Nov 4 State Propositions! (Sacramento: how much, homes, live)

[LASam]

Here's a link for everyone so they can do their research and be ready for the upcoming election! Make sure you don't get so caught up in the Obama/McCain election that you forget to educate yourself on our state initiatives!

Voter Information Guide - California Secretary of State

Feel free to post your opinions on any of the propositions. Some healthy debate would be nice too

[sav858]

Thanks for posting the link!

The ones I am most interested in are Props 1 (high speed rail) and 11 (redistricting).
Prop 1: CA really needs a high speed rail network to accommodate growth and provide alternatives to increasingly congested roadways and airports. Even though it's not exactly the best time financially for the state I think in the long run it will be beneficial overall and if we wait it will just cost more and might not ever get built.
Prop 11: This is the one I really hope passes b/c I cannot stand all the extremists, partisan politicians that keep getting elected to our state legislature. They are the main culprits to blame for our latest budget mess and much of the gridlock and dysfunction in Sacramento. The democrats and republicans in the state legislature are way too partisan and too far left or right for most people. We need some more moderate politicians and redistricting is the way to achieve that. This is a FUNDAMENTAL change CA needs very bad.

Also what is the deal with Prop 4? Haven't we voted on that before at least once or more?? I am so sick of seeing the same failed ballot propositions over and over. Some special interest groups need to just admit defeat and give up. And some of these other ones like Prop 5 seem very familiar too.

I'm kind of torn on Prop 7, not sure what side to believe. It seems like a good idea but also doesn't. Maybe somebody can give me some insight to that one.... Same thing with Prop 10, seems like a good idea but not really sure either. Seems a bit more than the state can handle and maybe something that the private market should take care of and not the govt.

Prop 12, I think that should be the federal govt's job and not CA taxpayers job to provide housing assistance to vets. Especially considering we get something like $.73 for every $1 we send to DC.

Prop 8, voting against it. So sick of hearing about this issue, hopefully this will once and for all end the debate.

[LASam]

Does anyone know the difference between Prop 1 (removed from ballot) and Prop 1A? I like the idea of having an alternative means of transit, but the price tag is a little scary considering how much trouble we are having currently getting the budget to balance.

Prop 2 seems fair to me, and I'm leaning towards a "Yes" vote. I don't see anything wrong with allowing all animals to turn around freely, lie down, stand up, and fully extend their limbs.

Prop 3 I am initially against. There is still $320M available from a 2004 bond issuance for children's hospitals... use that first. We don't need more debt when funds are already available.

Prop 4 I am fully in favor of. Parents should definately be informed if their children are getting an abortion... why shouldn't they be?!

Prop 6 I am initially in favor of. I like the fact that Lee Baca, the LA County Sheriff is in favor of it. I'm also in favor of spending money to give law enforcement the tools necessary to fight gangs.

Prop 8 I'm voting no. Pointless.

The rest of 'em... need more time to research.

[baobob girl]

Regarding prop 4, it is important to remember that while most parents are loving and supportive, some are not. Girls who are forced to tell their parents may be abused or abandoned. They may also be victims of incest.

[majoun]

1's been removed from the ballot. 2 and 3 I'd have to research some more.

A definite no on 4. The pro-lifers have put identical measures on the ballot in the last two elections. When will they learn that Californians won't accept their ideas?

Yes on 5. It's about time that the justice system got its priorities right and started going after the real criminals and not filling up jails and prisons with nonviolent offenders which creates less room for violent gang members, pedos, rapists, murderers, etc.

6 has some good stuff in it but it does seem flawed. The enhanced sentencing for gang members is good, but requiring almost $1 billion from the state's general fund to go into prisons with the amount increased yearly based on the CPI seems to be a recipe to worsen the state's finances and hurt taxpayers. I'll vote no for this reason, but it's not as clear cut of a no. I do think it'll pass because Californians are suckers for flawed initiatives that appear to address a problem but in reality create new problems or worsen existing problems.

Yes on 7 and 10. More of a focus on alternative energy could rebuild the state's economy. Admittedly, costs are an issue, but IMO the costs will be outweighed by the benefit to the state's economy.

A definite No on 8. Bad for human rights, bad for business, bad for tourism, and only good for raving bigots.

9? No. I like the idea of safety of the victim as a factor in determining parole but the rest of it seems to be a sop to the prison guards' lobby and will worsen the financial situation of the state.

11 sounds good. It would establish more competitive districts resulting in a shakeup to the established order in Sacramento. I'll vote yes.

12? Yes. It's important to treat veterans better and help them out during the current economic crisis. This could keep many Californians in their homes.

[j760]

Originally Posted by LASam

Make sure you don't get so caught up in the Obama/McCain election that you forget to educate yourself on our state initiatives!

Excellent point and I gave you rep for that. Some of these propositions will make a more immediate impact on Californians than whoever is elected President as well, so thanks for the thread LASam.

[LASam]

Originally Posted by j760

Excellent point and I gave you rep for that. Some of these propositions will make a more immediate impact on Californians than whoever is elected President as well, so thanks for the thread LASam.

Thanks! There is a TON of potential new state spending in these intitiatives which could slip through if people don't pay attention. Not to mention the social issues at hand (gay marriage, abortion notification). We all need to go to the polls knowing what to expect, and we need to be informed voters! Please don't let California suffer as a result of a presidential election circus!

[LASam]

Originally Posted by majoun

1's been removed from the ballot. 2 and 3 I'd have to research some more.

A definite no on 4. The pro-lifers have put identical measures on the ballot in the last two elections. When will they learn that Californians won't accept their ideas?

Yes on 5. It's about time that the justice system got its priorities right and started going after the real criminals and not filling up jails and prisons with nonviolent offenders which creates less room for violent gang members, pedos, rapists, murderers, etc.

6 has some good stuff in it but it does seem flawed. The enhanced sentencing for gang members is good, but requiring almost $1 billion from the state's general fund to go into prisons with the amount increased yearly based on the CPI seems to be a recipe to worsen the state's finances and hurt taxpayers. I'll vote no for this reason, but it's not as clear cut of a no. I do think it'll pass because Californians are suckers for flawed initiatives that appear to address a problem but in reality create new problems or worsen existing problems.

Yes on 7 and 10. More of a focus on alternative energy could rebuild the state's economy. Admittedly, costs are an issue, but IMO the costs will be outweighed by the benefit to the state's economy.

A definite No on 8. Bad for human rights, bad for business, bad for tourism, and only good for raving bigots.

9? No. I like the idea of safety of the victim as a factor in determining parole but the rest of it seems to be a sop to the prison guards' lobby and will worsen the financial situation of the state.

11 sounds good. It would establish more competitive districts resulting in a shakeup to the established order in Sacramento. I'll vote yes.

12? Yes. It's important to treat veterans better and help them out during the current economic crisis. This could keep many Californians in their homes.

Thanks for your input Majoun. I'll definately take your comments into consideration when making my decisions. I'm surprised at the No on Prop 4. If someone is under 18, shouldn't the parents have complete knowledge of what is going on in there lives? We always say the problems with today's kids isn't the media they are exposed to, it's a lack of interest/knowledge by parents into their kids lives. Aren't we being a bit hypocritical by saying abortions should be kept from the parents?

I definately agree with you on Prop 6. I really like the idea behind it... but the price tag is tough to swallow. It's the whole, societal benefit vs monetary cost debate.

[18Montclair]

I was gonna vote no on Prop 1 anyway. Too expensive and its configuration for Northern California was narrowminded and not at all relevent to the projected population growth patterns of the next 4 decades.

Prop 2 sounds somewhat kooky to me, but Im gonna vote yes cause of those british clay animation cartoons(wallace and gromit). Er, Chicken are people too.

Im voting no on Prop 3 because at this very moment, it seems awfully expensive.

Im voting no on Prop 4 because I view this as a matter of doctor-patient confidentiality.

Im voting Yes on 5 because I think the war on drugs is misplaced and really contributing to the problem.

Im voting No on 6 because money is tight right now and the state corrections infrastructure will have to wait for better times just like everyone else.

I have to do further research on 7-both parties are against it?

Im voting no on 8. Enough already.

Im voting no on 9. If an inmate has done his time, he needs to be released. Some of the things proposed in 9 invite cruel and unusual punishment. I think this one might be overturned in court if it passes because it might violate the US Constitution.

Im voting no on 10. Rebates for hybrids seem nice but we dont have any money right now.

Im voting no on 11. Redistricting should be done by our elected representatives, Dont like the outcome? Manifest your opposition at the ballot box. I am a huge opponent of term limits for the same reason-too many great leaders have been sidelined too soon.

Im also voting no on 12. Too expensive for this point in time.

[Sassberto]

I'm looking like No on everything but 2, 5,6 7

Still need to do my homework.