Help me decipher California's ballot propositions!
October 22, 2008 2:29 PM Subscribe
As a new California voter, I'm somewhat baffled by the various propositions on the ballot. Can you help me sort them out?
The ballot questions I'm used to are of the 'school board budget for a small town' type, rather than the 'big, vague, expensive, with many potential follow-on effects' that seem to be the way Californians do things.
I'm trying to find good information about the pros and cons of the various propositions on the ballot. Your own arguments are helpful and appreciated.
I have read the supplemental voter guide my Board of Elections sent me, and spent some time on this site. However, it doesn't go into a lot of detail, and I'm lacking the context for these initiatives in terms of who is proposing the propositions and what the effects of the changes would be. I've found a couple editorial endorsements from places like the LA Times, but I'm looking for more information.
This question mostly applies to Propositions that aren't Prop 8, I already know I'm voting No on that one. Thanks for your help!
The ballot questions I'm used to are of the 'school board budget for a small town' type, rather than the 'big, vague, expensive, with many potential follow-on effects' that seem to be the way Californians do things.
I'm trying to find good information about the pros and cons of the various propositions on the ballot. Your own arguments are helpful and appreciated.
I have read the supplemental voter guide my Board of Elections sent me, and spent some time on this site. However, it doesn't go into a lot of detail, and I'm lacking the context for these initiatives in terms of who is proposing the propositions and what the effects of the changes would be. I've found a couple editorial endorsements from places like the LA Times, but I'm looking for more information.
This question mostly applies to Propositions that aren't Prop 8, I already know I'm voting No on that one. Thanks for your help!
Oh, and I voted No on Prop 8 (not that you need convincing there) and Prop 4. Scary that we can amend our state constitution through the initiative process.....
posted by sbrollins at 2:46 PM on October 22, 2008
posted by sbrollins at 2:46 PM on October 22, 2008
I'm a big fan of 1A. Not only because I'll be working on the design of the eventual system, but it'll be the next step in creating a working national rail network. If regions build their own networks, eventually they'll tie them together.
It's pricey out of the box, but should pay for itself with operating revenue.
I found the supplemental voter guide to be helpful with the issues, though. The analysis from the independent auditor should let you know how much everything costs, and the arguments for and against are helpful because it lets you see which groups are arguing which way.
posted by hwyengr at 2:49 PM on October 22, 2008
It's pricey out of the box, but should pay for itself with operating revenue.
I found the supplemental voter guide to be helpful with the issues, though. The analysis from the independent auditor should let you know how much everything costs, and the arguments for and against are helpful because it lets you see which groups are arguing which way.
posted by hwyengr at 2:49 PM on October 22, 2008
Best answer: The Sierra Club, Green Party, League of Women Voters, and California Democratic Party all have recommendations on their websites. Sorry for the obvious left-leaning bias in my links, I live in San Francisco after all.
posted by foodgeek at 2:52 PM on October 22, 2008
posted by foodgeek at 2:52 PM on October 22, 2008
Here's a link to an on-line version of the voter guide; I find it easier to read than the print version. Each proposition is listed at the left. And then on each summary page, theres a link to arguments and rebuttals. The summary is usually vague and the pros and cons are biased --So read all three.
posted by wryly at 2:52 PM on October 22, 2008
posted by wryly at 2:52 PM on October 22, 2008
I have only looked at Prop 5: Nonviolent Offenders. Sentencing, Parole and Rehabilitation.
I am voting yes for it because I believe we should be decriminalizing drug related offenses and saving money on jail spaces for the really bad guys. In fact I would be in favor of taxing marijuana to fund the CA bailout Arnold requested from the feds.
I read into how the proposition would change marijuana misdemeanors to infractions: specifically "This measure would make the possession of less than 28.5 grams of marijuana by either an adult or a minor an infraction (similar to a traffic ticket) rather than a misdemeanor." It would carry the same $100 fine currently imposed and the revenue of it would now be "deposited in a special fund to provide additional support of the new youth programs created by this measure." Link here
Also, I briefly looked at Prop 8: Limit on Marriage. Constitutional Amendment.
If you vote no for it, it means you are supporting gay marriage by not amending the CA constitution. My girlfriend didn't read into the details and thought the opposite (just assuming that the minority party involved would raise the issue; not the other way around).
(FYI: Im not affiliated with any of these measures, its just my 2 cents)
posted by schindyguy at 3:04 PM on October 22, 2008
I am voting yes for it because I believe we should be decriminalizing drug related offenses and saving money on jail spaces for the really bad guys. In fact I would be in favor of taxing marijuana to fund the CA bailout Arnold requested from the feds.
I read into how the proposition would change marijuana misdemeanors to infractions: specifically "This measure would make the possession of less than 28.5 grams of marijuana by either an adult or a minor an infraction (similar to a traffic ticket) rather than a misdemeanor." It would carry the same $100 fine currently imposed and the revenue of it would now be "deposited in a special fund to provide additional support of the new youth programs created by this measure." Link here
Also, I briefly looked at Prop 8: Limit on Marriage. Constitutional Amendment.
If you vote no for it, it means you are supporting gay marriage by not amending the CA constitution. My girlfriend didn't read into the details and thought the opposite (just assuming that the minority party involved would raise the issue; not the other way around).
(FYI: Im not affiliated with any of these measures, its just my 2 cents)
posted by schindyguy at 3:04 PM on October 22, 2008
Since you're already good to go with a big steaming cup of NO on 8, I'd like to personally urge NO on 4 (parental notification re: abortion) as well.
Here's the L.A. Times "vote-o-rama" page, which includes their endorsements on the various propositions (scroll down).
posted by scody at 3:23 PM on October 22, 2008
Here's the L.A. Times "vote-o-rama" page, which includes their endorsements on the various propositions (scroll down).
posted by scody at 3:23 PM on October 22, 2008
We usually use some combination of the official voters' guide and something like the Bay Guardian, and add in League of Women Voters when need be. It's useful to see who's endorsing/supporting what - sometimes, for complicated local (San Francisco) initiatives that I can't parse, I look to see which city supervisors are pro/con.
posted by rtha at 3:35 PM on October 22, 2008
posted by rtha at 3:35 PM on October 22, 2008
Best answer: Please give sbrollins first response much weight. We've got a bunch of spendies in Sacramento, and most voters don't realize that selling a bond to raise money to pay for the prop still costs the state money and affects the budget.
Many of these props are good ideas, but it's just a terrible time to add expenditures. We can pursue these things in a year or 5, when we have our house in order.
Of course, if we can pass Prop 11, perhaps we can get rid of the bums that don't understand fiscal responsibility.
posted by tdischino at 3:41 PM on October 22, 2008
Many of these props are good ideas, but it's just a terrible time to add expenditures. We can pursue these things in a year or 5, when we have our house in order.
Of course, if we can pass Prop 11, perhaps we can get rid of the bums that don't understand fiscal responsibility.
posted by tdischino at 3:41 PM on October 22, 2008
You might find ballotpedia useful, as it has lots of links to the various supporters/donors for each Proposition.
posted by madajb at 4:09 PM on October 22, 2008
posted by madajb at 4:09 PM on October 22, 2008
Best answer: Well, I found ballotpedia.org very useful. I like to look at who is supporting or opposing the bill, and who donated money.
My procedure: look through the Votor Information Guide, mark the easy yeses and noes. Then I checked the Sierra Club's recommendations, and then I looked at the ballotpedia.org entries for the propositions I was unsure on. That process let me make decisions on everything but 1A (high speed train) and 11 (redistricting). 1A is extremely expensive, and 11 seems like there's no impartial answer, so I'm still stuck on those two.
posted by lemonade at 4:10 PM on October 22, 2008
My procedure: look through the Votor Information Guide, mark the easy yeses and noes. Then I checked the Sierra Club's recommendations, and then I looked at the ballotpedia.org entries for the propositions I was unsure on. That process let me make decisions on everything but 1A (high speed train) and 11 (redistricting). 1A is extremely expensive, and 11 seems like there's no impartial answer, so I'm still stuck on those two.
posted by lemonade at 4:10 PM on October 22, 2008
If you'll allow me to continue on my soapbox for 1A, infrastructure spending is a fantastic stimulant to the economy. Ranging from engineers (ahem) to track layers, this is going to be the largest single infrastructure project since the Interstates were built. Hundreds of thousands of people will be employed to make this thing happen, and there'll actually be an engineer shortage nationwide with all the people that will be helping out.
The other thing to remember, it's a 30-year bond. It seems expensive now, but gets relatively cheaper due to inflation. And, once revenue service begins, those funds can make the debt service payments.
posted by hwyengr at 4:33 PM on October 22, 2008
The other thing to remember, it's a 30-year bond. It seems expensive now, but gets relatively cheaper due to inflation. And, once revenue service begins, those funds can make the debt service payments.
posted by hwyengr at 4:33 PM on October 22, 2008
Best answer: Here's a link to a table that summarizes the ballot positions major organizations and various California newspapers have taken. It covers Republicans, Democrats, Greens, and Libertarians, etc.
I'd like to raise my voice to support Prop 1A. Yes, it's expensive, but you have to balance that against what the alternatives will cost. The option isn't spending $$ on high speed rail or not spending at all. The option is spending $$ on high speed rail vs. spending $$ on highways, $$ on airport expansions, and $$ on time spent sitting in traffic on highways on your way to your destination. The population of California is going to increase significantly in the next 30 years, and we can't just pave the whole damn state.
posted by ambrosia at 4:39 PM on October 22, 2008
I'd like to raise my voice to support Prop 1A. Yes, it's expensive, but you have to balance that against what the alternatives will cost. The option isn't spending $$ on high speed rail or not spending at all. The option is spending $$ on high speed rail vs. spending $$ on highways, $$ on airport expansions, and $$ on time spent sitting in traffic on highways on your way to your destination. The population of California is going to increase significantly in the next 30 years, and we can't just pave the whole damn state.
posted by ambrosia at 4:39 PM on October 22, 2008
The ballot guide for the propositions is generally pretty good for me. If I'm truly torn, I tend to vote no on the assumption that in most cases that leaves things unchanged, which is probably less harmful than introducing a negative change.
What I can never figure out is which judge to vote for. I reflexively recoil from the ones that are hard nosed lock up the criminals forever types, but outside of what I can read between the lines in their answers to generic questions on SmartVoter.org, I don't have any clue how to determine which ones to support.
posted by willnot at 4:43 PM on October 22, 2008
What I can never figure out is which judge to vote for. I reflexively recoil from the ones that are hard nosed lock up the criminals forever types, but outside of what I can read between the lines in their answers to generic questions on SmartVoter.org, I don't have any clue how to determine which ones to support.
posted by willnot at 4:43 PM on October 22, 2008
I find that the local Bar Association website is valuable for my judgeship decisions. They list which candidates are specifically not qualified, but after that, it's a crapshoot if they're both "Well Qualified".
posted by hwyengr at 4:47 PM on October 22, 2008
posted by hwyengr at 4:47 PM on October 22, 2008
And, once revenue service begins, those funds can make the debt service payments.
I voted yes on 1A after some agonizing about the state of our current budget problems, but I don't think what you wrote is true. Revenue will go to paying upkeep (of $1 billion/year or something like that), but I don't think it will recover money for this. That's all going to come out of the general fund, and the money we're authorizing is a fraction of the money they're ultimately going to need.
posted by willnot at 4:47 PM on October 22, 2008
I voted yes on 1A after some agonizing about the state of our current budget problems, but I don't think what you wrote is true. Revenue will go to paying upkeep (of $1 billion/year or something like that), but I don't think it will recover money for this. That's all going to come out of the general fund, and the money we're authorizing is a fraction of the money they're ultimately going to need.
posted by willnot at 4:47 PM on October 22, 2008
but I don't think it will recover money for this
The business plan for the CAHSR expects a $300 million annual operating surplus to go back to the state.
http://www.cahighspeedrail.ca.gov/library/default.aspx
posted by hwyengr at 5:00 PM on October 22, 2008
The business plan for the CAHSR expects a $300 million annual operating surplus to go back to the state.
http://www.cahighspeedrail.ca.gov/library/default.aspx
posted by hwyengr at 5:00 PM on October 22, 2008
Response by poster: Thank you everyone, this has been really helpful, and I will be investigating the links mentioned.
Trying to learn the proposition system has been pretty overwhelming: trying to figure out what's a good idea, what's an OK idea, what's a giveaway or pet project of someone with $3 million to burn and the number of a good lobbying firm, and what's just a truly terrible concept. The trickiest are the ones that seem benign: children's hospitals! green energy!, but as always, the devil is in the details. So thanks!
I am dismayed to learn that we have to elect judges, as well. Luckily, there's no judgeships on my ballot, though there is a ports commissioner...
posted by foodmapper at 5:55 PM on October 22, 2008
Trying to learn the proposition system has been pretty overwhelming: trying to figure out what's a good idea, what's an OK idea, what's a giveaway or pet project of someone with $3 million to burn and the number of a good lobbying firm, and what's just a truly terrible concept. The trickiest are the ones that seem benign: children's hospitals! green energy!, but as always, the devil is in the details. So thanks!
I am dismayed to learn that we have to elect judges, as well. Luckily, there's no judgeships on my ballot, though there is a ports commissioner...
posted by foodmapper at 5:55 PM on October 22, 2008
Bar Association of San Francisco's evaluations for judicial candidates. Disclosure: I serve on the judiciary committee.
posted by ClaudiaCenter at 6:35 PM on October 22, 2008
posted by ClaudiaCenter at 6:35 PM on October 22, 2008
I am a native Californian 48 years old and have watched California get deeper and deeper into black hole it may never recover from. I graduated from high school in 1978 the year after Prop 13 the beginning of the end as far as I'm concerned. The previous year our high school had a music program now gone bus travel for sports teams now gone an arts program now gone.....California schools have never recovered. Property values soar owners reap great profits from this yet property taxes remain stagnant, watch out for that pothole! Cities desperate for sales tax revenue sell their souls to big box retailers and car dealerships creating a visual nightmare. Yet several years later Californians vote to apply a fixed percentage of the budget to public schools yet make no provision for where these funds will come from. When I hear the word Proposition I say NO. The people of the state elect officials to represent them. The elected officials make laws as our representatives. Keep the rabble out of it and that includes me. I could go on forever. Current example Prop 8 you only need 50% of the voting population to pass this bad idea, well guess what it might pass. Reduce the opportunity for idiocy and we all look better. Vote no and don't sign ballot initiative petitions. California is a sinking ship that can only right itself through sensible non partisan politics. The California Initiative system is madness.
posted by pianomover at 8:04 PM on October 22, 2008 [1 favorite]
posted by pianomover at 8:04 PM on October 22, 2008 [1 favorite]
I'm involved in the campaign for Prop 5 and am happy to answer any questions about it. Obviously, I think it's great! It moves us closer to treating addiction as a disease rather than a crime, creates new funding for substance abuse treatment for young people, and helps us reduce the horrific overcrowding in our state prisons. It's one of the few initiatives that will actually cut state costs by billions (per the LAO). schindyguy already described the marijuana component.
It's supported by the CA Democratic Party, League of Women Voters, CA Society of Addiction Medicine, CA Nurses Association, etc. It is opposed by the CA prison guards' union (CCPOA) and the U.S. drug czar.
I'm not at all involved in the campaigns against 6 & 9, but would ask you to join me in voting against them. They both go the wrong way for our criminal justice system, increasing the length of time that people stay in our overcrowded prisons and increasing the costs to taxpayers. They won't keep us any safer, and will just cost us money. They are cynical efforts to play on people's fears of crime without actually making anyone safer.
As a final comment, be glad you don't live in San Francisco, which has an additional 22 local propositions to figure out!
posted by gingerbeer at 11:22 PM on October 22, 2008
It's supported by the CA Democratic Party, League of Women Voters, CA Society of Addiction Medicine, CA Nurses Association, etc. It is opposed by the CA prison guards' union (CCPOA) and the U.S. drug czar.
I'm not at all involved in the campaigns against 6 & 9, but would ask you to join me in voting against them. They both go the wrong way for our criminal justice system, increasing the length of time that people stay in our overcrowded prisons and increasing the costs to taxpayers. They won't keep us any safer, and will just cost us money. They are cynical efforts to play on people's fears of crime without actually making anyone safer.
As a final comment, be glad you don't live in San Francisco, which has an additional 22 local propositions to figure out!
posted by gingerbeer at 11:22 PM on October 22, 2008
Also, this guy on DailyKos has been doing a series of posts on the CA initiatives.
posted by gingerbeer at 1:22 PM on October 23, 2008
posted by gingerbeer at 1:22 PM on October 23, 2008
Local news weeklies tend to write up great reviews of the proposals for your area. The Bay Guardian had a great one a few weeks ago that may still be online, for example.
posted by jenfullmoon at 2:14 PM on October 23, 2008
posted by jenfullmoon at 2:14 PM on October 23, 2008
The Bay Guardian is here, but be warned that they have a very irritating user interface where you have to click through all 10 pages, rather than just having an index of ballot initiatives to pick from. They must be getting web design advice from those "100 best places to live"-type sites.
posted by gingerbeer at 4:18 PM on October 23, 2008
posted by gingerbeer at 4:18 PM on October 23, 2008
This thread is closed to new comments.
posted by sbrollins at 2:45 PM on October 22, 2008