Measure F: "Shall the appropriations limit applicable to the Menlo Park Fire Protection District, currently set at $40,000,000 pursuant to Measure G approved by the electors of the district on November 7, 2007, be continued at $40,000,000 for a period of four years from the date of the election?"
This isn't even an increase in funding. And right now, it isn't enough money for them to run the fire district! A "no" vote would mean a decrease in funding. In our voter guides there was a page with the argument in support. What was the argument in opposition? There was none!
This isn't the first time where I have seen a measure which seems like it shouldn't be up for vote. There have been measures that were superseded by the legislature, so the voter guide said votes don't even matter on it. But I consider these unique opportunities, from a "science" point of view. After all, they are a sort of control. How many people vote yes on a law that even those responsible for getting it on the ballot don't support? How many people vote no on something like this fire district appropriations?
23% voted no on the fire district measure. Who are these people? Do they want their house to burn down? Do they not understand how flammable everything is here?
I'm sure the market would take care of it. If people work hard, they can afford to buy fire protection. Why should the hard workers and job creators bail out the lazy who just want government to do everything for them? Plus, I think those few dollars that would stay in my wallet, will finally make me happy.
ReplyDeleteHonestly though, I know many people who would vote against it. They've been convinced through incessant propaganda that government is too big and the only way to fix it is to cut funding on everything until government gets smaller. Is it logical? Of course not, but most people aren't.