Since it may be of some interest to some, I put together this California propositions voting guide. I’ve followed the issues during this year’s election season and so hopefully this isn’t a completely incompetent rambling about what I think I think.
It’s funny that California has propositions. They’re awful things, really. I mean, the average citizen doesn’t know the scope and aim of what the budget should be, nor does he or she have access to the same information as state legislators and senators, or the time to spend researching these issues or the accountability that’s beholden to members, just look at the comments section at the bottom of any article on a newspaper’s website.
I believe we elect politicians -- however badly they suck -- to office for a reason. Citizens should not write tax law (Prop. 24), or approve new projects (like Prop. 23), or allocate funds for one project (like the high-speed railroad), or deny that funds from a specific tax revenue be raised (like property tax), or be allowed to deny rights to a minority group (like Prop. 8).
Basically, I think California propositions enable the anonymous ass holes who write slanderous comments on these newspaper websites to take control of government. And they can’t be unseated. Your dumbass next door neighbor and your roommate are lifelong legislators, tyrants in a way.
So, to avoid being just another anonymous voter, I’ve put together my propositions voting guide for the whole world wide web to see. These are decisions that I’m voting on that you -- California readers (your numbers are shrinking by the second) -- will have to live with, making me the tyrant, for better or worse. I’m not supporting candidates here, because they’ll have to answer for themselves for decisions that they’ll make on their own time (although, I will say that the God Damn San Francisco Giants may cost Gavin Newsom -- mayor of SF running for Lt. Governor -- my vote*).
*I'm a Dodger-blue Los Angeles Dodgers fan no matter the political season.
I’m worried about my own legislating here.
It’s the eve of the election so many of my stances on propositions were established long ago. But I had the day before the election -- November 1, 2010 -- off work to spend drinking coffee at Augie’s Coffee House in Redlands and research even the less sexy propositions.
First though, it should be said that I can’t stand most politic-ing. And I’m not an affiliate of a political party. Maybe it’s because I grew up in the thumb-your-nose at the establishment West, or maybe it’s just my nature no matter where I was from, but something seems dirty and oppressive about party affiliations.
Though, I acknowledge it’s something that will be around forever.
You will notice below that most of the positions I take are popular with Democrats. It’s unfortunate, I know, that those ass holes are in charge. But, unfortunately, the Republicans have not rebounded since their 2008 thumping. The GOP is either Tea Bagging all over itself or neglecting its responsibility as law makers as they watch the Democrats fail.
I was hoping after the 2008 election that some of them would articulate a plan to oppose the Democrats, but I’ve yet to really hear one.
Anyhow, here’s me working as your legislator (I’m excepting your check in the mail soon)*.
*Remember, these were written hastily one afternoon. Forgive poor writing or hodgesmodge blathering.
Prop. 19: No.
California has been the battle ground for many worthy causes. I’m proud that we’re a state that does what it can for its sick, advances the rights of gays and lesbians and is innovative in its approach toward energy and environmental issues.
We’re also the leader in the advancement of the legalization of marijuana.
11 other states have joined California in thumbing its nose at the federal government since the state legalized marijuana for medicinal purposes with Proposition 215 in 1996, which you should think would send a message to Congress that it’s high time its position on the issue be delegated to the state level.
But for all the good Proposition 215 has provided for California’s sick, it’s also created a legal mess as disorderly as Interstate 215.
Proposition 19 would only add to the mess, sort of like construction in San Bernardino on Interstate 215 added to that mess.
Proposition 215 made marijuana law in California confusing, making the enforcement of marijuana different from county to county. This is especially true for residents of San Bernardino County. Medicinal marijuana is legal in counties like Riverside and Los Angeles, but not San Bernardino.
Proposition 19 would further confuse the policies of municipal, county and state officials.
The LA Times said this of the proposition: “Proposition 19 is poorly thought out, badly crafted and replete with loopholes and contradictions.”
President Barack Obama’s drug czar Gil Kerlikowske does not enforce the federal policy when it comes to medicinal marijuana. But he has firmly stated that the administration will not condone marijuana’s legalization for recreational purposes. Whether you agree with the president’s policy or not is moot. There is no legal recourse to challenge federal authority on this issue. Gonzales v. Raich made it very clear that marijuana is a commerce issues, giving the federal government the power to legislate and enforce its policies, should it choose.
Proposition 19 may actually be a step backward for sick Californians. Folks who are actually sick and in pain may suffer should Kerlikowske enforce the federal law and close their dispensaries.
Proposition 20 and 27: Yes. No.
Vote yes on Proposition 20 and no on Proposition 27.
Hey, three propositions so far and here I am voting against the liberal consensus on both (although most democrats running for office -- or anyone who reads more than just the name and aims -- has come out against Prop. 19).
California voters should vote for Proposition 20 and against Proposition 27. George Skelton of the Los Angeles Times sums this one up pretty well:
Californians passed Prop. 11 in 2008 to strip from legislators the power to draw their own districts — meaning choose their own voters. The task was handed to an independent citizens commission. Prop. 20 would expand the reform to include congressional districts. Prop. 27 would scuttle the commission entirely and return self-interest gerrymandering to the Legislature.
Led by Rep. Howard Berman of Valley Village, Democratic House members want their legislative buddies to continue skewing districts in their favor because they fear reelection competition.
To continue reform, vote "yes" on Prop 20 and "no" on Prop. 27.
Most of California’s congress-members and state-level legislators are against this proposition, because it should shake up their safe seats. Republican districts are just as bad as Democrat districts. These safe seats are what make California’s politicians so much more polarized than its citizens.
It’s absurd that Riversiders share a congressperson with folks in San Clemente. Ken Calvert is not held accountable even though he’s one of the most corrupt members of Congress. This is true too of many California Democrats.
Proposition 21, Yes.
I like my state parks. And I probably spend more than $18 on state parks per year. Plus, there have been multiple occasions when I’ve wanted to spend the night in a state park -- thinking here specifically of Park El Captain -- but couldn’t because I didn’t have the money. This proposition would charge $18 more per year on car registration, but in exchange drivers with California license plates will be allowed to enter the parks for free.
So I’m voting yes on this one for a selfish reason, perhaps the most loathsome consequence of California’s propositions, making me a part of the problem. You should unseat me and strip me of my legislating power because I'm voting in a way that I said is fundamentally against the values that I set forth in the beginning.
But you can't.
Ehh ... moving on ...
Proposition 22: No.
I don’t know much about tax law, but I do know that he state is scrambling to close multibillion-dollar budget gaps nearly every year. Yes, you can say that it’s the problem of those ass-holes in Sacramento. And yes, you’d be right. But those sons-of-a-bitches don’t need their job to be made any harder.
The state needs flexibility to close this gap -- which you can also say Prop. 21 hampers, too.
But Prop. 21 helps state park, which are in serious damage. The passage of Prop. 22 would severally hamper the state’s ability to put together a budget.
The Sacramento Bee said this of Prop. 22: “A power play by cities and redevelopment agencies.”
Prop. 23: No.
Mostly, you’re going to hear this from folks who support the proposition, “The state’s global warming policy will drive jobs out of California.”
I don’t believe this is true, especially in the long term.
Yes, there is literature out there to suggest that the implementation of the Air Pollution Control Law will hamper businesses in California. But most reports don’t take into account jobs that have been created in the last 10 years by California’s green-energy industry. California is at the forefront of green-energy, suspending the implementation of the Air Pollution Control Law will be a step backward.
There’s so much to gain by continuing to explore and encourage the use of green energy. 20 to 30 years from now we may find California in a very advantageous position because of its innovative research. We’re competing with other countries, specifically Germany, in alternative energy options. When I studied in Germany a year ago, it was interesting that many of the folks I talked to loved to boast about how Germany was passing California -- as if California was its own nation -- in solar energy research.
This proposition is simply a mandate on whether the baby-boom generation cares an inkling about future generations. They probably don’t.
I think the fact that Prop. 23 is largely bankrolled by two Texas oil companies says it all.
Prop. 24: No
California’s tax law needs to be completely revamped. And, yes, passage of this proposition would create much needed revenue for the state. But this work should not be done through propositions. And, yes, California businesses could use a tax break.
Our lawmakers need to write tax law. It’s work for professionals. It’s why we elect folks. If it’s done through propositions, it’ll further muddy the patchwork job that California’s tax laws already are.
The Press-Enterprise says, “The tax breaks this measure would repeal do need fixing, but that is a job better left to legislative deliberation.”
Prop. 25 and 26: Yes. No.
I don’t understand opposition to Proposition 25 and support for Proposition 26 (25 gives the state legislature the ability to pass a budget with a simple majority vote instead of the super majority vote its needed for years. And 26, basically, nearly does the opposite, disallowing the legislature to raise fees and taxes without a supermajority). It just seems to make so much sense.
Year after year, the state’s assembly fails to pass a budget on time. Republicans argue that the two-thirds majority is its only weapon to combat rampant budget increases. If I was advising Republicans, I’d argue that passage of Proposition 25 will help their cause. Finally, Democrats can be held accountable for the state’s deficit. As it stands now, no one is held accountable. Democrats can point at the 2/3rds requirement as a standard that forces Republicans to take their share of the blame. No one wins, no one loses, the state stays messed up.
I’d also advise Republicans that there is a more effective way of stopping California Democrats: unseat them. The California Republican Party shouldn’t look anything like the National Republican party. It will not win social issues here -- Proposition 8 was an aberration. So Republicans must adjust in California and appeal to its citizens’ general distain for Washington and wasteful spending.
Plus, no other state uses the 2/3rds system.
It’s a really screwy way of doing business. Also, according to the Los Angeles Times, California’s credit rating takes a huge hit every time the budget comes in late, it being lowered to something of “Garbage status.”
Epilogue
Friends ... I hope we can still be friends ... despite my awful legislating ... finding common ground is cool ... so I encourage you to join me ... writing down your stance on these propositions ... your reasoning would be nice too ... hold yourself accountable during this election ...
