California's Litany of Propositions

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by CalBoy, Sep 28, 2008.

  1. CalBoy macrumors 604

    CalBoy

    Joined:
    May 21, 2007
    #1
    So, as some Californians may have already realized, we have 12, yes 12, propositions on the ballot this November, after having already voted on 9 propositions earlier this year (7 on Super Tuesday and 2 more during the June primaries), I'm wondering if any Californians out there are beginning to see the initiative process as an abuse of a once sacred political tool.

    Perhaps what's even more alarming is that the initiative process allows the constitution to be amended so easily (it is only slightly harder to do this than to pass a standard law via the initiative process).

    Aside from that complaint/question, I'd also like to know how some of you plan to vote on some of these props. For the moment I've made up my mind about props 4 and 8, but some of them are very much up in the air for me:

    Prop 1: I'd like a high speed train, but I'm worried about generating new debt at a time like this.

    Prop 2: While I'm all for making the lives of farm animals more humane, I'm worried about any loopholes that the law might have that will allow farmers to "comply" only to the letter of the law and be just as cruel at the end of the day.

    Prop 3: Like the train, I like the idea but I'm worried about the debt it would create. I guess that since it isn't nearly as expensive as the train, I'll probably vote 'yes' on it.

    Prop 4: Places a waiting period and parental notification on teenager abortion access, and since this is the third or forth time this has been on the ballot in one form or another, my vote is a safe 'no.'

    Prop 5: This remains ambiguous to me, as it promises a reduction in the statutory penalties for nonviolent drug crimes (which I'm all for), but it asks for half a billion in other programs, which with the state's budget in the condition it is I'm hesitant to vote for spending increases. Why can't the reduction in penalties stand alone?

    Prop 6: This asks for nearly a $1 billion to beef up law enforcement and build/expand the prison system. I think that our prisons are already overcrowded, and that building more of them isn't the solution, so I'm going to vote 'no' for this rather expensive proposal.

    Prop 7: Requires certain quotas for renewable energy (as in 40% of the state's total power by 2020 and 50% by 2025), and I like this idea, so a safe 'yes' for me.

    Prop 8: Bans gay marriage; needless to say, I'll be voting 'no' on this prop. Further discussion can be found here.

    Prop 9: Even though I know this prop's general idea (helping violent crime victims) I'm unclear as to this prop's end result. I'd appreciate some discussion on this one. :)

    Prop 10: Uses the state's budget to fund subsidies for alternative energy fuels and vehicles. I don't quite like how the state would be using upwards of $5 billion directly from the general fund to do this, especially because the funds are setup to benefit certain companies more than others.

    Prop 11: Changes who draws the state's boundaries for elected seats, taking it away from the Legislature. I like this idea, because California's districts are incredibly gerrymandered at the moment, and politics as usual is not working for us.

    Prop 12: Subsidies for veterans, including helping them with housing. I'm a bit divided on this. The cost is high (nearly a billion), and the responsibility is normally on the Federal government for these kinds of benefits. What do you guys think?
     
  2. joepunk macrumors 68030

    joepunk

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2004
    Location:
    a profane existence
  3. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #3
    Beginning? Beginning?? I've long thought that the most useful initiative would be one that eliminates all previous initiative-driven laws and banishes the initiative process.

    It was a worthy idea at the time it was put in place, but it has proven to be far to easily manipulated by special interest groups. The initiative process is one of the major reasons California has such a high level of mandated spending. People are all too willing to vote for increased spending mandates while simultaneously voting for lower tax mandates. It's just silly.
     
  4. Ugg macrumors 68000

    Ugg

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2003
    Location:
    Penryn
    #4
    1. Yes. The alternatives are worse. It's either another freeway down the central valley or more airplanes in the sky. Both options would require major airport expansions which are horrifically expensive.

    It would also create much needed "real" jobs.

    2. No. It's a poorly thought out proposition. I would vote for it if it were more thorough in its application.

    3. No. It's too narrow and allows the money to basically go to any hospital that treats children. I'm all for increased hospital funding but this is a bad proposition.

    4. No.

    5. No. For the same reasons you gave.

    6. No. More prisons are not the answer.

    7. Yes. It would encourage the nascent alt-energy industry in the state.

    8. No.

    9. No. More unnecessary bureaucracy would be created without any clear benefit.

    10. No. Too much slop in that bucket.

    11. No. It's simply an elitist power grab by unelected officials.

    12. No. It's a bad idea served up with a wrapping of the American flag.
     
  5. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #5
    What do parole laws have to do with gay marriage? :confused:
     
  6. it5five macrumors 65816

    it5five

    Joined:
    May 31, 2006
    Location:
    New York
    #6
    It's the same in Arizona. Practically all of the eight propositions on the ballot this November were backed by special interest groups (real estate organizations, payday loan companies, healthcare corporations, etc...).
     
  7. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #7
    The initiative and referendum system has been abused for decades. It's actually gotten a bit better recently -- in years past, it wasn't unusual to have 20 of them on a ballot, often covering obscure and complicated issues. A long time back, I got in the habit of automatically voting 'no' on every one unless a compelling case could be made for them. I still hold to that rule. Make the Legislature do its job.
     
  8. CalBoy thread starter macrumors 604

    CalBoy

    Joined:
    May 21, 2007
    #8
    That is very true. I suppose it does sound painful in the short term, but without the train in the long term, we'll all be paying and suffering more.
    Although one might posit that the legislature as it stands now is barely elected.

    If the commission/board is appointed in a bipartisan manner, would it not be more promising?

    I'm just throwing out some ideas here. I'm quite on the fence about this one.

    I suspected as much, but it's always hard to cast a vote "against the veterans" as the 'pro' side claims.
    If we do have a Constitutional convention for the state, I hope they address this and make it incredibly hard to use the initiative process (say by raising the bar for passage to 65% or some other super majority).

    Or they could eliminate it altogether too.

    I've only been a voter for a relatively short time, and yet even I've settled into this pattern. Most of the props are conservative in nature anyway, so it just because easier for me to reject everything I see.
     
  9. Ugg macrumors 68000

    Ugg

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2003
    Location:
    Penryn
    #9
    The proposal has been in the works for years. The other "green" initiatives are mostly for show but a high speed train would have an enormous impact in many ways.

    I really think it's worth voting for and given the high fuel prices, it might just pass this time around.
     
  10. solvs macrumors 603

    solvs

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    LaLaLand, CA
    #10
    Considering the Govenator (who I might add was elected in a recall to solve such things... how's that going' for ya') is asking for a $7 billion bailout, I don't see any of these going anywhere now.
     
  11. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
  12. CalBoy thread starter macrumors 604

    CalBoy

    Joined:
    May 21, 2007
    #12
    Well the two social issues props are still quite hotly contested.

    It's even more worrisome because after rejecting Prop 4-esque measure twice before, Californians might be fooled into thinking this one is any different.

    As for Prop 8, it is at the moment behind, but anything can happen in the next 30 days.
    I wonder if he had to offer his soul in return...
     
  13. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #13
    If so, he's out of luck.

    Sorry, hard to resist. Reminds me of the joke about the lawyer who is visited by the Devil, who offers him wealth and respect in exchange for his immortal soul. The lawyer thinks hard about this for a few moments, then finally asks the Devil, "Okay, so what's the catch?"
     
  14. CalBoy thread starter macrumors 604

    CalBoy

    Joined:
    May 21, 2007
    #14
    That's right, I forgot that cyborg robots from the future don't have souls. :p
    Ahh lawyer jokes, always worthwhile.

    One of my personal favorites: "Why won't a Shark attack a lawyer?"

    A: Professional courtesy.
     
  15. solvs macrumors 603

    solvs

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    LaLaLand, CA
    #15
    That's what they want you to think.

    Seriously though, I don't care what it is. He promised something after making a huge deal about the other guy not being able to balance the budget, and now this. He oughta be ashamed of himself (but somehow I doubt it).

    I worry about that one. I was listening to the radio and a bunch of people kept calling in saying if the law passed, their churches would be sued. The DJs tried to press them, and seemed skeptical, but more people called in saying it was true. It wasn't until the end of the segment that they made a quick announcement that it wasn't true based on a text they received. Doubt anyone even heard them. I don't know if churches are telling people this knowing it to be false, or that they don't know any better, or a little of both, but this is how it will fail. I've seen commercials saying so as well. There is supposed to be a provision in there that says, which is already allowed BTW, for churches to decide who they want to marry. "We reserve the right to no service" and all.

    But believe it or not, religious people actually see it as an affront to their rights. :rolleyes:
     
  16. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #16
    I don't think this borrowing has anything immediately to do with the budget. Apparently the state frequently borrows money commercially to meet its short-term obligations. The jaw dropper is that because of the freeze-up in the credit markets, nobody would give the State of California a swing loan. It's just another a marker for how much worse this financial crisis has become just in the last two weeks.
     
  17. killr_b macrumors 6502a

    killr_b

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2005
    Location:
    Suckerfornia
    #17
    All these props are unnecessary.

    If Arnold wants 7B because of a "shortfall" then we can start by not approving the 9B in projects listed on this ballot by special interest groups.

    Props 1-12, big NO.

    Even if they were all free. NO.

    Specifically on 1: I see this as a cut in quality of life.
    Specifically on 7: This would increase the cost of living and doing business in this state. Both of which are already astronomical compared to the rest of the country.
     
  18. stevento macrumors 6502

    stevento

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2006
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    #18
    Propositions?

    In California, we have two major propositions.

    Prop 8, if it passes will define marriage as one man and one woman, nullifying any gay marriage or civil unions that took place recently

    Prop 7 will make it the law that food corporations have to treat animals humanely and make food more expensive.

    What are some props in your state and how are you voting on them.

    I cannot wait to vote hell to the nawwwwwwww on prop 8 and yes 7.
     
  19. jplan2008 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2008
    #19
    We also have gay marriage ban on the ballot in Florida. A constitutional amendment here needs 60% to pass, so while unfortunately a majority of Floridians will probably vote for it, it fortunately will not pass.
     
  20. Ntombi macrumors 68040

    Ntombi

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2008
    Location:
    Bostonian exiled in SoCal
    #20
    Prop 2 is on farm animal humane treatment. Prop 7 is about alternative energy. But it's a bad bill that I'll be voting against (along with every environmental group and newspaper in the state)

    There are many many more in California.

    The two I'm most concerned about are 4 and 8. 4 requires a waiting period and parental notification for abortion. I'll be voting no.

    No on 8, of course.
     
  21. pooky macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2003
    #21
    Um, you seem to be mistaken. California has 12 (!) propositions on the ballot. Prop 7 is not the farm animal thing (that's prop 2), but instead deals with regulation of electricity generating utilities. Prop 8 is indeed a gay marriage ban.

    Edit, whoops, beaten by 2 minutes.

    Voted no on 7, for the same reasons as Ntombi. Also no on 4 and 8. And yes on 2, although I don't care as much about that one.
     
  22. EricNau Moderator emeritus

    EricNau

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2005
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    #22
    Are you basing this on more than the commercials sponsored by PG&E?

    Meanwhile, I have mixed feelings about Prop. 2. Of course I feel that farm animals need to be treated properly, however, studies from the University of California, Davis found that the Prop would have little impact on the lives of animals, at great expense to California jobs. So, is it really worth it?

    And of course no on 4 and 8.

    ...And yes on 1A! :D
     
  23. Ntombi macrumors 68040

    Ntombi

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2008
    Location:
    Bostonian exiled in SoCal
    #23
    Yes, thanks. :rolleyes: I actually research every proposition and every candidate, including judges.
     
  24. CalBoy thread starter macrumors 604

    CalBoy

    Joined:
    May 21, 2007
    #24
    FYI other Californians have been discussing the props here.

    As for Florida's amendment on gay marriage, I wish California had the 60% threshold. Amendments in this state are passed too easily.
     
  25. EricNau Moderator emeritus

    EricNau

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2005
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    #25
    You see high-speed rail as a cut in the quality of life? :confused:
     

Share This Page