What else is on your ballot that you'll be voting on? Here in Florida we have 12 amendments to the state constitution on the ballot (well, technically 11, as amendment 7 was changed in wording and became amendment 8). Found a pretty good site which talks about the buzz words, gives the text, discusses the history of the topic, and presents the arguments given by both the pro and anti sides. http://collinscenter.org/2012flamendments/home-2/
Main ones that stick in my mind:
-Amendment 1 is pretty much "Say no to the healthcare mandate" amendment. Pretty worthless, as the Supreme Court already ruled the mandate is constitutional at a federal level, so this would likely just lead to a long slog through the Supreme Court again, where the eventual verdict is "We already ruled on this, tough luck." Voting no on that one.
-Amendment 5 gives the legislature more influence on the judicial process, especially the selection of state supreme court justices. I like my powers separated. That said, it sucks that the governor has the power of appointing justices right now, as I don't like the governor of FL's policies. Still, I'd stick with the current situation, so I'm against it.
-Amendment 6 is one of those controversial ones. There were a bunch of signs on the way into work today saying things like "Keep the government out of my vagina!" and "Say NO to amendment 6: support a woman's right to privacy!" Supporters of the amendment are arguing it's to keep tax-payer funding away from providing abortions... but that's already the case. What the supporters are NOT saying is that this strips out a provision that allows a woman's right to an abortion to fall under their right to privacy. This means that a woman would no longer be able to argue she has a constitutional right to privacy if, say, an ultrasound bill came around; or that a woman with a legal guardian doesn't have the right to privacy in not informing the guardian of her abortion. Gets a big **** NO from me.
-Amendment 8 is another controversial one. It removes the language that prevents religious institutions from receiving tax payer money. The main topic is about providing tax-payer funds to religious schools; voucher programs could now be used to send students to religious institutions instead of public or secular private ones, which in turn funnels funding away from public schools. The issue is that the constitution does give aid to organizations that promote secular activities, but not to those who promote religious ones. For example, Catholic Charities current receives aid besides the "no aid" provision, because they don't promote Catholicism through their work; they just happen to be Catholic. If removed, funding could go to organizations and schools who proselytize rather than just support. Again, another **** NO from me.
The others are more mixed; generally support housing tax breaks for disabled veterans, their spouses, and the elderly. What do you guys have coming up in your states?