SUBSCRIBE NOW WELCOME BACK. Do you want to continue reading where you left off? New Republic subscribers can pick up where they left off no matter which device they were previously using. SUBSCRIBE NOW

Go Home No To Pot and Gay Marriage, Yes To Long State Names

JONATHAN COHN NOVEMBER 3, 2010

No To Pot and Gay Marriage, Yes To Long State Names

As always, there were an assortment of ballot initiatives and other random acts of direct democracy that voters dealt with today. The two most famous, California's Prop 19 (legalization of marijuana) and Prop 23 (suspending the state's carbon emissions law), are losing, as polls predicted. On Prop 19, the theory that pot aficionados would hide their vice from pollsters appears to have been less compelling than the theory that pot aficionados would zone out on election day. More likely, the recent California law that reduced penalties for possession of small quantities of weed to a $100 fine undermined the rationale for the initiative. 

Colorado's "personhood" amendment, designed to enshrine the Right-to-Life movement's views of the homicidal nature of all abortions and some forms of birth control, lost very badly, after most Republican politicians danced around the question. And in Rhode Island, an initiative to change the name of the state to "Rhode Island" (it's currently "Rhode Island and Providence Plantations") was trounced. Guess you'll have to get someone from RIPP to explain that one to you.

On a more serious note, a conservative effort to deny three Iowa Supreme Court justices retention in office to punish them for the Court's unanimous decision legalizing same-sex marriage narrowly succeeded. You will soon see the organizers of that effort as major potentates in the 2012 Iowa Republican Caucuses.

SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS

Show all 2 comments

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

2 comments

Here in tha RIPP, we mostly thought the proposed amendment was stupid. It would mainly change the name in the constitution and some legal documents and not affect daily usage (newly elected gov. Chaffee, for example, is under no obligation to say "My fellow Rhode-Island-and-Providence-Plantation-ites"). The objection is that the word "plantation" has connotations of slavery -- but for Roger Williams, the word meant "colony," so objecting to it is roughly on par with objecting to the word "niggardly." Also, though RI was unfortunately a major slave state later on with plantations in the modern sense, the people in the Providence Plantations part were actually avant-garde abolitionists. See more here: http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2010/11/shedding_a_tear.php But really, even if the RIPP WERE named after giant slave-powered farms, I'd be opposed to sweeping that under the rug.

- frippo

November 3, 2010 at 9:36am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Yes, frippo, though I'm from Illinois (which I think is just called Illinois), I was gratified by this result. I'm looking for any positive news. My biggest objection to the change was that it makes no sense to officially call the entire state Rhode Island, when the actual island is only a small part of it.

- JakeH

November 3, 2010 at 12:19pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

SHARE HIGHLIGHT

0 CHARACTERS SELECTED

TWEET THIS

POST TO TUMBLR

SHARE ON FACEBOOK

Close