States Have Many Environmental Issues on Ballot

2002 Environment Ballot Initiatives
Last update: Oct. 16, 2002

Attention has fallen on a handful of state ballot initiatives and referendums that may have dramatic environmental impacts. The following list highlights some of the biggest stories in the upcoming election.
Oregon voters will decide whether to support a measure requiring labeling of Genetically-engineered foods. According to BallotFunding.org, opponents of the measure, organized as "Coalition Against the Costly Labeling Law," have raised over $4.6 million from CropLife International, PepsiCo, General Mills, ConAgra and Monsanto. Labeling proponents spent $64,000 to qualify the bill.

  • Oregon Concerned Citizens for Safe Foods supports the measure.
  • Coalition Against the Costly Labeling Law opposes the measure.
  • Associated Press story.

In Alaska, ballot measure 3, also known as "The All-Alaskan Gasoline Initiative," is the latest manifestation of a longstanding debate over whether to pipe natural gas to the United States through Canada, or pipe it to Alaskan ports and then ship it to markets in liquified form in tankers. Measure 3 favors the latter approach; if it passes, it would establish a public agency (the Alaska Natural Gas Development Authority) to facilitate construction of a pipeline to Alaskan ports by taking bids from private companies.

Proponents of the measure say the all-Alaska approach would concentrate economic benefits in Alaska. Opponents say the measure would steer Alaska to an approach to moving natural gas to market that is not economically feasible.

Meanwhile, studies by major energy firms in recent years have cast doubt on whether any means of transporting natural gas from Alaska's North Slope could make economic sense.

  • Background from a proponent of the measure.
  • Arguments for and against ballot measure 3.

In California, Proposition 50, known as "The Water Security, Clean Drinking Water, Coastal and Beach Protection Act of 2002," has created controversy. The Act would authorize $3,440,000,000 in general obligation bonds, to be repaid from the state's General Fund and would fund a variety of water projects, including the protection of beaches, the exploration of desalination usage and the restoration of pristine mountain watersheds. Proposition 50 has gained support from the Nature Conservancy and the Metropolitan Water District of California. Critics, through, argue that California is already in debt and cannot pursue policies of loose spending.

  • To get more information from the group campaigning for its approval, visit the Proposition 50 website.
  • The San Diego Union-Tribune wrote a story on the initiative this past May explaining that although Southern California endured its driest year in 50 years, voters are also aware that the state faces a $24 billion budget deficit.

Proposition 51 has also created a stir of political debate in California. Named "The Traffic Congestion Relief and Safe School Bus Act," the measure dedicates 30 percent of the state share of sales tax on motor vehicle sales to a whole host of transportation-related programs (including fuel-efficient boats for Lake Tahoe and a rail line with stops at a casino). If passed, the measure would create permanent funding streams for traffic safety programs, traffic congestion relief programs, replacement of older and unsafe school buses, mitigation of the impact that transportation systems have on California's natural resources and, most significantly, increased investment in public transit.

  • The Fresno Bee, Associated Press and Arizona Republic outline the reasons why various groups oppose and support Proposition 51.

Montana voters will decide on a measure that could lead to a public buyback of 12 hydroelectric dams currently owned by out-of-state corporations. The Montana proposal, Initiative 145, would allow the state to acquire hydroelectric dams in an attempt to reverse the rising cost of power which resulted from the deregulation period (when the Montana Power Company sold off Montana's hydroelectric dams to Pennsylvania Power and Light).

Montana Conservation Voters maintains a website monitoring the issues affecting the upcoming elections in that state, including candidate environmental record scorecards.
  • The Montana Public Interest Research Group outlines the key reasons voters should support I-145 in their Buy Back the Dams Campaign web page.

  • In late August, the New York Times wrote a story on the push to buy the dams of Montana.

In Utah, representatives from operators of the state's only radioactive waste site have voiced objection to a proposed initiative that would increase taxes on radioactive waste shipped to the state. Under the referendum, the state's tax on such waste would jump from 10 cents per cubic foot to between four and 150 dollars, depending on the specific type of waste. Half of the funds generated from the tax would go toward public education. Money would also go toward projects for the homeless and environmental regulation.