased that I understand their game and voted no.

cp124
Offline
Last seen: 9 years 7 months ago
Joined: 05/21/2005 - 12:01am
I voted No!

Anyone that voted yes has been duped again. The state will spray pave, use the money else ware, and we will be back voting again in 2 years.

Naran
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 7 months ago
Joined: 10/06/2004 - 12:01am
I voted No!

Bob Stone - excellent analysis. Thank you.

gopcollegestudent
Offline
Last seen: 1 month 2 weeks ago
Joined: 10/16/2005 - 5:38pm
I voted No!

Would the bond have just been for roads I may have voted for it..But bike paths, lol..

Do we really have a need for new bike paths? No we need to fix our roads for cars first... roll roll

This state gets worse and worse each year no wonder why everyone is packing their bags soon Maine will have no young people left and it will be grandma supporting grandma...And tax relief well you can forget about that...All you'll see from Augusta is tax shift ..Shift and sham... roll roll

Editor
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 6 months ago
Joined: 04/18/2009 - 3:43pm
I voted No!

Bond issues approved by wide margins
The state can now borrow $131 million and will receive matching funds for water and transportation projects.

ELBERT AULL, Staff Writer
June 13, 2007

Election officials expected [b]15 percent to 20 percent of registered voters to cast ballots[/b], compared with around 50 percent during gubernatorial elections. Poll workers in Portland and surrounding towns reported turnout numbers in the expected range.

http://pressherald.mainetoday.com/story.php?id=113552&ac=PHnws

democrat
Offline
Last seen: 9 years 4 months ago
Joined: 11/15/2003 - 1:01am
I voted No!

Well, the T-bond passed 71-28, the water bond 64-35. Deane Jones beat Morrell handily, and the papers emphasized the difference in their stands on gay rights and abortion. Note that the district voted for a republican just 8 months ago. It's always interesting after an election to see how your views stack up against the majority of people who voted.

gopcollegestudent
Offline
Last seen: 1 month 2 weeks ago
Joined: 10/16/2005 - 5:38pm
I voted No!

I happy with my vote against the bonds...

Anonymous
I voted No!

And the downward trend for Maine continues! Its great if you are part of the goverment, not so great if you don't!

democrat
Offline
Last seen: 9 years 4 months ago
Joined: 11/15/2003 - 1:01am
I voted No!

Sam, I don't think you can call having improved roads and clean water a "downward trend". A downward trend would be having an even worse highway infrastructure and inadequate sewer systems.

knucklehead
Offline
Last seen: 6 days 2 hours ago
Joined: 02/13/2004 - 1:01am
I voted No!

Dem - take a minute and read Bob's analysis of laMaine's comments, and apply "liberally" to your comments.

eagleisland
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 7 months ago
Joined: 04/30/2005 - 12:01am
I voted No!

[quote="Bob Stone"]laMaine's post is a great example of the failure of Maine's voters to understand what is happening when it comes to the financial management, or lack thereof, of the state of Maine.

1. "the majority of Maine people" voted "Yes"

This is false. The majority of the people [u]voting yesterday[/u] voted "yes". The majority of the Maine people continued blissfully about their business yesterday, totally unaware that it was even a voting day. The mis-managers in Augusta count on a numb electorate to do precisely what they did. Comfortably numb comes to mind.

2. "What roads are you guys driving on? Mine are full of pot holes and worse. Time to make investments in Maine's infrastructure."

Agreed. The roads are in terrible shape. The majority of the voters chose the MOST EXPENSIVE way possible to fix those roads. Nice job, voters.

3. "This bond will go a long way towards helping making this happen."

Again, the most expensive way possible. Think about it, laMaine. The legislature just told you there were $13.5 billion more important things that they had to spend [u]your[/u] money on over the next two years over sewage stormwater separation. You bit for their story.

Good to know that you voted yes. I am pleased that I understand their game and voted no.[/quote]

Throwing a flag.

The transportation bond is not intended to fix potholes or do basic road maintenance. It's for major capital projects, such as replacement of worn-out bridges.

Now, one could certainly wish that this very imperfect bill (see below) was unnecessary, in that government should be managing this type of expenditure out of operating, rather than capital budgets. But such is the lay of the land. Yours truly gets the heebie-jeebies every time I hear an Augusta pol mention the word 'investment.' The term is usually applied to some hazy concept that's a pet project of a political hack.

This bond issue (and IIRC this is the first one I've voted for in about 15 years) actually does rise to the issue of investment. Maine has trouble attracting business investment for three reasons: 1) high taxes, 2) high health care costs, and 3) poor transportation infrastructure. We can do nothing about #s 1 and 2 until the voters smarten up (if ever). As for #3: that we're essentially at the end of the country geographically is something we can't change, but we can make the transportation infrastructure within the state more efficient and reliable.

Now with that said, there's some mighty silly stuff included... including roughly a million allocated to essentially keeping the wish list on passenger rail moving beyond Portland alive. That's a waste of money, and there are certainly others.

I most certainly wish we had a legislature and an executive branch that had sufficient wisdom and vision that this bond would be unnecessary. We do not, but we do have a transportation infrastructure in dire need of real and expensive work. Given how much the cost of that work is rising due to labor and materials costs, I view it as better to get it done sooner rather than later.

TMaine
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 3 months ago
Joined: 05/15/2007 - 11:42am
I voted No!

DEM - We are already paying (through existing taxes and fees) enough $ to take care of the roads. The problem is that $ is not being spent responsibly. Unfortunately our elected officials feel that they can continually take $ collected thru taxes and fees for justifiable expenses (like the roads), spend it on other programs and then collect more $ from us thru bonds to cover their overspending. And what is more unfortunate is Maine voters support this practice.

Mary1
Offline
Last seen: 9 years 5 months ago
Joined: 06/30/2005 - 12:01am
I voted No!

Exactly, TMaine. I'd like to know who the slack-jawed yokles are who keep going to the polls in droves to vote this crap in. Do people not wonder where the gas tax and toll revenues are going??

Anonymous
I voted No!

Democrat, if you think borrowing money and taxing fuel is the way to pay for our road system than you need to rethink it. If this works so well, than why are our roads in such poor shape. The roads all across Maine are just plain horrible. The idea may have been worthy but the reality of it is the roads are a mess, the gas tax doesn't keep up with expences and Maine is terribly in debt. It is a stupid way of doing things. Everyone has a stake in good roads regardless if they buy fuel or not. Maine has the highest taxes in New England and most likely in the U.S. It also has the worst roads. Young people are leaving, there are no jobs but those that come with being in the government. The vote yesterday means we continue on a failed policy.

That is the truth of the matter.

TMaine
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 3 months ago
Joined: 05/15/2007 - 11:42am
I voted No!

I think the majority of the people are the uniformed/uneducated/lazy voters who get to the polls see the transportation bond and think....Yeah...... the roads do suck, and there are lots of potholes that need to be fixed so they vote yes...........or it is the voters who don't want to see their special $ pit dry up and will continue to support bonds in fear that if they don't, the current climate of over spending on non-necessities may have to be curbed. But......These are the people who go to the polls, support these tactics (overspending) and elect/re-elect politicians who refuse to make changes. We need to work harder to educate the public and change the status quo (or throw in the towel and move).

JimP
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 1 week ago
Joined: 08/13/2006 - 8:55pm
I voted No!

This is yet another shell game outrage. I can only conclude that the vote yesterday represents the ratio of wagon pullers (me) to wagon riders (those that will profit from this) About 2:1...

My question to you wagon riders is what is going to be the answer when guys like me decide that they have had enough? There are plenty of states in the Union that have people that think and act like I do. Who pays for your socialist utopia then?

I am inching closer to giving up on Maine each year. If it were not for the great fishing I would have been gone a long time ago.

This kind of crap breaks my heart. It is bad enough to have to pay once for this stuff but to have to pay twice is outrageous.

mediadog
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 1 month ago
Joined: 03/27/2005 - 1:01am
I voted No!

It's sort of ironic that at election day's end the most conservative vote outcome was in (as it is constantly referred to here) "socialist" Portland, where voters overwhelmingly defeated an attempt to raise $1 million to remake the old Public Market into a library.

They had previously approved a bond issue of $4 million to expand and modernize the present library building and were obviously in no mood to abandon it or to approve the extra $1 million it would cost to renovate and move into the smaller Public Market, which is located just across the street.

It shows that even a liberal electorate will vote to rein in spending when (1) they understand the consequences of their vote and (2) the spending does not make a lot of sense.

Mike G
Offline
Last seen: 21 hours 48 min ago
Joined: 02/17/2000 - 1:01am
I voted No!

[quote="mediadog"]It shows that even a liberal electorate will vote to rein in spending when (1) they understand the consequences of their vote and (2) the spending does not make a lot of sense.[/quote]

I disagree, the liberal electorate knew the money was coming out of their pockets. On a state wide referendum the money is coming out of everyone's pockets so therefore who cares.

laMaine
Offline
Last seen: 9 years 3 weeks ago
Joined: 05/18/2004 - 12:01am
I voted No!

my comments between the slashes ==========

[quote="Bob Stone"]laMaine's post is a great example of the failure of Maine's voters to understand what is happening when it comes to the financial management, or lack thereof, of the state of Maine.

1. "the majority of Maine people" voted "Yes"

This is false. The majority of the people [u]voting yesterday[/u] voted "yes". The majority of the Maine people continued blissfully about their business yesterday, totally unaware that it was even a voting day. The mis-managers in Augusta count on a numb electorate to do precisely what they did. Comfortably numb comes to mind.

============
Perhaps. But a review of previous bond referendum s would seem to indicate that even a larger voter turnout would cause little change in the results. Most people want transportation improvements and clean water.
============

2. "What roads are you guys driving on? Mine are full of pot holes and worse. Time to make investments in Maine's infrastructure."

Agreed. The roads are in terrible shape. The majority of the voters chose the MOST EXPENSIVE way possible to fix those roads. Nice job, voters.

=============
Not necessarily, Bob. Let’s look at the good old time value of money. The interest rate is 5.5%, pretty low. The cost of metal and pavement have been (and will likely) continue to increase at a rates far above multiples of 5.5%. Your solution of voting no would of merely delayed these projects for another year, at which time they would cost substantially more to complete. In other words, penny wise but pound foolish.

As I said before, I do agree with most on here that funds raised by the gas tax should not be pilfered as it has been. I would support legislation to make this happen. However, that is a separate issue, and those who voted no on the bond referendum as a protest vote are merely cutting off their nose to spite their face. Again, doing nothing on highway maintenance doesn’t save money, it COSTS money.
=============
3. "This bond will go a long way towards helping making this happen."

Again, the most expensive way possible. Think about it, laMaine. The legislature just told you there were $13.5 billion more important things that they had to spend [u]your[/u] money on over the next two years over sewage stormwater separation. You bit for their story.

===================
Hardly Bob. Guess we disagree. I don’t think capital projects should be funded out of an Operations and Maintenance budget. The sewage stormwater seperation is going to benefit many over time. The cost of doing so should be spread over time as well.
===================

Good to know that you voted yes. I am pleased that I understand their game and voted no.

===================
The game in this case results in an improved transportation infrastructure and cleaner rivers. I am pleased to have supported both.
===================

Good to know that you voted yes. I am pleased that I understand their game and voted no.[/quote]

gopcollegestudent
Offline
Last seen: 1 month 2 weeks ago
Joined: 10/16/2005 - 5:38pm
I voted No!

lamaine- I am pleased to have opposed both...

Shandier
Offline
Last seen: 9 years 1 month ago
Joined: 11/18/2005 - 3:42am
I voted No!

As usual... I voted no, for all the good it did, other than to voice my sorely outnumbered voice!

Bob Stone
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 1 month ago
Joined: 06/08/2003 - 12:01am
I voted No!

So many comments...

As to laMaine's comments on his most recent post:

a. I want transportation improvements and clean water. Where we differ is priority setting. We are wasting hundreds of millions of dollars on things less important than transportation improvements and clean water. An inefficient K-12 system, a bloated U Maine system, exorbitant never ending social services benefits, a bloated legislature are just a few examples.

b. I understand the time value of money. What I am saying is that these "improvements" could have been handled out of current revenues if other things could have been re-worked (see list above).

c. Water bond is miniscule and could have been funded with an appropriation.

Maine is being financially mismanaged, I call it "financial malpractice".

Maine has tipped to socialism and it isn't coming back.

laMaine
Offline
Last seen: 9 years 3 weeks ago
Joined: 05/18/2004 - 12:01am
I voted No!

Moody's gives the State of Maine a bond rating of Aa3.
Fitch an AA

The State’s debt ratio, both on a per capita and personal income basis, remains below the 50-state median.

Where is the malpractice?

Bob Stone
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 1 month ago
Joined: 06/08/2003 - 12:01am
I voted No!

All kinds of malpractice.

Wasting tens of millions for a failed computer system. (DHHS)

Oppressive tax burden on one of the poorer states in the nation.

Unfunded liabilities in pension and health care accounts amounting to billions.

A stagnant economy, that was actually negative recently.

Debt is measured on GO debt. You have to look at the entire picture.

laMaine
Offline
Last seen: 9 years 3 weeks ago
Joined: 05/18/2004 - 12:01am
I voted No!

But none of those things relate to the two bond issues you were so against.

By your apparent definition, neither highway infrastructure improvements nor clean water improvements are bad things. Yet you voted against them, because of the "other" issues in the state.

I've often heard the discussion of general obligation debt versus total debt. How does Maine compare to other states in that manner? I couldn't find anything on it.

Pages

Log in to post comments