You mean, like F (lower the voting age to 16 for local elections), N (allowing non-citizens who are parents of school-age children to vote for school board members), and Q (banning tents on public sidewalks)? How about W (a 0.25% increase in the tax on selling your house/building if it’s $5 million or more, or 0.5% if it’s $25 million or more)?
Bernie Sanders is back in CA supporting the Yes on 61 vote.
“The time is long overdue for the American people too stand up to the greed of the pharmaceutical industry,” Sanders says in the 30-second TV spot that began running last week. “Proposition 61 is a very, very important step forward … and will be a real blow against this greedy industry that will reverberate all over America.”
I saw the TV ad last night for the first time.
This is my approach too. My test for voting yes is, “Is this something that is on fire? Will my yes vote be a bucket of water on the fire?” So, in that spirit #59 is the only one that comes even close to that test - but it is nowhere near aflame IMHO, (more like not cold to the touch).
Grocery bags? Condoms? Really? REALLY? Petty distractions!
And it isn’t a bucket of water - it’s a sheet of paper that says, “Somebody please throw a bucket of water on this.”
Just got my CA voter guide. It’s 223 pages. And NOT because it’s printed in multiple languages-- mine is all English. I can hardly wait to read it…
My favorite Irvine-based data-driven left-leaning blogger, Kevin Drun, just put out his endorsements. I often disagree with his conclusions on these things, but it’s nice to have one individual’s well-argued perspective. California Voters Were Hit With a Blizzard of Ballot Propositions. Here’s Your Cheat Sheet. – Mother Jones
Of those 223 pages, 100 of them are dedicated to descriptions of the ballot propositions. Each one consists of:
(a) a 1/2-page summary
(b) a 3 1/2-page analysis (usually - some are 1 1/2; some are 5 1/2);
(c) a page in favor of the proposition and a rebuttal to that statement;
(d) a page against the proposition and a rebuttal to that statement
Another 105 pages are dedicated entirely to the text of the laws that are being added/modified by the propositions.
We shouldn’t over exaggerate - you’re right. No one’s reading the legal texts.
Still: Each proposition is pretty manageable on its own,* but i think it’s ridiculous to expect an optimal outcome from having voters voluntarily research each of the 17 on the state ballot.
*Exception: Prop 61
My two cents:
Prop 51 (Issues 9 billion dollars in bonds for California’s K-12 schools and community colleges)-YES, California’s public education systems used to be the best in the nation and it is time we made California Schools Great Again. This builds new schools to ease overcrowding and modernizes existing facilities that were neglected during the Great Recession. Additionally, it funds community colleges and vocational educational programs that will secure good jobs for tens if not hundreds of thousands of California youth and brings college costs under control. Finally it will serve to stimulate the state economy by creating a new boom in construction. While this measure does not target low-income school districts (probably the most persuasive counterargument), its unlikely the state’s voters will approve such a means-tested initiative and by focusing on vocational education, these bonds will stand to benefit working-class Californians.
Prop 52 (Extends current fees on hospitals that are used to fund MediCal as well as obtain matching federal funds for it while requiring voter approval to divert this funding elsewhere)-YES, MediCal is a chronically underfunded healthcare program that millions of low-income Californians depend on for their well being and to avoid the disaster of medical bankruptcy. This initiative would secure this source of funding for the future and make sure voters will have a say should politicians try to divert it elsewhere.
Prop 53 (Requires voters to approve any new infrastructure bonds controlled wholly or partly by the state that exceeds $2 billion in value)-NO, like Prop 13 that helped devastate California’s hitherto excellent public school system, this is a scheme by reactionary plutocratic forces to set up roadblocks on public spending to improve California infrastructure and stimulate the economy so they can avoid paying taxes. Additionally by forcing a statewide vote on local projects in which the state is partly involved it erodes local control.
Prop 54 (Prohibits the legislature from passing any laws until the bill has been posted in print and online for 72 hours and permits individuals to record proceedings)-YES, while I’m sceptical of the bill due to it being bankrolled by a plutocrat presumably to use any delays to mobilize lobbyists and reactionary forces, on the whole it promises to be a measure that will promote open and good government while prohibiting legislators from making last minute amendments based on backroom deals. Of course using this measure for good will require public political mobilization and awareness, but that is something I’m optimistic that we’ll be able to improve upon.
Prop 55 (Extends state income tax increases approved in 2012 on those with more then 250k a year from 2019 to 2030)-YES, after long last California has achieved a balanced budget under Governor Brown and we have finally begun endeavours to restore the immense damage done to education and other funding during the years of deficit and recession. This measure ensures that we continue to have revenue sources to prevent future disastrous cuts in event of another recessions and that the wealthiest Californians pay their fair share.
Prop 56 (Increases the cigarette tax by two dollars a pack and extends it other tobacco products including e-cigarettes with most of the revenue going to healthcare and tobacco prevention programs)-YES, tobacco is a thoroughly noxious substance that causes untold human suffering while being a public nuisance to all those around it. Any measure that serves to undermine and reduce its usage without an outright ban (which would bring on all the cons of a War on Drugs) is a good thing in my book especially when the funding here will be used to provide healthcare and prevent future tobacco usage. It is quite telling that most of the No campaign is being funded by the tobacco companies themselves.
Prop 57 (Allows “nonviolent” felons to be considered for parole once they finish their prison terms for their primary offense while allowing sentence credit to be given to meritorious prisoners and gives judges rather then prosecutors discretion on whether to try juveniles as adults)-YES, this is a reluctant vote on the whole because California defines only a handful of felonies as “nonviolent” which does not include domestic violence, assault with a deadly weapon, and rape of unconscious persons. However, I do think on the whole parole boards will have sufficient wisdom to recognize the actual nature of these crimes and prevent their early release while the legislature hopefully will be encouraged to take action. Meanwhile, this provides a partial solution to the court orders for the alleviation of overcrowding in California prisons thus saving taxpayers money and also encourages rehabilitation among prisoners.
Prop 58 (Repeals Prop 227 from 1998 which required English immersion programs for English-learning public school students unless parents got a waiver and gives legislature authority to make changes in language education programs)-NO, creeping Quebeckization of California must be prevented at costs to preserve national solidarity and combat social atomization that divides rather then unites Californians and Americans. English immersion programs have been immensely successful in integrating Spanish and other foreign language speaking students into the mainstream of California life allowing them to achieve success in education and jobs. This undermines it by giving the legislature potential authority to create programs that will end up segregating English learning students from their peers in programs that may be almost entirely Hispanophone thus damaging their future prospects which by preventing assimilation lays the seed for ethnic divide and tension which by preventing the unity of the masses retards concerted social action,. There are already many opportunities for California students to learn foreign languages-let’s increase funding for them without doing a disservice to millions of new Americans.
Prop 59 (Recommends that state elected officials fight to pass a constitutional amendment overturning Citizens United which would also clarify that corporations are not persons)-YES, while this somewhat of a frivolous ballot measure in that it will not have the force of law, we must consider the current situation of the Republic where plutocratic forces exert disproportionate influence upon the mechanics of government. Passing this measure would give voice to the popular movements as embodied by Senator Sanders’s miraculously successful Presidential candidacy that stand against Moneyed Reaction. Should this be approved, the most populous State in the Union will send a thunderous and united support for a truly democratic politics.
Prop 60 (Requires porn performers to use condoms and holds those funding the films liable if they fail to do so)-YES, this measure helps prevent the spread of STDs among porn performers and their partners, which as we saw in recent years are still at risk of exposure especially when greedy pornographers take advantage of their power to circumvent condom usage. Additionally, this will further promote the need for safe sex among the population at large. While some have argued this will drive the porn industry out of the state, I confess that I don’t see this as a negative and if this contributes to a “cleaner” California sense all the more better.
Prop 61 (Requires state agencies with the exception of managed care programs under MediCal to pay no more then the Department of Veteran’s Affairs does for prescription drugs from pharmaceutical companies)-YES, this is admittedly a very risky gamble considering the enormous uncertainties associated with how Big Pharma will react to legislation that may result in Big Pharma either refusing to pay VA prices to state agencies (since the pharmaceutical companies aren’t obligated to do so) or jacking up VA prices. However, the fact remains that one of the biggest drivers of healthcare costs in the United States (and especially why we spend a higher percentage of GDP on healthcare compared to other developed countries) is because the US government does not have the sort of broad authority to negotiate for lower drug and other costs (even Medicare unfortunately has no power to do this cf. Medicare Part D). This initiative’s success would significantly shift the Overton Window and be the opening shots of a national campaign to finally give the State its rightful authority to bring healthcare costs down. As noted above, the zeitgeist is present with the success populist left-wing movements such as Bernie Sanders’s candidacy (who incidentally endorses this measure) and we need to seize it to bring big issues like these into the public conscious so we can work together to build a juster and more secure society for all Americans. Now is the chance for Californians to cross the Rubicon and like we have been so often before in our long and illustrious history, the state will be once again at the forefront of constructive social action and progress. If you only have enough ink on your pen to vote on one ballot initiative, vote YES on Prop 61.
Prop 62 (Abolishes death penalty in California and replaces the sentences of those on death row with life in prison without parole. Also mandates forced labour for these inmates to provide restitution to the families of victims)-YES, as I said four years ago I’m not a categorical opponent of the death penalty since there are indeed irredeemable serial killers, mass shooters, cartel bosses, terrorists, war criminals, and the like who have lost any right to life they may have possessed. However, the death penalty as carried out in California and the rest of the Republic is a disaster, with it taking decades for people to (possibly) be put to death after being given the sentence and in the mean time costing the public millions in countless appeals and reviews. Additionally there is a nontrivial risk of innocents being put to death as indicated by exoneration of many on Death Row due to new DNA evidence and there also clearly are racial disparities in how death penalties are given. For all these reasons, I think the abolition of the death penalty and replacing it with life without parole is an optimal solution unless we were to propose a thoroughly revised form of the death penalty. Prop 66 is problematic in that it does increase the risk of executing innocents and may additionally increase costs by its provisions.
Prop 63 (Increases numerous gun control measures including requiring licenses to purchase ammo, removes grandfather clause on large-capacity magazine ban, reclassification of gun thefts as felonies)-NO, this is a somewhat confusing ballot measure for me because much of these provisions appears to have been already passed by the state legislature and this seems to be simply codifying it in the State Constitution. In light of the confusion and my view that the Second Amendment (in line with the rest of the Bill of Rights) should be interpreted as a broad individual right to firearms, I’m pretty sceptical of Prop 63 and thus impelled to vote no.
Prop 64 (Legalizes recreational marijuana and hemp and imposes cultivation as well as sales taxes on the substance along with certain regulations)-YES, while “it’s 2016” argument in general is pretty retarded imo especially given this year’s events, I think it’s applicable here. Marijuana is absolutely less harmful then either tobacco or alcohol while countless lives have been damaged by enforcing bans on its usage and the legalization of the substance has proven successful in other states such as Colorado and Washington. I think its time California followed suit especially when it raises revenue from it for the public good.
Prop 65 (Redirects revenues from paper bag sales in grocery stores to environment-related spending)-NO. Since this initiative and Prop 67 are mutually exclusive, consult the reasoning below.
Prop 66 (Streamlines death penalty by having superior court take up initial appeals on death penalty, limits further appeals, imposes time limits on sentence reviews, requires appointed attorneys who take non-capital cases to take capital cases as well, and allows death row inmates to be placed in any state prison)-NO. Since this intitative and Prop 62 are mutually exclusive, consult the reasoning above.
Prop 67 (Bans plastic bags and allows sales of recycled paper/reusable bags at a minimum of 10 cents per bag)-YES. I don’t feel too strongly about this but Prop 65 appears to be a strategem by the plastic bag companies to pass a deceptively similar legislation which if it gets more votes then 67 may prevent a plastic bag ban since there’s no explicit language on it there. Banning plastic bags is not an unreasonable preposition so this’s my decision I guess.
Good summary, Qin. We are largely in accord.
I heard today that if Prop 60 passes, the porn websites are going to somehow shut access to their sites from people in CA. If there is any truth to that, or any way they could accomplish it, then the measure will surely go down in flames. Most would not admit to it, but I am sure there are a lot of people thinking “You can take my porn only when you pry it from my cold, dead hands”.
The other thing I heard today is that Prop 61 has had the most money invested in it of any CA proposition, ever. All funded (opposing) by Pharma. They really want it defeated, for some reason.
AFAIK, the only way to keep a website’s access in some states but not others is to base it on the addresses of the credit cards used (which is how I think things like DirecTV enforcing local-game blackouts for NFL Sunday Ticket work). IP addresses, which are used for country-based blocking, are pretty much meaningless. Besides, does Prop 60 apply to showing porn in California, or just making it there?
(Note to self: patent the idea of a “green-screen color” condom - they can they replace it with the real thing in post-production.)
As for Big Pharma and Prop 61, look at it from their point of view; if it passes, they have to figure out where they would have to raise what they charge the VA to make up for the losses from having to lower what they charge Medi-Cal to the same amount.
Why should we increase the debt for this? And tax money is fungible, there’s no guarantee the school budgets will actually benefit.
Prop 60 is the stupidest prop on the ballot. I am voting NO! just to show the legislature how fucking stupid it is.
I’m pretty sure it wasn’t the legislature that got Prop 60 on the ballot, but signed petitions. However, I agree it is stupid.
Prop 51: No
Jerry Brown’s against it, so is the LA Times. That’s good enough for me.
Prop 52: Yes
I want Medi-Cal funded.
Prop 53: No
I don’t need state voters to have a say over local projects. That’s why we have local projects.
Prop 54: No
Transparency sounds good, but I’m very happy with my CA representatives. I’m fine with what they do and I trust them to do a good job. I don’t need, want, or care about looking at the bill 72 hours or 72 days before they act on it. Of course I’m saying this because my state is predominantly Democratic and liberal. If someday that changes to Republican, then I’ll demand transparency. Until then, this is a waste of time
Prop 55: Yes
On one hand, I get that we should force the legislature to update the tax code so we can stop relying on this supposed temporary tax increase on the rich, on the other hand, they haven’t done it and forcing their hand now will probably just create another proposition in the future to return this tax to the books, and its much harder to do that than to simply extend it. As for the rich, I have no fear they’re going to be motivated to leave by an extension of this tax. California already has high taxes compared to other states, we’ll be fine, if they leave, others will come.
Prop 56: Yes
Tax the tobacco companies out of business
Prop 57: Yes
Transfer power out of prosecutors’ hands
Prop 58: Yes
Bilingual education is good
Prop 59: Meh
Symbolic posturing? Or a step in the right direction? I don’t know and since it has no binding force, I don’t care about this prop. I’ll probably just flip a coin or something
Prop 60: No
Fuck the moral police for getting it passed in LA County and fuck them for trying to ruin porn for all Californians. The industry already has sufficient safety regulations. To me, this is like passing a law saying movies and TV shows cannot have smoking or drinking because they are vices. Leave art and entertainment alone you jackasses!
Prop 61: No
This is a good idea to try and force the drug companies into selling things cheaper, but the wrong way to go about it. I, too, share the concern that drug makers might either pull out of California or try to recoup their lost profits elsewhere
Prop 62 and 66: Yes on 62, No on 66
This is odd, I don’t remember competing and mutually exclusive propositions before. As much as I think some people need killin’, I don’t believe that we should be in the company of countries like Saudi Arabia or China in terms of offing people. If people are so suspicious of the government having your information or knowing if you have registered weapons, they should be much more concerned that the government can simply eliminate you for good. As much as some victims want to end someone who’s hurt their family or friends, I personally think life in prison is much worse than death. Its time to get rid of the death penalty once and for all. And seriously, we still use gas chambers to execute people??! That’s some Nazi shit man!
Prop 63: Yes
A lot of people here like their guns, but they try to sound reasonable by always stating that they’d be for “sensible” gun laws without typically naming what those are. Well its time to put your money where your mouth is. This law requires people who are restricted from having guns (like felons) to actually be forced to get rid of them. That’s a bad thing? It also mandates the attorney general to submit their names into a database, getting rid of the “but how do we know who is ineligible?” argument. It mandates people to report stolen or missing weapons without 5 days. What owners wouldn’t want it back or have it be traced back to him? As far as the ammo buying background check regulations, it lasts for 4 fucking years. You can apply for a permit once every 4 fucking years, ok? That’s not a burden. This law has many things that pro-gun people always talk about wanting in a sensible gun law, its time to man up and vote for it, or just fucking admit to yourselves you don’t give a shit about gun violence as long as you get to keep your precious secretly and cheaply
Prop 64: Yes
Yeah, its time to legalize pot. Ok, but speaking seriously for a minute, do you anti-pot people really think you’re going to win this? This is like gay marriage. Every election year, there’s going to be a vote on it, and every year the vote in favor is going to get closer and closer to passing. This may be the year. You’re not going to win this. All your lies and fears are going to be ignored. Pot will eventually be legal everywhere. Get over yourselves and stop living in the past. Reefer Madness was not a documentary and Shaggy is the best human member of the Scooby gang
Prop 65 and 67: No on 65, Yes on 67
On one hand, I am for helping the environment. On the other hand, plastic bags are unbeatable to line the inside of trash cans. But these laws only regulate the free bags given out at grocery stores, who are really charging us higher prices so they can hand them out. But I’m pro-environment, and I already have several multi-use cloth bags. If I have to actually buy a packet of plastic bags in the future to use for my trash cans, so be it
Ugh. Really?
Transparency is a good thing. And when we demand correct process only from our political opponents, those demands should rightly be seen as partisanship, not a real desire for a better political process.
Prop. 61 has me scratching my head some. Apparently, the actual effect is difficult to predict, on account of the fact that we don’t know for certain how much discount (IF ANY) the Department of Veterans Affairs has been able to negotiate from the pharmaceutical companies. And the reason we don’t know is because such information is contained in confidential agreements, to which the public is not permitted access.
Well, if it passes, the state will be required to pay no more for the drugs than the Department of Veterans Affairs. But I don’t see how the state will find out, as the Proposition doesn’t affect the confidentiality of those agreements.
So how is it supposed to work?
Bernie Sanders was at a pro-61 rally in Sacramento yesterday, and we got a robocall from him the other night.
I guess everyone, with good reason, has spent most of the evening focused on the nationwide story. Well, stick a fork in Hillary, because it looks like she’s done.
I thought i’d update the latest numbers for the CA propositions. I’m going to crib the descriptions from Pleonast’s OP.
All numbers from the LA Times. Numbers current as of about 11pm, Pacific, with about 34-35% of precincts reporting.
In places where i’ve written PASSED, i’m basing this on the conclusion drawn by the newspaper, not my own impressions.
51 School Bonds. Funding for K-12 School and Community College Facilities. Initiative Statute.
Yes: 52.5
No: 47.5
52 Medi-Cal Hospital Fee Program. Initiative Constitutional Amendment and Statute.
Yes: 70.1
No: 29.9
PASSED
53 Revenue Bonds. Statewide Voter Approval. Initiative Constitutional Amendment.
Yes: 49.4
No: 50.6
54 Legislature. Legislation and Proceedings. Initiative Constitutional Amendment and Statute.
Yes: 63.9
No: 36.1
PASSED
55 Tax Extension to Fund Education and Healthcare. Initiative Constitutional Amendment.
Yes: 61.5
No: 38.5
PASSED
56 Cigarette Tax to Fund Healthcare, Tobacco Use Prevention, Research, and Law Enforcement. Initiative Constitutional Amendment and Statute.
Yes: 62.5
No: 37.5
[Not sure why they haven’t called this one yet]
57 Criminal Sentences. Parole. Juvenile Criminal Proceedings and Sentencing. Initiative Constitutional Amendment and Statute.
Yes: 64.6
No: 35.4
PASSED
58 English Proficiency. Multilingual Education. Initiative Statute.
Yes: 72.6
No: 27.4
PASSED
59 Corporations. Political Spending. Federal Constitutional Protections. Legislative Advisory Question.
Yes: 53.0
No: 47.0
60 Adult Films. Condoms. Health Requirements. Initiative Statute.
Yes: 46.2
No: 53.8
61 State Prescription Drug Purchases. Pricing Standards. Initiative Statute.
Yes: 45.8
No: 54.2
62 Death Penalty. Initiative Statute.
Yes: 45.3
No: 54.7
63 Firearms. Ammunition Sales. Initiative Statute.
Yes: 62.7
No: 37.3
PASSED
64 Marijuana Legalization. Initiative Statute.
Yes: 55.7
No: 44.3
PASSED
65 Carry-Out Bags. Charges. Initiative Statute.
Yes: 44.1
No: 55.9
66 Death Penalty. Procedures. Initiative Statute.
Yes: 51.6
No: 48.4
67 Ban on Single-Use Plastic Bags. Referendum.
Yes: 51.7
No: 48.3
Just one observation of my own:
The only result here that i’m really, really disappointed in is Prop 66, the measure designed to speed up the death penalty appeals process.
I hoped that Prop 62, designed to eliminate the death penalty, might pass, but i was never very optimistic about it.
I understand why some people support the principle of the death penalty, even though i don’t agree with them. But even if you do support the death penalty in principle, it seems to me that any reasonable and rational person who is even vaguely aware of the number of people exonerated in the United States over the past couple of decades—some of them off death row—should recognize that the one thing we don’t want to be doing with the death penalty is speeding up the process and limiting the option for appeals.
To be quite frank, i think only a ghoul could vote for such a measure, and yet here it is, about to pass.
Here are the results with 99.4% of the precincts in:
51 (K-12 and Community College Facilities) - Yes 54.0%
52 (Medi-Cal Hospital Fee Program) - Yes 69.6%
53 (Voter Approval of Revenue Bonds) - No 51.4%
54 (Legislative Procedure Requirements) - Yes 64.3%
55 (Tax Extension for Education and Healthcare) - Yes 62.1%
56 (Cigarette Tax) - Yes 62.9%
57 (Criminal Sentences & Juvenile Crime Proceedings) - Yes 63.6%
58 (English Proficiency. Multilingual Education) - Yes 72.4%
59 (Corporate Political Spending Advisory Question) - Yes 52.3%
60 (Adult Film Condom Requirements) - No 53.9%
61 (State Prescription Drug Purchase Standards) - No 53.8%
62 (Repeal of Death Penalty) - No 53.9%
63 (Firearms and Ammunition Sales) - Yes 62.6%
64 (Marijuana Legalization) - Yes 56.0%
65 (Carryout Bag Charges) - No 55.4%
66 (Death Penalty Procedure Time Limits) - Yes 50.9%
67 (Ban on Single-use Plastic Bags) - Yes 51.9%