Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 02-14-2018, 07:24 AM
Jackmannii Jackmannii is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: the extreme center
Posts: 29,817
Are there 366,000 stupid Californians?

Because that's how many signatures (5% of eligible voters) it will take to put the "California Clean Environment Initiative" on the ballot.

Characterized by Mother Jones as crazy even by California standards, this initiative would (among other things) ban school vaccination requirements, genetically modified plants and animals, 300 separate chemicals (including fire retardants) and prohibit chlorinating or fluoridating municipal water supplies.

There's even a bonus for conspiracy theorists who dread mind control by cellphones, wi-fi and other nefarious sources.

"Emissions and reception of radio frequencies in the one millimeter to one meter range shall be investigated for health effects and interference with AM and FM radio. Within 3 years, limits on frequencies, power, pulse at certain modulations, cycling and distances to sensitive receptors, shall be scientifically established by CCEA. Set limits shall protect newborns, children and sensitive individuals from sleep disturbance, cancer, ability to concentrate, autism, blood/brain barrier leakage, and hyperactivity."

Here's the full initiative in all its loony glory.

Some sources indicate it's unlikely that proponents will get enough signatures to put this thing on the ballot. But some pretty weird stuff has made it before.

Last edited by Jackmannii; 02-14-2018 at 07:25 AM.
  #2  
Old 02-14-2018, 07:44 AM
Nava Nava is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Hey! I'm located! WOOOOW!
Posts: 38,789
According to the article, the woman who started the initiative " believes cancer, autism and other diseases are linked to exposure to toxic chemicals, genetically modified organisms or radiation". Thing is, the link between toxic chemicals and radiation in producing multiple diseases including cancer and any and all forms of poisoning has been well-established. The problem is in the leap between what's been established and the rest of her beliefs. Reminds me of one of my Idiot Aunt's speeches: there's no link between roasting herself at the beach with no sunscreen and breast cancer, her breast cancer was caused by radiation.

Last edited by Nava; 02-14-2018 at 07:44 AM.
  #3  
Old 02-14-2018, 07:52 AM
Morgenstern Morgenstern is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Southern California
Posts: 11,866
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nava View Post
... Idiot Aunt's speeches: there's no link between roasting herself at the beach with no sunscreen and breast cancer, her breast cancer was caused by radiation.
Too many dental x-rays?
  #4  
Old 02-14-2018, 08:12 AM
Nava Nava is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Hey! I'm located! WOOOOW!
Posts: 38,789
No idea; there are levels of stupid I try to survive, not fight. I wouldn't be surprised if by now she blames cellphone towers despite her first bout of cancer being before there was such a thing around.
__________________
Life ain't peaches and cream, but sometimes it's laughing your ass off when you have no ass. - WhyNot

Last edited by Nava; 02-14-2018 at 08:13 AM.
  #5  
Old 02-14-2018, 08:22 AM
Shodan Shodan is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Milky Way Galaxy
Posts: 37,046
I'm against this, but maybe that's the cell phone radiation talking.

Yours in good health thru the purity of essence of our precious bodily fluids,
Gen. Jack D. Ripper
  #6  
Old 02-14-2018, 08:23 AM
Morgenstern Morgenstern is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Southern California
Posts: 11,866
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shodan View Post
...

Yours in good health thru the purity of essence of our precious bodily fluids,
Gen. Jack D. Ripper
Pee?
  #7  
Old 02-14-2018, 08:32 AM
andros andros is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Dejagore
Posts: 9,845
Quote:
Originally Posted by Morgenstern View Post
Pee?
If this is an indication that you have not yet watched one of the most beautiful and perfect movies of all time, I am so so very envious. You still have your first viewing ahead of you!
  #8  
Old 02-14-2018, 08:40 AM
andros andros is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Dejagore
Posts: 9,845
As to the OP, of course there are 366,000 stupid Californians. The question is whether or not they are already the right variety of stupid, or if they will be fooled by a misleading initiative title that attempts to push the "save the planet" button.

To paraphrase Gary Larson, we know they're stupid...but what kind of stupid are they?
.
  #9  
Old 02-14-2018, 08:42 AM
TriPolar TriPolar is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: rhode island
Posts: 39,135
No, there are not 366,000 stupid Californians. The number is much higher than that.
  #10  
Old 02-14-2018, 08:43 AM
Morgenstern Morgenstern is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Southern California
Posts: 11,866
Quote:
Originally Posted by andros View Post
If this is an indication that you have not yet watched one of the most beautiful and perfect movies of all time, I am so so very envious. You still have your first viewing ahead of you!
Actually, I saw it three times, at the drive-in, with my girlfriend.
BTW, what was it about and who was in it?
  #11  
Old 02-14-2018, 09:27 AM
John Mace's Avatar
John Mace John Mace is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: South Bay
Posts: 84,078
Quote:
Originally Posted by TriPolar View Post
No, there are not 366,000 stupid Californians. The number is much higher than that.
True. But we do OK for ourselves, and somehow manage to eke out a living.
  #12  
Old 02-14-2018, 09:29 AM
andros andros is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Dejagore
Posts: 9,845
Quote:
Originally Posted by Morgenstern View Post
Actually, I saw it three times, at the drive-in, with my girlfriend.
BTW, what was it about and who was in it?
Pee, I assume.
  #13  
Old 02-14-2018, 10:14 AM
friedo friedo is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 23,941
There are nearly 40 million people in California. Finding 366,000 stupids would be like shooting fish in a place where there's a lot of fish really close to each other. A fishtank or something.
  #14  
Old 02-14-2018, 10:21 AM
Johnny Bravo's Avatar
Johnny Bravo Johnny Bravo is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: The Swamp
Posts: 7,398
The only flavor of stupid you need to get an initiative on the ballot is "stupid enough to sign a petition that somebody waves in front of you."

That's a much lower bar than "stupid enough to be in favor of this wacko initiative."

Last edited by Johnny Bravo; 02-14-2018 at 10:21 AM.
  #15  
Old 02-14-2018, 10:22 AM
Icarus's Avatar
Icarus Icarus is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: In front of my PC, y tu?
Posts: 4,581
This is why I dislike the whole California Initiative process. It seems anyone can pay people to stand outside grocery stores collecting signatures under specious titles. "The save the babies act!" "The world peace act!"

Then the few voters who actually show up to the polls read over some few sentences and recall, "Hmmm, the TV said that the Sheriff's Deputy Association is in favor of this (or were they against it? I can't remember exactly.) My cousin is a Deputy. I'll vote for it!"

Please stop.

I think when I retire I'll start an initiative to get rid of the initiative process. It'll be my hobby.
__________________
Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge.
- C. Darwin
  #16  
Old 02-14-2018, 10:35 AM
Morgenstern Morgenstern is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Southern California
Posts: 11,866
Quote:
Originally Posted by Icarus View Post
...

I think when I retire I'll start an initiative to get rid of the initiative process. It'll be my hobby.

Silence the voice of the people! How dare they demand things.
  #17  
Old 02-14-2018, 10:45 AM
Riemann Riemann is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Santa Fe, NM, USA
Posts: 4,877
Quote:
Originally Posted by Icarus View Post
I think when I retire I'll start an initiative to get rid of the initiative process. It'll be my hobby.
After the initiative to abolish initiatives, we need to ban intolerance, then get a majority of the electorate to realize what idiots they are and vote to abolish democracy.
  #18  
Old 02-14-2018, 10:47 AM
Shodan Shodan is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Milky Way Galaxy
Posts: 37,046
Quote:
Originally Posted by Morgenstern View Post
Pee?
Children's ice cream, Mandrake!

Regards,
Shodan
  #19  
Old 02-14-2018, 10:48 AM
E-DUB's Avatar
E-DUB E-DUB is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 3,893
Of course there are. Probably every state has that many stupid people. With the smaller states, it's just a higher percentage of the population.
  #20  
Old 02-14-2018, 10:54 AM
Icarus's Avatar
Icarus Icarus is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: In front of my PC, y tu?
Posts: 4,581
Quote:
Originally Posted by Morgenstern View Post
Silence the voice of the people! How dare they demand things.
We have elected representatives, they should do their jobs.
__________________
Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge.
- C. Darwin
  #21  
Old 02-14-2018, 11:01 AM
Morgenstern Morgenstern is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Southern California
Posts: 11,866
Quote:
Originally Posted by Icarus View Post
We have elected representatives, they should do their jobs.
Yes, they should do their jobs unmolested by the voice of the masses demanding they do their job.
  #22  
Old 02-14-2018, 11:05 AM
Jackmannii Jackmannii is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: the extreme center
Posts: 29,817
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nava View Post
Thing is, the link between toxic chemicals and radiation in producing multiple diseases including cancer and any and all forms of poisoning has been well-established.
The author of the ballot initiative, Cheriel Jensen says:

"We, Californians, have the right in our person and families to live, as free as possible, from toxic chemical or toxic process-caused cancer, paralysis, structural or functional birth defects, autism spectrum disorder, diminished intelligence, gut cell genetic alteration, seizures; pregnancy complications, developmental complications, cellular structural damage; structural and functional nerve damage, demyelination, brain tumors, Guillain-Barre syndrome, ALS; fluorosis, brittle bones; joint damage; altered thyroid, testosterone, estrogen, cortisone, sperm counts, pineal gland calcification, early or delayed puberty, extra heavy or lengthy menstrual bleeding, reproductive system damage, or other harmful hormone related impacts; Parkinson’s; Alzheimer’s; eye damage such as reduced vision, dry eyes, twitching eye lids, red eyes, watery eyes, cataracts, macular degeneration, blindness; hearing damage; intestinal bacteria die-off or alteration; chemical bums, rash, eczema, abnormal hair loss, photosensitivity, inflammation, spontaneous nose bleeding, idiopathic thrombocytopenia purpura; breathing difficulty, asthma, voice volume or frequency losses, repeated coughing, choking, rhinitis, chemical sensitivity, allergy, anaphylaxis, immune system deregulation, lupus, fibromyalgia; pancreas, kidney, spleen or liver damage, diabetes; interference with sleep, inability to concentrate; pain, headache, racing heart; body retention of the toxic substance or its’ breakdown products; invasion of living cell wall structures by nanoparticles; or changes to the body’s genetic material, or other adverse conditions"

Note "or other adverse conditions". That pretty much covers the waterfront. Feel bad? It's them Toxins.

I respectfully submit that what this initiative aims to ban has not been found to cause every disease or annoying symptom ever described.*

*and not even "any and all forms of poisoning".
**come to think of it, Jensen may be onto something by citing "diminished intelligence".

Last edited by Jackmannii; 02-14-2018 at 11:07 AM.
  #23  
Old 02-14-2018, 11:11 AM
Morgenstern Morgenstern is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Southern California
Posts: 11,866
I see she left the vapors off that list. Proof she doesn't know shit.
  #24  
Old 02-14-2018, 11:12 AM
RickJay RickJay is offline
Charter Jays Fan
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Oakville, Canada
Posts: 39,700
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jackmannii View Post
Because that's how many signatures (5% of eligible voters)
If my math's correct, 366,000 would be about two percent of eligible voters. There are just over 18,000,000 eligible voters in California.

Five percent of that is almost a million people.

Are two percent of people stupid? Of course.
__________________
Providing useless posts since 1999!
  #25  
Old 02-14-2018, 11:12 AM
mhendo mhendo is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 24,855
Quote:
Originally Posted by Morgenstern View Post
Silence the voice of the people! How dare they demand things.
The whole initiative process seems, at first glance, like an admirable exercise of democracy, with the people taking control of the political process. What could be bad about that, right? And when it was passed in 1911, during Progressive-era concern about political corruption, it did indeed fulfill some of that promise. But it's become a bloated and distorted system that is no less subject to venality and stupidity and "special interest" pressures than the legislature itself.

I understand why people want to wrest control of political issues away from politicians, but the initiative system has, in many ways, made the system less able to respond to changing circumstances, and has hamstrung the legislature in ways that actually make it less effective. Politicians aren't perfect, but we elect them to govern, and the initiative process, as currently implemented, makes that far more difficult. Californians complain about Sacramento being inept and useless, but if that's the case, the current system is at least partly to blame.

In the 1970s, the ballot initiative gave us a stipulation that any tax increase require a two-thirds majority of both houses of the state legislature. This measure makes it incredibly easy to reduce taxes, and incredibly hard to raise them when the state's financial situation requires it. Then, last year, the legislature did manage to get the required two-thirds vote and passed an increase in the state gasoline tax. Now, there are people camped outside supermarkets wanting to repeal the tax, and calling for a public vote on ANY tax increase.

I'm not arguing for or against the new gas tax. On the one hand, we could use some spending on infrastructure and transportation; on the other, Sacramento often siphons off money from gas taxes into the general fund and doesn't actually do enough work on the roads. There are reasonable arguments to be made on both sides.

But the ballot measure process in California has turned into a sort of electoral heckler's veto, where anyone with enough money to pay some signature-gatherers, or any crazy idea with a few hundred thousand mouth-breathing supporters, can gum up the political works with their pet causes.
  #26  
Old 02-14-2018, 11:15 AM
ElvisL1ves ElvisL1ves is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The land of the mouse
Posts: 47,034
You mean, are there only 366,000 stupid Californians, right?
  #27  
Old 02-14-2018, 11:16 AM
Do Not Taunt Do Not Taunt is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Seattle
Posts: 2,169
I generally like initiatives. Sometimes elected representatives are just too fearful - or too gerrymandered - to do their job right. We legalized recreational marijuana by initiative here in Washington back in 2012 after the legislature refused to do anything about it. Same story on same-sex marriage.

Two things, though: here in Washington, the title of the initiative is written by a neutral party - the Secretary of State, I believe. I also think courts can have some oversight here. But the party writing and pushing the initiative definitely cannot give it a title like "Clean Environment Initiative" if that isn't really what it does. Initiatives are also limited to a single subject, so a title would probably end up being more specific.

Secondly, and this is where initiatives in Washington have problems, people will generally vote for new spending programs and for tax cuts. You can't run a government that way. If I had my druthers, initiatives would have to either be budget-neutral, or revenue effect minus spending effect should be positive.
  #28  
Old 02-14-2018, 11:19 AM
Do Not Taunt Do Not Taunt is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Seattle
Posts: 2,169
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhendo View Post
In the 1970s, the ballot initiative gave us a stipulation that any tax increase require a two-thirds majority of both houses of the state legislature.
Another thing that's different in Washington is that we can't amend the Constitution by initiative, and law changes can be later amended by the legislature (I think after two years.) Basically, I think we do initiatives better than y'all do, but the argument should really be around reforming the process to make it work better, rather than abolishing it entirely.
  #29  
Old 02-14-2018, 11:20 AM
Chimera Chimera is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: In the Dreaming
Posts: 24,090
Quote:
Originally Posted by RickJay View Post
Are two percent of people stupid? Of course.
Pretty much what I came to say.

2% of the population will support any goddamned stupid idea or theory.

"Should we engage in diplomatic discussions with the cows to purchase their milk from them?"
"Do plants have rights?"
'Would you agree that we're illegally sending probes to Mars without the permission of the Martians?"

Yeah, you'd probably get at least 2% of the general population to support any of those.
__________________
Have lost my patience with the refusal to moderate trolls and hate on this board and am taking a break.
  #30  
Old 02-14-2018, 11:22 AM
EddyTeddyFreddy's Avatar
EddyTeddyFreddy EddyTeddyFreddy is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Exurbia, No'thuh Bawst'n
Posts: 12,993
Quote:
Originally Posted by Morgenstern View Post
I see she left the vapors off that list. Proof she doesn't know shit.
And what about collywobbles and glanders? Huh? Huh?
  #31  
Old 02-14-2018, 11:26 AM
Morgenstern Morgenstern is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Southern California
Posts: 11,866
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chimera View Post
...

2% of the population will support any goddamned stupid idea or theory.

...
Actually it was 46.4%
  #32  
Old 02-14-2018, 11:32 AM
Buck Godot's Avatar
Buck Godot Buck Godot is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: MD outside DC
Posts: 4,912
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nava View Post
. Reminds me of one of my Idiot Aunt's speeches: there's no link between roasting herself at the beach with no sunscreen and breast cancer, her breast cancer was caused by radiation.
Someone needs to write up a Dihydrogen Monoxide style petition to shut down the space based fusion powered radiation emitter that as well as being the primary contributor to global warming, causes thousands of cancer deaths each year.

Last edited by Buck Godot; 02-14-2018 at 11:37 AM.
  #33  
Old 02-14-2018, 11:38 AM
EddyTeddyFreddy's Avatar
EddyTeddyFreddy EddyTeddyFreddy is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Exurbia, No'thuh Bawst'n
Posts: 12,993
Here's a comprehensive rundown of the initiative process in Massachusetts, which is less freewheeling than California's. Marijuana was legalized via initiative, but the law still isn't fully in effect because the legislature had a shot at amending what the voters chose, and now the regulatory apparatus has to do its song and dance to get the retail licensing and regulation system set up and operating. As it stands now, you can own and smoke pot legally but you still can't go down to your corner pot store to buy it.

Well, as far as the state government is concerned, you're okay to have marijuana; the new U.S. Attorney came in yapping about intending to uphold Sessions' doom to potheads mandate (but after public blowback and meeting with state elected officials has since toned it down). So recreational as well as medical marijuana (legalized earlier) is still in a state of flux here.
  #34  
Old 02-14-2018, 11:39 AM
EddyTeddyFreddy's Avatar
EddyTeddyFreddy EddyTeddyFreddy is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Exurbia, No'thuh Bawst'n
Posts: 12,993
Quote:
Originally Posted by Buck Godot View Post
Someone needs to write up a Dihydrogen Monoxide style petition to shut down the space based fusion powered radiation emitter that as well as being the primary contributor to global warming, causes thousands of cancer deaths each year.
I'd sign that!
  #35  
Old 02-14-2018, 12:24 PM
Nava Nava is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Hey! I'm located! WOOOOW!
Posts: 38,789
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jackmannii View Post
I respectfully submit that what this initiative aims to ban has not been found to cause every disease or annoying symptom ever described.*

*and not even "any and all forms of poisoning".
**come to think of it, Jensen may be onto something by citing "diminished intelligence".
How do you define a "poison"? Last I checked, it was a toxic chemical. A real one, not "something that I think I can cleanse through coffee enemas". If poisoning isn't caused by poisons what is it caused by, microwave ovens? Someone should have notified Socrates!
__________________
Life ain't peaches and cream, but sometimes it's laughing your ass off when you have no ass. - WhyNot
  #36  
Old 02-14-2018, 12:26 PM
Shodan Shodan is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Milky Way Galaxy
Posts: 37,046
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jackmannii View Post
"We, Californians, have the right in our person and families to live, as free as possible, from toxic chemical or toxic process-caused cancer, paralysis, structural or functional birth defects, autism spectrum disorder, diminished intelligence, gut cell genetic alteration, seizures; pregnancy complications, developmental complications, cellular structural damage; structural and functional nerve damage, demyelination, brain tumors, Guillain-Barre syndrome, ALS; fluorosis, brittle bones; joint damage; altered thyroid, testosterone, estrogen, cortisone, sperm counts, pineal gland calcification, early or delayed puberty, extra heavy or lengthy menstrual bleeding, reproductive system damage, or other harmful hormone related impacts; Parkinson’s; Alzheimer’s; eye damage such as reduced vision, dry eyes, twitching eye lids, red eyes, watery eyes, cataracts, macular degeneration, blindness; hearing damage; intestinal bacteria die-off or alteration; chemical bums, rash, eczema, abnormal hair loss, photosensitivity, inflammation, spontaneous nose bleeding, idiopathic thrombocytopenia purpura; breathing difficulty, asthma, voice volume or frequency losses, repeated coughing, choking, rhinitis, chemical sensitivity, allergy, anaphylaxis, immune system deregulation, lupus, fibromyalgia; pancreas, kidney, spleen or liver damage, diabetes; interference with sleep, inability to concentrate; pain, headache, racing heart; body retention of the toxic substance or its’ breakdown products; invasion of living cell wall structures by nanoparticles; or changes to the body’s genetic material, or other adverse conditions"
It's never lupus.

Regards,
Shodan
  #37  
Old 02-14-2018, 12:29 PM
Jackmannii Jackmannii is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: the extreme center
Posts: 29,817
Quote:
Originally Posted by RickJay View Post
If my math's correct, 366,000 would be about two percent of eligible voters. There are just over 18,000,000 eligible voters in California.

Five percent of that is almost a million people.
I read an article that had it as 5% of voters. This source has it as 5% of voters in a recent election.

"With the state authorization, Jensen is now clear to start collecting signatures to get the initiative on the ballot this November. She'll need to collect valid signatures from 365,880 registered voters—five percent of the total votes cast for governor in the November 2014 general election—in order to qualify. She has until August 8 to do so."

https://www.motherjones.com/environm...nia-standards/

In pre-Internet, pre-alternative media (and pre-alternate fact) days, it would've been next to impossible to collect enough signatures. But now - I suspect that Facebook conspiracy and other wackoid groups alone number close to that many California members, nearly all of whom would be eager to sign the petition, assuming they can write legibly and spell their names.
  #38  
Old 02-14-2018, 12:33 PM
Gorsnak Gorsnak is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Saskaboom
Posts: 8,998
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nava View Post
How do you define a "poison"? Last I checked, it was a toxic chemical. A real one, not "something that I think I can cleanse through coffee enemas". If poisoning isn't caused by poisons what is it caused by, microwave ovens? Someone should have notified Socrates!
Most anything is a poison at some dosage. Dihydrogen monoxide has an LD50 of 90ml/kg.
  #39  
Old 02-14-2018, 12:33 PM
Stranger On A Train Stranger On A Train is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Manor Farm
Posts: 17,971
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Mace View Post
True. But we do OK for ourselves, and somehow manage to eke out a living.
We also have fantastic food, beautiful natural scenery of mountains, desert, old growth forests, alpine meadows, and coastal ranges, some of the most progressive political and social movements in the country, one of the great land grant public research university systems, Caltech, the Golden Gate Bridge, the world’s sixth largest economy, zero publc monuments to the Confederacy, and a metric fuckton of sun. So putting up with a few hundred thousand nutters is like coping with drought, living with the nation’s highest gas prices, and enduring the occasional significant earthquake. Totally worth it.

Stranger
  #40  
Old 02-14-2018, 12:38 PM
Morgenstern Morgenstern is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Southern California
Posts: 11,866
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jackmannii View Post
I read an article that had it as 5% of voters. This source has it as 5% of voters in a recent election.

"With the state authorization, Jensen is now clear to start collecting signatures to get the initiative on the ballot this November. She'll need to collect valid signatures from 365,880 registered voters—five percent of the total votes cast for governor in the November 2014 general election—in order to qualify. She has until August 8 to do so."

https://www.motherjones.com/environm...nia-standards/

In pre-Internet, pre-alternative media (and pre-alternate fact) days, it would've been next to impossible to collect enough signatures. But now - I suspect that Facebook conspiracy and other wackoid groups alone number close to that many California members, nearly all of whom would be eager to sign the petition, assuming they can write legibly and spell their names.
Those have to be registered voters too. So she probably needs well over 500k siggies.
  #41  
Old 02-14-2018, 12:54 PM
kaylasdad99 kaylasdad99 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Anaheim, CA
Posts: 29,683
Quote:
Originally Posted by Icarus View Post
I think when I retire I'll start an initiative to get rid of the initiative process. It'll be my hobby.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Morgenstern View Post
Silence the voice of the people! How dare they demand things.
Meh. The California initiative process, which takes the form of binding referendums, has given us some pretty stupid ill-advised (at least in hindsight) outcomes, Prop. 13 and term limits being among the most egregious.

I used to sign all petitions to get initiatives on the ballot, on the well-meaning assumption that "Hell, there ain't hardly anything that's too dangerous to at least talk about."

Turns out that assuming that "talk[ing] about it" was a given was optimistic, at best (full disclosure: I wised up in this regard several years before the Knight Initiative came along)

Nowadays, I find myself liking the non-binding referendum model that is used in Hawaii.
  #42  
Old 02-14-2018, 12:56 PM
RickJay RickJay is offline
Charter Jays Fan
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Oakville, Canada
Posts: 39,700
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jackmannii View Post
I read an article that had it as 5% of voters. This source has it as 5% of voters in a recent election.

"With the state authorization, Jensen is now clear to start collecting signatures to get the initiative on the ballot this November. She'll need to collect valid signatures from 365,880 registered voters—five percent of the total votes cast for governor in the November 2014 general election—in order to qualify. She has until August 8 to do so."
That's a different measure, 5% of the number of votes cast for governor, as opposed to 5% of eligible voters.
__________________
Providing useless posts since 1999!
  #43  
Old 02-14-2018, 12:59 PM
Locrian Locrian is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Valley Village, CA
Posts: 3,836
A water main burst in the San Fernando valley and there was some flooding on some streets last year. More than half the people in the area were screaming about how can we waste our resources. I had to explain to them that if the water doesn't burst in a few different areas and we flood, the building where the main burst would be gone, exploded, blown to pieces, everyone inside dead, NO water service for weeks and a major flood.

So, yes, there are at least 366,000 stupid people here and actually anywhere.
  #44  
Old 02-14-2018, 01:02 PM
Morgenstern Morgenstern is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Southern California
Posts: 11,866
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaylasdad99 View Post
Meh. The California initiative process, which takes the form of binding referendums, has given us some pretty stupid ill-advised (at least in hindsight) outcomes, Prop. 13 and term limits being among the most egregious.

I used to sign all petitions to get initiatives on the ballot, on the well-meaning assumption that "Hell, there ain't hardly anything that's too dangerous to at least talk about."

Turns out that assuming that "talk[ing] about it" was a given was optimistic, at best (full disclosure: I wised up in this regard several years before the Knight Initiative came along)

Nowadays, I find myself liking the non-binding referendum model that is used in Hawaii.


What about the Gas Tax Repeal Initiative? Are you signing that or are you willing to let the legislature put their hand deeper into your pocket? (you're in CA right?) The people didn't get to vote on implementing that tax, but it appears we'll get to vote on repealing it. Seems fair all things considered.

Last edited by Morgenstern; 02-14-2018 at 01:03 PM. Reason: spkjelling
  #45  
Old 02-14-2018, 01:05 PM
kaylasdad99 kaylasdad99 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Anaheim, CA
Posts: 29,683
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jackmannii View Post
The author of the ballot initiative, Cheriel Jensen says:

"We, Californians, have the right in our person and families to live, as free as possible, from toxic chemical or toxic process-caused cancer, paralysis, structural or functional birth defects, autism spectrum disorder, diminished intelligence, gut cell genetic alteration, seizures; pregnancy complications, developmental complications, cellular structural damage; structural and functional nerve damage, demyelination, brain tumors, Guillain-Barre syndrome, ALS; fluorosis, brittle bones; joint damage; altered thyroid, testosterone, estrogen, cortisone, sperm counts, pineal gland calcification, early or delayed puberty, extra heavy or lengthy menstrual bleeding, reproductive system damage, or other harmful hormone related impacts; Parkinson’s; Alzheimer’s; eye damage such as reduced vision, dry eyes, twitching eye lids, red eyes, watery eyes, cataracts, macular degeneration, blindness; hearing damage; intestinal bacteria die-off or alteration; chemical bums, rash, eczema, abnormal hair loss, photosensitivity, inflammation, spontaneous nose bleeding, idiopathic thrombocytopenia purpura; breathing difficulty, asthma, voice volume or frequency losses, repeated coughing, choking, rhinitis, chemical sensitivity, allergy, anaphylaxis, immune system deregulation, lupus, fibromyalgia; pancreas, kidney, spleen or liver damage, diabetes; interference with sleep, inability to concentrate; pain, headache, racing heart; body retention of the toxic substance or its’ breakdown products; invasion of living cell wall structures by nanoparticles; or changes to the body’s genetic material, or other adverse conditions".
Good Gawd, woman, if you want to run a multigenerational experiment to determine the effects of putting an entire ecosystem and its population into a hermetically sealed bubble, could you at least choose a somewhat more limited geographical arena, with a smaller population?

Or rent Bio-Dome.
  #46  
Old 02-14-2018, 01:21 PM
kaylasdad99 kaylasdad99 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Anaheim, CA
Posts: 29,683
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaylasdad99 View Post
Meh. The California initiative process, which takes the form of binding referendums, has given us some pretty stupid ill-advised (at least in hindsight) outcomes, Prop. 13 and term limits being among the most egregious.

I used to sign all petitions to get initiatives on the ballot, on the well-meaning assumption that "Hell, there ain't hardly anything that's too dangerous to at least talk about."

Turns out that assuming that "talk[ing] about it" was a given was optimistic, at best (full disclosure: I wised up in this regard several years before the Knight Initiative came along)

Nowadays, I find myself liking the non-binding referendum model that is used in Hawaii.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Morgenstern View Post
What about the Gas Tax Repeal Initiative? Are you signing that or are you willing to let the legislature put their hand deeper into your pocket? (you're in CA right?) The people didn't get to vote on implementing that tax, but it appears we'll get to vote on repealing it. Seems fair all things considered.
Yes, I am in California. Hence my distrust for the notion that our initiative process is a panacea of any kind.

For the record, I am voting AGAINST the Gas Tax Repeal Initiative (assuming that it makes the ballot). I'm also voting against the recall of Josh Newman. I don't sit in either chamber of the state Assembly, but my votes were counted when we put in the members who do.

Last edited by kaylasdad99; 02-14-2018 at 01:23 PM.
  #47  
Old 02-14-2018, 01:27 PM
kaylasdad99 kaylasdad99 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Anaheim, CA
Posts: 29,683
oh, and by the way...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Morgenstern View Post
The people didn't get to vote on implementing that tax, but it appears we'll get to vote on repealing it. Seems fair all things considered.
No, all things considered it DOESN'T seem "fair;" it seems bass-ackwards. Send them to Sacramento to take care of our business, then micromanage them so they can't?

Fuck that.
  #48  
Old 02-14-2018, 01:30 PM
Stranger On A Train Stranger On A Train is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Manor Farm
Posts: 17,971
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaylasdad99 View Post
Good Gawd, woman, if you want to run a multigenerational experiment to determine the effects of putting an entire ecosystem and its population into a hermetically sealed bubble, could you at least choose a somewhat more limited geographical arena, with a smaller population?

Or rent Bio-Dome.
We’ll throw in Stephen Baldwin and Pauly Shore for free.

Stranger
  #49  
Old 02-14-2018, 01:41 PM
Morgenstern Morgenstern is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Southern California
Posts: 11,866
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaylasdad99 View Post
No, all things considered it DOESN'T seem "fair;" it seems bass-ackwards. Send them to Sacramento to take care of our business, then micromanage them so they can't?

Fuck that.
Come on bro, it's the California legislature. What on earth makes you think they don't need micromanaged. The same legislature that passed a bill, SB 1383: to Control Cow Flatulence?

(SB 1383 requires the state to cut methane emissions from dairy cows and other animals by 40% by 2030.)

They've got some serious reengineering to do to get the emissions of those cows within range.

I think micromanaging the CA legislature is a fine idea.
  #50  
Old 02-14-2018, 02:03 PM
Jackmannii Jackmannii is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: the extreme center
Posts: 29,817
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jackmannii
I read an article that had it as 5% of voters. This source has it as 5% of voters in a recent election.

"With the state authorization, Jensen is now clear to start collecting signatures to get the initiative on the ballot this November. She'll need to collect valid signatures from 365,880 registered voters—five percent of the total votes cast for governor in the November 2014 general election—in order to qualify. She has until August 8 to do so."
Quote:
Originally Posted by RickJay View Post
That's a different measure, 5% of the number of votes cast for governor, as opposed to 5% of eligible voters.
Why yes Rick, it is different. Thanks for pointing that out.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:26 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017