This may be a little late, but does anyone have any thoughts on these ballot propositions? I’m usually baffled and/or ignorant about what they are and then I end up voting “No” on them by default, or I just skip over them.
Prop. 93 has both “Yes” and “No” supporters arguing for term limits. It seems like it just changes the term limit scheme, possibly to something that is better. But the way the both sides seem to be misrepresenting it makes me want to ignore it, too.
I haven’t looked into the other two. Has anyone else?
Prop 91 is interesting…the argument *for *the Proposition is summed up with “We respectfully urge you to vote NO ON PROPOSITION 91.”…
Apparently the proposition has been ‘superseded’ by another proposition (1A) that was on the November 2006 ballot. So Prop 91 is now ‘obsolete’. I don’t know *what *happens if it should actually pass…
I think that this year, like most, I will end up voting ‘No’ on all of the propositions on the ballot…
The proposition process in California long ago stopped being a useful legislative tool for the populace. Any more, it’s just a way for monied special interests to sell us a bill of goods.
Sadly, history shows us Californians to be enthusiastic customers.
That said, what have we got?
Prop. 91 NO, please. Inviting thirty million people to band together in micromanaging the state’s finances can only have BAD unintended consequences.
Prop. 92 No, please. Unless my understanding is faulty, the community college system is a part of the University of California. The UC system has suffered mightily since the days when it was one of the crown jewels of the American system of higher education, but it needs to be restored to greatness by professionals who know what they’re doing, supported by courageous leaders, not monkeyed around with. Yes, community college has to be kept affordable for attendees, but the way to do that needs to be implemented responsibly and accountably.
Prop. 93 NO, please. Speaking of bills of goods and unintended consequences. Term limits can’t be fixed, and tweaking the details of it is a waste of time, money, and energy. Just do away with term limits already, that’s what I’m waiting for.
Prop. 94-97 (identical except for the tribes involved). NO, please. The Governator can negotiate something better than this. Those tribes REALLY want the extra slot machines, and they will deal. I’m particularly annoyed since I learned that the $9 Billion hype that was going around referred to the potential revenues over a period of 22 years. And the scare commercials they’ve been running the past couple of days haven’t helped any.
Apparently, an overwhelmingly large majority of voters were in the booth, going **eeny-meeny-miney-moe, catch a prop by the toe ** to make their picks, despite the “Please vote no on our proposition” statement in the voter pamphlet that was mailed out to everyone a few weeks ago.
Doesn’t bode well for us if people really are paying that little attention.
Yeah. WTF is up with that? The guys who wrote the thing said to vote against it. No argument for it was presented. Are 42% of the voters just purposefully being asses or are they that clueless or what?
Why? When I vote in person, I study the ballot in the days before the election and then mark up the sample ballot with my choices. The actual voting is just making marks on paper.
I’m a lot more concerned with people not being informed about the issues until moments before they vote.