Use the source, Q!
PROPOSITION I
Shall it be City policy to oppose military recruiting in public schools and consider funding scholarships for education and training that could provide an alternative to military service?
Digest by the Ballot Simplification Committee
THE WAY IT IS NOW: The San Francisco Unified School District operates the City's public schools. The District receives federal money to pay part of its operating costs. By accepting federal money, the District must permit U.S. military recruiters access to its schools. Colleges and universities that receive federal funds are subject to similar requirements.
THE PROPOSAL: Proposition I is a declaration of policy that the people of San Francisco oppose the federal government's use of public schools to recruit students for service in the military.
Proposition I is also a declaration that San Francisco should consider funding scholarships for higher education and job training that could provide an alternative to military service.
A \ufffdYES\ufffd VOTE MEANS: If you vote \ufffdyes,\ufffd you want it to be City policy to oppose military recruiters\ufffd access to public schools and to consider funding scholarships for education and training that could provide an alternative to military service.
A \ufffdNO\ufffd VOTE MEANS: If you vote \ufffdno,\ufffd you do not want this to be City policy.
The legal text is [link|http://www.sfgov.org/site/uploadedfiles/election/Guides/PropI_Legal%20Text.pdf|here] (2 page .pdf). It says:
Resolved, that the people of San Francisco oppose U.S. military recruiters using public school, college and university facilities to recruit young people into the armed forces. Furthermore, San Francisco should oppose the military\ufffds \ufffdeconomic draft\ufffd by investigating means by which to fund and grant scholarships for college and job training to low-income students so they are not economically compelled to join the military.
The summary doesn't mention college and university facilities. My personal opinion is that it appears to be a declaration with no teeth. O'Reilly's reaction is typical of too many pundits - being upset at a symbolic protest action while ignoring substantive issues.
That said, if the ballot didn't mention college and university facilities and only mentioned public schools, then it borders on being a deceptive ballot, IMO. I see value in ROTC and military recruiting on college campuses. Recruiting at high schools is more problematic.
FWIW.
Cheers,
Scott.
