[Vision2020] yes, Weitz is suing Moscow School District

[Donovan Arnold]

Andreas wrote:
   
  "Donovan: are you making the wildly hyperbolic argument that a dispute over the wording of a ballot question is tantamount to 'stealing'?" 
   
  Mark Twain said, "The difference between the almost right word & the right word is really a large matter--it's the difference between the lightning bug and the lightning."--10/15/1888 
   
  I think in matters of legalities, elections, and votes this is especially true. We know full well the wording of a contract, a piece of legislation, or the explanation of a ballot measure can significantly determine the outcome of a law and its enforcement. The Patriot Act is a prime recent example of this. If a ballot passed with 55% of the vote, it is entirely plausible that at at least 6% of the people voted in favor on the measure based on the wording. 
   
  "The paternalistic theory that Weitz is basing his lawsuit on is that, somehow, people's behavior today is driven entirely by the wording of a ballot measure fifteen years ago, and not the debate surrounding the funding of the schools today. This seems a rather thin basis to sue to reverse the will of the people of Moscow. "
   
  This is called a red herring. We don't know the true will of the people if the wording on the ballot was either incorrectly written or an illegal question. Further, not everything can be voted on by a vote of the people; the majority cannot vote to rape and pillage the minority.
   
  "And are you arguing for the (widely discredited) theory of 'taxpayer's standing'?" 
   
  Andreas, "taxpayer's standing" is not discredited for small municipalities, and is expressly allowed by federal government. The discrediting of taxpayer's standing is based on the idea that one lone taxpayer is too remote and removed from federal government. 
   
  Second, I think that the three constitutional standing requirements can be easily achieved by Dr. Weitz. 
   
  Finally, I must ask, why you believe that Saundra Lund and Rosemary Husky had standing to file a complaint against New St. Andrew's as taxpayers?
   
  Seems we have another double standard here again. 
   
  Best,
   
  Donovan
   
   
   
  

 
   
  
 
   
   
   
  

Andreas Schou <ophite at gmail.com> wrote:
  
      If it is in fact true that the Moscow School District is illegally collecting funding from the people in Moscow, I hope indeed that Dr. Weitz is successful in his lawsuit. All tax increases should be legal, otherwise it would be called stealing. I hope even our most liberal proponents for education are not in favor of stealing.
  
The paternalistic theory that Weitz is basing his lawsuit on is that, somehow, people's behavior today is driven entirely by the wording of a ballot measure fifteen years ago, and not the debate surrounding the funding of the schools today. This seems a rather thin basis to sue to reverse the will of the people of Moscow. 

Just to clarify, Donovan: are you making the wildly hyperbolic argument that a dispute over the wording of a ballot question is tantamount to "stealing"? And are you arguing for the (widely discredited) theory of "taxpayer's standing"? 

-- ACS




=======================================================
List services made available by First Step Internet, 
serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994. 
http://www.fsr.net 
mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
=======================================================

       
---------------------------------
Ahhh...imagining that irresistible "new car" smell?
 Check outnew cars at Yahoo! Autos.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20070504/cf1ce89c/attachment.html