| Posted By |
Message |
| Pages: 1 [2] |
NervousNell
Just another chapter in life..
Member since 11/09 54921 total posts
Name:
..being a mommy and being a wife!
|
Re: Voting Yes tomorrow question
Posted by blu6385
Posted by NervousNell
Posted by beachbabe
Posted by NervousNell
Posted by CSK
Posted by blu6385
So whats the bottom line about pensions? Specifically for people who are retired, NYC police, correctional officer or fire fighter? I was told to vote no so their pensions won't be on the line.
If I am going to be honest I doubt this is going to pass. Any advertimsent I have seen about this is how everyone should vote no. I havent seen one advertisement about voting yes.
I don't even really know what the whole thing is really about anyway
The reason why you see all the press and adverts for voting no is that there is a significant established base of unions with money who benefit significantly from the system currently in place. They fear-monger their membership and use their collective funds to promote the system that currently serves them.
And from what I am reading, the pensions of current and past union members can NOT be reduced or changed by a Constitutional Convention as it is also protected by federal law. (see excerpt that I posted above)
So I think it's a huge misconception that just grew bigger and bigger and morphed into this idea that people could lose their pensions. Like a rampant game of telephone gone bad.
That's crazy! All these people are voting no based on a giant misconception
From what i can tell, yes.
But you know how it is in this day and age... one person posts something on FB and then one person shares it without doing any research into it's validity, and so on and so on and next thing you know it's God's truth and there is mass panic in the streets.
from what I am being told by people who say to vote no is that the pension are protected currently but they can vote to change the Constitution to no longer protect it anymore and that's why they are voting no and telling people to vote no!
The pensions are protected by FEDERAL law as well.
By the US Constitution, not just the State Constitution.
So even if they tried to change it at the state level, the US constitution, on the Federal level would still protect them.
|
Posted 11/7/17 2:30 PM  |
| |
|
Long Island Weddings
Long Island's Largest Bridal Resource |
Mill188
LIF Adult
Member since 3/09 3073 total posts
Name:
|
Re: Voting Yes tomorrow question
At first I was all for the proposition, and the last few days my opinion has changed. Let me be fully transparent and state that my husband is in a union that opposes passage of the proposition.
My first thought was "YES!" let's open the constitution and get rid of the waste in NYS. They can't touch DH's pension or his retirement, so we are safe. It's the next guy who won't be. Trust me, DH and I had many a debate about it. He was opposed 100% and I wasn't sure but was leaning towards voting for it.
After looking at some more, I realized that NYS is in financial crisis - why would we spend even more taxpayer $$ to rewrite the state constitution? And do we really trust our politicians/delegates to do the right thing for us?
There are so many sweeping changes I would like to see in NYS but they can all be accomplished by legislative action amending the constitution rather than rewriting the entire thing. All it takes is politicians with balls and who actually listen to the constituents.
|
| Posted 11/7/17 2:37 PM |
| |
|
NervousNell
Just another chapter in life..
Member since 11/09 54921 total posts
Name:
..being a mommy and being a wife!
|
Re: Voting Yes tomorrow question
Posted by Mill188
At first I was all for the proposition, and the last few days my opinion has changed. Let me be fully transparent and state that my husband is in a union that opposes passage of the proposition.
My first thought was "YES!" let's open the constitution and get rid of the waste in NYS. They can't touch DH's pension or his retirement, so we are safe. It's the next guy who won't be. Trust me, DH and I had many a debate about it. He was opposed 100% and I wasn't sure but was leaning towards voting for it.
After looking at some more, I realized that NYS is in financial crisis - why would we spend even more taxpayer $$ to rewrite the state constitution? And do we really trust our politicians/delegates to do the right thing for us?
There are so many sweeping changes I would like to see in NYS but they can all be accomplished by legislative action amending the constitution rather than rewriting the entire thing. All it takes is politicians with balls and who actually listen to the constituents.
I tend to agree. I am going to vote no.
But not because I am worried about my husband's pension. Because from doing my own research I know it's safe.
But for many other reasons- many of which you have listed here.
|
| Posted 11/7/17 2:39 PM |
| |
|
Paramount
Sweet!
Member since 7/12 4289 total posts
Name:
|
Re: Voting Yes tomorrow question
Frankly I think pensions HAVE to go. Leave them for those who have them STOP them for all new hires and go to a 401K.
I would vote yes in a second if I thought the convention would bring around some meaningful change in the state.
But it would be a big waste, unfortunately.
Message edited 11/7/2017 3:24:20 PM.
|
| Posted 11/7/17 3:23 PM |
| |
|
MommaG
Yay Spring!
Member since 5/05 5133 total posts
Name:
Gloria
|
Voting Yes tomorrow question
I think most people are concerned that this would cost a lot of money and basically get nothing done. Also, once a convention convenes, they can vote on ANYTHING, not just topics that have already been proposed. People are concerned that topics they thought were said and done can be changed or repealed.
|
| Posted 11/7/17 4:09 PM |
| |
|
GoldenRod
10 years on LIF!
Member since 11/06 26792 total posts
Name:
Shawn
|
Re: Voting Yes tomorrow question
Posted by MommaG
I think most people are concerned that this would cost a lot of money and basically get nothing done. Also, once a convention convenes, they can vote on ANYTHING, not just topics that have already been proposed. People are concerned that topics they thought were said and done can be changed or repealed.
THEY don't vote on anything.... WE vote on everything. The delegates bring up proposals, but everything has to be voted on by us.
|
| Posted 11/7/17 4:27 PM |
| |
|
MichLiz213
Life is Good!
Member since 7/07 7979 total posts
Name:
|
Voting Yes tomorrow question
While I am in a union and have have a pension, two things stuck out to make me vote no:
-There is land in the Adirondacks protected by the constitution in which a lot of people would like to have access.
-Robert Mercer, one of the (if not the) top donors to conservative candidates and Breitbart, has said if there is a yes vote he will pour money into making sure delegates he is in favor of are chosen. So much for trying to end corruption by voting yes.
Message edited 11/7/2017 4:40:43 PM.
|
| Posted 11/7/17 4:40 PM |
| |
|
GoldenRod
10 years on LIF!
Member since 11/06 26792 total posts
Name:
Shawn
|
Re: Voting Yes tomorrow question
Posted by MichLiz213
While I am in a union and have have a pension, two things stuck out to make me vote no:
-There is land in the Adirondacks protected by the constitution in which a lot of people would like to have access.
-Robert Mercer, one of the (if not the) top donors to conservative candidates and Breitbart, has said if there is a yes vote he will pour money into making sure delegates he is in favor of are chosen. So much for trying to end corruption by voting yes.
The vote on the Adirondack land is separate from the Convention vote. They are unrelated to each other.
|
| Posted 11/7/17 6:04 PM |
| |
|
NervousNell
Just another chapter in life..
Member since 11/09 54921 total posts
Name:
..being a mommy and being a wife!
|
Re: Voting Yes tomorrow question
Posted by GoldenRod
Posted by MichLiz213
While I am in a union and have have a pension, two things stuck out to make me vote no:
-There is land in the Adirondacks protected by the constitution in which a lot of people would like to have access.
-Robert Mercer, one of the (if not the) top donors to conservative candidates and Breitbart, has said if there is a yes vote he will pour money into making sure delegates he is in favor of are chosen. So much for trying to end corruption by voting yes.
The vote on the Adirondack land is separate from the Convention vote. They are unrelated to each other.
Yes I noticed that was a seperate proposition on the back. The third one
|
| Posted 11/7/17 6:21 PM |
| |
|
MichLiz213
Life is Good!
Member since 7/07 7979 total posts
Name:
|
Re: Voting Yes tomorrow question
Posted by NervousNell
Posted by GoldenRod
Posted by MichLiz213
While I am in a union and have have a pension, two things stuck out to make me vote no:
-There is land in the Adirondacks protected by the constitution in which a lot of people would like to have access.
-Robert Mercer, one of the (if not the) top donors to conservative candidates and Breitbart, has said if there is a yes vote he will pour money into making sure delegates he is in favor of are chosen. So much for trying to end corruption by voting yes.
The vote on the Adirondack land is separate from the Convention vote. They are unrelated to each other.
Thanks for clarifying
Yes I noticed that was a seperate proposition on the back. The third one
|
| Posted 11/7/17 7:55 PM |
| |
|
Jenn79
One more?
Member since 2/12 2410 total posts
Name:
|
Re: Voting Yes tomorrow question
Posted by MichLiz213
Posted by NervousNell
Posted by GoldenRod
Posted by MichLiz213
While I am in a union and have have a pension, two things stuck out to make me vote no:
-There is land in the Adirondacks protected by the constitution in which a lot of people would like to have access.
-Robert Mercer, one of the (if not the) top donors to conservative candidates and Breitbart, has said if there is a yes vote he will pour money into making sure delegates he is in favor of are chosen. So much for trying to end corruption by voting yes.
The vote on the Adirondack land is separate from the Convention vote. They are unrelated to each other.
Thanks for clarifying
Yes I noticed that was a seperate proposition on the back. The third one
This one passed if I'm reading it correctly. I'm still not sure I totally understood this one either. The wording for me was tricky.
|
| Posted 11/8/17 9:28 AM |
| |
|
MrsT809
LIF Adult
Member since 9/09 12167 total posts
Name:
|
Re: Voting Yes tomorrow question
Posted by Jenn79
Posted by MichLiz213
Posted by NervousNell
Posted by GoldenRod
Posted by MichLiz213
While I am in a union and have have a pension, two things stuck out to make me vote no:
-There is land in the Adirondacks protected by the constitution in which a lot of people would like to have access.
-Robert Mercer, one of the (if not the) top donors to conservative candidates and Breitbart, has said if there is a yes vote he will pour money into making sure delegates he is in favor of are chosen. So much for trying to end corruption by voting yes.
The vote on the Adirondack land is separate from the Convention vote. They are unrelated to each other.
Thanks for clarifying
Yes I noticed that was a seperate proposition on the back. The third one
This one passed if I'm reading it correctly. I'm still not sure I totally understood this one either. The wording for me was tricky.
From what I understand, currently any time utility work or other work is needed in protected land they must bring a proposal for a vote which is a pita of course. This created a bank so they can deduct small amounts from the bank as land is used for these kinds of project as needed. It had pretty widespread support from environmental groups I think but it just barely passed.
|
| Posted 11/8/17 9:32 AM |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] |
