67 is easy. Why am I voting on this again? Isn't "gone down in flames 3 times" enough? It's not like this is a new test plane that will get us to Alpha Centuri in 6 days.
68: I object to gambling period. It's a tax on the innumerate, it is more damaging to those with limited means, and I don't believe that the people should profit off of addiction. (I am also the child of a gambling addict.) That said, I would object less if it was open to all comers, rather than being a gimme to a single corporation. Also, the numbers have been misleading. Yes, our schools are underfunded, but this isn't the way to do it. Having gone to excellent public schools and come home to repossessed cars, no electricity, and the like... I am not willing to make every child in the state a citizen of Omelas. Just because all would benefit doesn't mean that it is acceptable to increase the suffering of a few.
104: really? This should have already been the case.
ETA: hang on. Having now read the text of the proposal (haven't gotten the blue book yet)... All school board meetings should be open, yes. School boards should absolutely not be making policy without public input. But since negotiations between the district and the suppliers of, say, toilet paper or lunches are not open, there is no reason that meetings between the district and the representation of the union should be open to the public. Policy is one thing. Process is another.
105: I honestly don't know. The entirety of modern ag is the product of genetic manipulation. Doing so with biochemistry is not inherently more hazardous. I'm honestly quite fond of modern broccoli, tomatoes and a world where 10% of every town doesn't starve come spring every year. That said, having a label that warns me of the presence of a GMO is merely more information, and it's not like people pay all that much attention to the current labeling as it is. That one may be a coin toss, or a leave blank.
= new reply since forum marked as read