Outros Referendos

Não só por cá têm ocorrido referendos, nas últimas eleições para o Congresso e Senados Norte-Americanos, dia 7 de Novembro (a história tem destas piadas...), numa série de estados houve referendos, destaco o do Dakota do Sul onde foi a votação uma proposta para reverter a legalização do aborto.
Os movimentos “pro-choice”, como lá (e tb cá...) são chamados, ganharam a batalha. Mas os eleitores não opinaram apenas sobre o aborto, fizeram-se consultas sobre a legalização da Marijuana, casamentos entre homossexuais e aumento do salário mínimo.
O sim ao aumento do salário mínimo ganhou em todos os estados onde se realizou este referendo, a legalização da marijuana foi derrotada mas por curta margem nalguns lados. Os casamentos homossexuais, aliás a proposta não era de legalizá-los, antes de impedir que seja feita legislação no sentido de legalizá-los! Esse tipo de proposta passou em todos os estados onde ocorreu.
Para verem os resultados mais em detalhe cliquem no link abaixo, também anexo um pequeno artigo sobre o referendo do Dakota.

http://edition.cnn.com/ELECTION/2006/pages/results/ballot.measures/

South Dakota abortion ban rejected
SIOUX FALLS, S.D. (AP) — A ballot measure that would ban nearly all abortions in South Dakota was rejected on Tuesday.

With 59% of the precincts reporting, opponents of the ban had 55%, or 98,182 votes, to the supporters' 45%, or 79,444 votes.
Jan Nicolay, leader of the group seeking to reject the measure, said the returns indicate that voters understood that the proposed law was too extreme because it did not include exceptions for rape, incest or the health of a pregnant woman.
Lance Weber, 49, of Sturgis said he does not like abortion but voted against the measure because it would not allow abortions for rape and incest.
"I still feel like there is a gray area in that particular matter, and I feel there needs to be some exceptions," Weber told the Associated Press.
MORE INFO: Ballot initiatives by county
But other voters like Inez Grenz, 62, of Eureka said they had waited a long time to vote against abortion.
"This was the chance of a lifetime," Grenz said. "I'm just against abortion. I'm pro-life. I'm a Christian and I vote my values."
The South Dakota campaigns working for and against the measure, which would ban nearly all abortions in the state, said they planned to work hard on Election Day to get their supporters to the polls.
The Legislature passed the law last winter in an attempt to prompt a court challenge aimed at getting the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn its 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion in the nation.
Instead of filing a lawsuit, however, opponents gathered petition signatures to place the measure on the general election ballot for a statewide vote.
The campaign turned quickly from the overall issue of abortion rights when opponents attacked the law as extreme, arguing that it goes too far because it would not allow abortions in cases of rape, incest or a threat to the life of a pregnant woman.
Supporters countered that the law would allow doctors to protect the lives of pregnant women with medical problems. They also argued that rape and incest victims would be protected by a provision that says nothing in the abortion ban would prevent women from getting emergency contraceptives up to the point a pregnancy could be determined.
The debate not only split the general public, but also the medical community. Ads run by both sides featured doctors giving their interpretation of the law.
Regardless of the outcome in Tuesday's election, the battle was expected to continue. If voters approved the ban, the measure was likely to be challenged in court. If the ban was rejected, lawmakers opposed to abortion could pass a less restrictive measure next year, one that includes exceptions for rape and incest victims.
Combined spending by the two campaigns exceeded $4 million, considered a lot in a state a population of only about 750,000. Campaign finance reports filed in the campaign's last week revealed that an unidentified donor had given at least $750,000 to help the ban's supporters.