The full text is here (pdf).

Basically, this would require, in the words of the summary “long-term care workers to be certified as home care aides”. It basically establishes a set of education and training requirements and requires that these workers be registered by the state and licensed.

I am fundamentally opposed at a very basic level to the government licensing ANYTHING. (And yes, that probably even includes drivers.) It is just plain none of the government’s business to keep track of such things, or to set requirements. This is not to say that it is not good for such workers to have training, background checks, etc. It is just to say that I do not believe this should be government’s job.

There are various private solutions for this. Government does NOT need to be involved.

It needs to be the responsibility of those hiring for these sorts of workers to check qualifications to whatever degree they deem necessary (or not). And of course government should be involved if there is fraud or mistreatment or the like. But making sure that workers get some sort of mandatory training and then providing a license and keeping a big registry of such people? No thanks. Much too big brother for me.

There can also be plenty of room for private providers of certifications that would gain reputations and be looked for by those doing hiring. But such things need to be voluntary, not mandated by law… both for the person looking to do work, and the person or organization looking to hire them.

Therefore, my vote here is:

NO

Therefore

The full text is here (pdf).

This is a basic death with dignity initiative, which would allow terminally ill patients, with a number of safeguards, to request and receive lethal prescriptions to allow them to end their lives.

I read through the entire text, and the statements for and against. I believe more than enough safeguards are present here and that this is a good change. Fundamentally, the choice to end one’s life should always be available to those who wish it. If I was in charge, I’d go even further and probably not even restrict it as much as it is restricted.

But this is good and reasonable, and if I am ever in that sort of situation, I would certainly want to have that sort of choice available to me. I’m not by any means sure what I would choose, but I certainly would not want the law to say that anybody helping me in that situation was a felon, which is what the law says today.

Thus, my vote is:

YES