Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Extras | All Access e-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

ENDORSEMENT: Propositions get backing

November 1, 2013

Proposition One regarding the casino has garnered most of the spotlight, but there are others awaiting voters on Tuesday....

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(8)

joew

Nov-05-13 6:22 AM

So because the VA is way way behind the curve in determining disability for these men and women you will vote no? Is that what you're saying?

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Krasnitz

Nov-04-13 11:52 PM

Gotta go with Carla on this one.

0 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

American

Nov-02-13 10:29 AM

Vets already get "extra credit" when they apply for a civil service job. The only one like joew that I will vote against is increasing the retirement age. No sane person would want this.

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

joew

Nov-02-13 7:12 AM

Carlaw-first off you unlike some others are very intelligent and well informed,that is apparent the way you comment. I will vote yes on all with the possible exception of Prop 6. The issue with the additional credit for Vets with disabilities is not pity,it specifically states post appointment. What this prop allows for is the inordinate amount of time it takes for the VA to issue rulings on disability.(over a year in some cases)Please look over that prop again before making your decision. Thanks. P.S. It in no way effects me by the way.

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Carlaw

Nov-02-13 6:28 AM

Ney! Vote no. Even on the credit for Vets. Every Vet I talked to from the legion thinks Civil Service Credit should be based upon merit, not pity! That's a Vet for you, God bless them all. I will vote no on all of them especially Judicial,Rumblefish is right!

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

rumblefish

Nov-01-13 9:28 AM

we can not support Proposition 6, because extending retirement age blocks the introduction of possible progressive thinking in law interpreting, besides if you were going to extend up to 80, you might as well make it for life and have no limit....

4 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Steiner

Nov-01-13 8:39 AM

hey 1 laona, our govt leaders stopped reading proposed legislation at least by the 1940s. You know like the ACA when it was passed. noone read it. they could not it was too long.They got the gist of it in a paragraph. the lawyers did the rest. Lawyers have been runnning the show since magna carta. It explains the mess we have. No tech guys, just lawyers.

1 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

1Laona

Nov-01-13 7:36 AM

ote NO on all si amendments.These are "Constitutional Amendments" and should be discussed and we should get to see the hundreds of pages of information showing what these amendments will do,NOT the paragraph they show you in the voting booth.Wake up,you're being "chumped again".

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 8 of 8 comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 

 

I am looking for:
in:
News, Blogs & Events Web