If voters approve the amendment, the state would have the power to limit the amount of "soft money" that can be transferred to statewide campaigns.

Soft money, in the words of the amendment, includes "money...for administrative, overhead or party-building activities."

The law would limit the amount of money candidates could receive from individuals or groups to $100.

Candidates who limit their fund-raising to these personal contributions would, in some cases, be eligible for state funds for their campaigns.

Opponents of the amendment say it would restrict the free expression of ideas by setting limits on taxpayers who want to contribute to the candidate of their choice.

They also disdain the use of state money for election financing.

Tax Break for the Rich?

A "Yes" vote on Question 3 will reduce the so-called 12 percent tax, a levy on personal income from dividend and interest gains. The new rate would be tied to the state's income tax, currently 5.95 percent of wages and salaries.

Proponents of the measure say the current law "penalizes people who save."

They note that no other state in the country taxes dividends at a higher rate than they do personal incomes. The measure is supported by most of the state's largest newspapers, including the often-at-odds Boston Herald and Boston Globe.

Opponents of the measure say that few Massachusetts voters will be affected by the tax rate change, claiming "nearly three quarters of Massachusetts taxpayers have no dividend income and would get nothing from the tax cut."

Further, they state that the measure penalizes saving, an important mechanism for future economic growth.

They say the measure benefits the rich and will actually cause Massachusetts taxpayers to lose money.

Power Play

The final ballot initiative has received the most publicity. A "Yes" vote on Question 4 would continue a 1997 law aimed at restructuring the state's electric utility industry. A "No" vote would repeal the law.