[Evenstar]

Originally Posted by hazelnut

I think this was very well said Evanstar and I have to say that I agree with you and Bear Islander on this one. You present a very fair and convincing case especially with the personal experience you have had in this very area.

Thanks Hazelnut!

Originally Posted by Lakegeezer

Bear Islander and Evenstar have a point. One issue should not make or break a candidate. Broadbase taxes, school funding, healthcare and funding the state retirement system are more important issues for the Lakes Region than a speed limit. However, it is very telling when elected officials pass a bill that so many were against and adds new restrictions to a targeted group. The issue was lake safety, and they did nothing to improve it. What other nanny laws will they pass because some group funds a campaign of hype?

Thanks for clarifying my point by listed some of the more important issues.

Most bills that are at all controversial stir up the emotions of people on both sides. At the House Transportation Committee Hearing there were just as many people that testified for the bill as against it - so no matter how a Senator votes, their decision is going to upset a large number of people. Emotional bills are pretty much a no win for them.

There was no "targeted group" - as a lake speed limit affects all boats. That's like saying that highway speed limits targets high-performance cars.

Did you listen to the Senate discussion? Those that spoke in support of the bill, spoke mostly about safety. I've spoken to a number of the Senators who voted in favor of the speed limit - and they believe that it will improve safety on the lake. Going slower is safer - that's a fact, on land and on water. You might not agree with a particular speed limit - but, with everything else being equal, slower is safer.

BTW: One of the Republican Senators who voted against the speed limit actually thinks that Winni is so large that you can't even see land when you're in the middle of it. Talk about being uninformed about something that you are voting against!

Originally Posted by VtSteve

Many people vote solely on the basis of party affiliation, some based on personal rights or gun issues solely, this isn't new stuff here.

The Senator who I worked for always voted his conscience and most of the Senators I know also vote their conscience. Two Republican Senators voted for this bill and two democrats voted against it - so this was not a party-line vote.

I am not a member of WINNFABS.

If these bills were the most contentious, and generated a lot of correspondence and calls, he should therefore deduce that they ARE important, at least to his constituents. Perhaps he should get out more often, and maybe find out why this issue IS important.

You obviously know nothing about this senator to make those comments.

The most important bills are the ones that will have the most effect on the most people - not the ones that upset a relatively small, but very vocal, percentage of the population. These are what I call Political Bills - since they generate the most media coverage. Last year's Civil Union bill (HB 437) is a good example of an emotionally charged Political Bill.

...led me to the unanimous conclusion that the primary causes of boating accidents are, 1) Drunks; 2) Irresponsible, careless and negligent boaters.
3) Inexperienced, unknowledgable boaters that get themselves into trouble unwittingly;4) Accidents happen in any activity.

Yes, and 1 through 3 all become more dangerous as speed increases. Which is why slower speed are safer.

As far as #4 goes, I do not remember hearing any Senator who voted in favor of the speed limit (or any other supporter) stating that a lake speed limit would eliminate all accidents. Most supporters feel that unlimited speeds on a recreational lake puts some boaters at unnecessarily high risks, which a speed limit will help reduce.