Referendum endorsements for the year 2022, explained. To be accompanied by non-November endorsements for special elections. Keep in mind that, as of writing, I do not know all of the eventual orderings that these referenda will actually have on a ballot; as such, you should try to re-read this at a later date or just look at things yourself prior to the election. Some endorsements subject to change. April 22, California 22nd US House district special primary: Matt Stoll May 7, Texas: 1. Property tax limit reduction for elderly and disabled: Yes, taxing people who cannot work excessively sounds unreasonable, so allowing some tax relief for persons who depend on Social Security is permissible. 2. Increased homestead exemption for school district property taxes: Yes, first and foremost because it reduces the available budget of the teacher unions. Parents should homeschool, and education tax relief is one major aspect of homeschool freedom. Also, the exemption limit is itself reasonable, as very few homes are worth this much. May 24, Alabama: $85M bonds for public historical sites and parks: No, in part because the definition of "improvement" is not strict enough. If this loanmoney were used to pay for the "improvement" of state parks by removing monuments, for instance, it would not actually improve them but destroy them. Furthermore, public debt is itself bad. June 7, South Dakota: Admt C for 60% requirement for spending referenda: Yes, big spending is bad and this would discourage it. A more unanimous population should support large spending packages. Considering this is also the day for primaries, make sure you vote! August 2, Kansas: No Right to Abortion: YES, vote for life! Nov. 8, nationwide: Alabama: 1. Recompiled Constitution: NO. Advertised as a simple "recompilation," this new Constitution of Alabama would do absolutely nothing except remove "racist language." Another pathetic referendum pushed by BLM, it is often being marketed as granting powers to local governments to do things that currently require state approval. This is untrue; Alabama would continue to maintain near-zero local government and extremely centralized administration. It would not, however, have a "racist Constitution," including anti-black and pro-White language which is usually unenforced at present. Reject it solely on the basis that it would be anti-White bullshit; if lawyers have a hard time reading it, well tough shit. Cut the anti-White bullshit and "recompile" the Constitution complete with all the racist and homophobic language I want. 2. Internet Infrastructure Funding: Yes, but only because this is merely a constitutional amendment intended to allow funding for internet infrastructure. 3. Orphan jurisdiction: yes, seems to be a very minor change. 4. Denial of bail: YES, too many criminals can get out by paying bail otherwise. 5. Election safeguards: YES, these are good. 6. Capital improvements: Yes, some cities would be permitted the special ability to make changes for capital improvements, rather than only repayment of debt. Alaskan constitutional convention: No, tentatively. A previous referendum on an unconstitutional clause seeking to suppress religious schooling failed in the state, so this could be used to eliminate that, but otherwise it could cause other damage (for instance, by repealing the DOMA embedded in the state constitution) if repealed. As such, the endorsement should switch to YES only if the SCOTUS rules this amendment constitutional in a case currently on the docket this year. Arizona: 1. Tax simplification: Yes, this sounds pretty good. 2. In-State Tuition for Illegals: NO, obviously. 3. Invalid Provisions Amendment: NO, this would just give Ds the power to repeal "unconstitutional" laws that prohibit gay marriage etc. ahead of potential SCOTUS overturnings. Argue that the language of the amendment itself is vague and invalid, giving too much power to the legislature for something pointless. 4. Single-subject requirement: NO, the language is not very clear and is ultimately subject to judicial fiat, making referenda more vulnerable to judges. Arkansas: 1. 60% Initiative Requirement: Yes, this will limit initiatives from becoming unstable or competitive. 2. Legislative Convocation of Special Sessions: Yes, this will prevent D Governors from using their powers to protect rigged election results. 3. Govt Burden of Free Exercise: YES, this will provide much greater religious freedom at the state level. California: 1. Sports betting on Indian lands: NO, just because Indian lands. 2. Noneconomic Malpractice Damages: No, raises frivolous lawsuit concerns and provides an excuse for more costs. 3. Plastic Waste Reduction: NO, single-use plastic is great. 4. Flavored Tobacco Ban: NO, if only because I want dudeweeds to go back. Colorado: Tax reduction: Yes, although a 0.15% tax reduction is pretty small. Connecticut: Early voting: NO, usual D rigging Florida: 1. Yes, it is a bad idea to tax improvements made to protect against flooding and provides a public benefit when tax relief improves flood resistance. 2. Yes, but your vote will not matter for 20 years because the CRC only meets once per generation. Its amendments were not outrageous last time except for one that banned offshore drilling again. (Yes, this means you literally can vote no and it will not matter until 2038.) Additional Homestead Exemption: yes, just because it reduces taxes. Georgia: 1. Suspend Compensation for Felon Indictees: YES, politicians indicted for felonies (including corruption, murder, theft, fraud, etc.) would be ineligible for paychecks. 2. Merger Family Farm and Dairy tax exemption: YES, this would encourage more milk and egg consumption and thus help make America healthy again. Idaho: Legislative authority to call a special session: Yes, because it protects against Governor Rigger should Idaho ever elect a D. Illinois: Right to collective bargaining: NO, this is obviously just a way for corrupt Ds to expand their union power. Iowa: Right to firearms: YES, because a state 2A is obviously a great idea. Kentucky: Changes to session end dates and special sessions: Yes, this is positive for Governor Rigger overrides. No Right To Abortion: YES, vote for life and explicitly affirm that the Commonwealth can prohibit abortion. Louisiana: SB214: NO, this raises taxes. HB59: YES, this is actually about preventing gov/utility company negligence, particularly against storm damage, from being billed to customers. HB143: NO, raise taxes on New Orleans. HB154: YES, allow the state to invest even more in DWAC and crypto, and then tell Schroder to actually do it. HB315: no, why the hell would you empower govt employees to support Ds more Maryland: Renaming of Courts: No, stupid idea. Civil Jury Trials: Yes, raise the small claims limit. Does not really matter but it will be necessary for evictions soon. Residency requirements: Yes, 6-month requirements make sense. Massachusetts: Income tax for teachers and transport: No, this is an income tax for funding teacher unions. Missouri: 1. Yes lmao, why would not the state be permitted to invest in local bonds? Restricting it to federal bonds exclusively is a terrible idea. Constitutional convention: Similar to Alaska, this is a double-edged sword where provisions favorable to both them and us could be repealed. Wait on a ruling from SCOTUS this year to decide. Tentative no. Montana: C-48: No, this just gives unnecessary additional authority to the leftist MTSC appointed by Bullock. LR-131: YES, vote for children to receive medical care. Make it a crime for healthcare professionals to refuse to provide emergency care when a baby is born. LR-132: Yes, MTSC sucks. Nevada: (This state has a very bad habit of making me hope nothing passes.) Gambling tax increase: No, increasing gambling taxes for no reason is idiotic. At least make it a non-hidden tax. Sales tax increase: No, and all the funding goes to teacher unions. Tranny ERA: NOPE. Explicitly declares LGBT nondiscrimination a right and enshrines it in the Constitution of Nevada. Minimum Wage: NO, do not raise the minimum wage even more. New Hampshire: Constitutional convention: Actually quite possibly the weakest no, and mainly because I have not bothered to research the NH Constitution. It contains a Blaine Amendment but seems to lack anything we would actually seek to preserve. New Mexico: Land Grant Perm Fund: NO, just because the funds go to teacher unions. Household Services Infrastructure: NO. This is yet another welfare bill, like the one the tyrant is attempting to force federally, New Judge Elections: Yes, this provides for the early election of judges and there is no reason to oppose it because Ds control appointments at present. Bonds: NO -- quite concerningly, D lobbies AARP & AFT benefit massively from these. New York: $3B climate change bonds: NO Oregon: Right to Healthcare: No, socialized medicine should not be in a state constitution. This is beyond vague, and mainly serves as an excuse to claim a mandate in establishing commie medicine. Remove Slavery as Punishment: NO, in fact this is the most important thing on the ballot. Slavery is a necessary punishment for felony inmates to be reformed. Read Paul. South Dakota: Amendment D: Adding Obamacare to the State Constitution. Worse: This amendment entrenches Obamacare to make it impossible to repeal the Medicaid provisions, which would be effectively replicated by the State Constitution. If Obamacare were repealed and replaced, Constitutional Amendment D would mandate a state implementation of Obamacare to be carried out forever. No work requirements, no adjustments for lottery income, and (if Obamacare is repealed) no federal funding for the program. This amendment is an abominable Democrat hackjob and an attempt to scam the good people of South Dakota. Even a small amendment can cause South Dakota taxpayers to pay up big because every single person who could ever be provided healthcare under all current and future federal law would be eligible for Medicaid. I do not think I have ever seen an amendment this badly written in South Dakota, or even the entire Country perhaps, since the Marsy Law. Vote against it. Tennessee: Right-to-Work Amendment: YES! Vote to free people of forced union membership and improve the TN business environment, making it more like other Southern states. Remove Slavery as Punishment: NO! The South must preserve this institution. Acting Governor: Yes, it is probably a good idea to have a plan if the acting gov gets assassinated or something. Utah: Emergency Session Appropriation Limits: No, increasing limits is not a good idea. Vermont: Proposal 2: NO! This is an amendment to "prohibit slavery and involuntary servitude." This is an obvious means to pander to BLM, which is a degenerate Communist Furthermore, debt slavery, the only form of slavery currently legal in Vermont, is already under a federal prohibition. There is absolutely no need to do this; instead, force the Ds to fight harder for a redundant ban on slavery in a deep blue state like Vermont. They will waste resources they could use on more fruitful initiatives. Proposal 5: NO! This amendment is about "reproductive rights." In other words, just in case Vermont libs do not have enough children to keep the D party alive, they will make sure the Vermont Supreme Court holds the power to force abortion down the throats of the people even if Roe v. Wade is overturned by SCOTUS. It could have adverse effects in other areas, such as IVF, rape laws, and adoption. It is possible that the State could be given an awkward new legal code relative to the delivery of newborns, as well. In other words, the incredibly broad wording of the Democrats who wrote it while intending to euphemistically and rhetorically increase support for abortion is another argument against it. Slut pills and other degenerate items are also affected. West Virginia: No Court Authority over Impeachment: YES. This is a GOP-backed measure intended to crack down on corrupt (D)ictatorial judges. Incorporation of Religious Groups: YES! Why would you not permit religious incorporations? Every other state does, so it brings WV to national standards including that of the federal tax code. Tax exemption for property used for Business: Yes, this will encourage economic growth. Legislative Approval of BoE Rules: YES, now get rid of the educational dictatorship & CRT. Wyoming: A. Yes, allow local governments to invest. B/JRA. Yes, raise the judicial retirement age.