[mobile site, backup mobile]
[SoapBlox Help]
Menu & About Calitics

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?

- About Calitics
- The Rules (Legal Stuff)
- Event Calendar
- Calitics' ActBlue Page
- Calitics RSS Feed
- Additional Advertisers
Daily Email Summary


View All Calitics Tags Or Search with Google:
 
Web Calitics
Event Calendar
February 2010
(view month)
S M T W R F S
* 01 02 03 04 05 06
07 08 09 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 * * * * * *
<< (add event) >>

Wire Services
Advertise Liberally

MBA Member

Blue CA Ad Network
Join Our eMail List
Email:

Photobucket

Calitics Endorsements on the State Propositions (and Judges)

by: Brian Leubitz

Fri Oct 20, 2006 at 15:28:19 PM PDT


(Bumped to the top. - promoted by SFBrianCL)

Well, several people had asked me to put out endorsements, so we agreed on some positions on the propositions.  We are supporting all of the Dems for the statewide offices, but some we are supporting more than others.  Namely, Debra Bowen will be a dynamic and effective Secretary of State.  For another resource, check out the Speak Out California Progressive Voter Guide (ad to the right) Here we go:

Props:
1A: No, makes budgeting harder
1B-1E: yes, we need infrastructure improvements

83: Jessica's Law: NO! A bad idea that moves sex offenders away from their families and support systems and into rural communities.
84: Water/Park Bonds: Yes. With the onset of global warming and pollution, we need to invest in our water.
85: Parental Notification: No, again. Didn't we just say no last year?
86: Cigarrette Tax to fund health care: No position. It's a tough call; there are many considerations including legal concerns.  A yes on this will toss the state into litigation.  If you are comfortable with that, then go with Yes.
87: Oil/Alternative Energy: Yes, California is an environmental leader, this is one more step of a leader to help fund alternative energy research.
88: Parcel Tax: No, but it's a close one.  I don't like how the tax operates. I would prefer a one-time percentage rather than a flat $50.
89: Public Campaign Finance: Yes! It's about time we bring some pressure to bear on the entrenched special interests.
90: Break the Government: No, don't let them trick you with the eminent domain line.  This one goes way, way too far.

Judges: Yes on all appellate judges, except William McGuiness, who wrote the decision in In Re Marriage Cases that denied marriage equality. He's in the first district court of appeal, which is SF/San Mateo, Peninsula/ and Marin up the coast.

Brian Leubitz :: Calitics Endorsements on the State Propositions (and Judges)
Tags: , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Thanks for the Endorsement!!!!! (0.00 / 0)
Speaking of 89, check out the trailer for tonight's hour-long PBS special on clean money elections:



Support Proposition 89, visit the Prop 89 blog


It was a great show, everybody should check it out. (0.00 / 0)
Here's the link for that episode of Now.  I believe you can watch the whole show or download the audio only.  I love PBS.


I'm proud to work for Kamala Harris for AG.

[ Parent ]
83 (0.00 / 0)
I first became suspicious of 83 after I got a robo-call asking me to vote for it "to protect children" and, oh, by the way I should also vote for 85 and the robocall was paid for by the yes-on-85 people. I said "hmm, if the 85 people are promoting 83 I'm probably against it". Before that I had heard basically NOTHING about 83.

Then the other night at a house party for Phil Angelides and Debra Bowen (co-hosted by my boyfriend auros) I got to ask our candidate for district attourney, Karen Sununu, her opinion on 83. She agrees with you guys and says she is voting against it. She thinks there are much better ways we can spend that amount of money to protect children. And this is someone who has devoted a good chunk of her career to protecting children. I have a lot of respect for her.


Why no on 88? (0.00 / 0)
Regressive nature of parcel tax?

I can tell you that some of us in rural California like the proposal because it guarantees us some of the money.  We don't see any of the lottery money, and since term limits we aren't really a priority.


Yeah, it's regressive (0.00 / 0)
I think it's a really bad precedent to allow taxes that are regressive. The owner of a high rise pays the same as a small house. That's preposterous.

I would support an increase in the property tax across the board, on a percentage basis.  I just can't support a flat $50.

I'm proud to work for Kamala Harris for AG.


[ Parent ]
88's an "orphan" (0.00 / 0)
according to the LA Times. That alone shouldn't be reason to automatically vote "no", but it should be considered. The people who put it on the ballot aren't even helping it.

[ Parent ]
Well, somebody put an ad for it here (0.00 / 0)
But, yeah, there was no traditional media buy at all.  I voted no because the way the tax was written was probably not the best.  I've also heard evidence that it might cost an astounding amount to collect the tax in comparison to what is raised.

I probably would have supported a larger, percentage based one-time tax though.  Or even a percentage based permanent tax on property. This $50 thing doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

I'm proud to work for Kamala Harris for AG.


[ Parent ]
No on 90 (0.00 / 0)
If anyone has any idea of voting for Prop. 90, please go "Takings Initiatives" site established by the Center for Public Integrity.  This is a prime example of the manner in which big money has taken over the initiative process in California.  It is enough to make one want to start an initiative to eliminate the initiative process.

It is time for the grassroots, the netroots, to focus on a solution to make it more difficult for big bucks nut cases like Howard Rich to stick his NY nose into CA politics just because he has more money than he knows what to do with.

Working for a real Green Governor, Laura Wells.  


Yes, it's ridiculous you can buy your way on the ballot (0.00 / 0)
A million bucks is nothing in comparison to how much these things cost in terms of media buys.  SO, if you're big Pharma, you can buy your way on the ballot to make sure you confuse the hell out of all the voters on the special election, etc.

We need to end paid signature gathering.  If it's really a democratic uprising, then the people will really rise.  5 people with a million bucks should not be enough to get on the ballot.

I'm proud to work for Kamala Harris for AG.


[ Parent ]
No on all bonds (0.00 / 0)
That's 1B-1E and 84. Big fat NO on those.

Some good may be achieved by the project funded by them, but the funding will hurt us too much. Digging the state deeper into debt will incumber the budgeting process for the next 30 years. What project is worth doing now so urgently that it's worth paying double for? The interest paid on these bonds is a subsidy to the investment industry, money stolen directly from us and paid to them. If these things were really worth doing they'd be worth raising taxs for. The advocates for the bonds may say that they don't raise taxes, but they do in an indirect way sometime in the future. These bond issues are unfunded mandates imposed on the already cumbersome state budget. Something else will have to get squeezed for these things to happen.

There's on possible justification for a Bond issue. The benefit of having the project now is so great that it effectively pays for the debt incurred. None of these bond issues meet that. There's one bond issue, scheduled for a future election (looks like Nov 2008 now) for a new high speed rail link spanning the state from north to south. That's the kind of thing a bond should be for. The bond issues on this ballot should be budgeted as regular maintenance and ongoing improvements.

Repeal Prop 13 on commercial property, fund the state properly, fund these projects properly. But all of these bond issues are a bad deal. No on 1B,1C,1D,1E and 84.

Santa Barbara Progressives


I understand the feeling (0.00 / 0)
I was tempted to say no as well.  I'm just not convinced that we will be able to raise enough revenue in the next few years to get anything done.  Amending Prop 13 is a long-term process. I'm just not sure we can wait that long to fix our infrastructure.

But, your viewpoint is a strong one.

I'm proud to work for Kamala Harris for AG.


[ Parent ]
We agree (0.00 / 0)
pretty much entirely. I'm still a little dubious about the transportation bonds, and I'm with you on 88 -- I like the sentiment, but I don't like the way it's structured. As for 85, I just wonder how many times the stupid thing is going to wind up on the ballot. I'm sick of feeling nervous about it.

Local Sacramento Spit Endorsements:

Yes on J & K (establishes trustee areas for the school district, and allows one board member from each) -- I don't honestly see why this wasn't done years ago

Yes on L (expands SMUD into yolo county) -- I -heart- SMUD, and I think it's a model that should be expanded wherever possible

HELL NO on Q and R (raises the sales tax to publically fund an arena for the Kings) -- details of negotiations haven't even been worked out because the Maloofs are greedy jackasses. I'm dubious about the power of arena-based "revitalization" projects -- I think revitalization can be done in much more effective ways. And I'm not so thrilled about the parking and traffic mayhem downtown that this is likely to create. I find it a little sickening that a regressive tax is being considered in order to fund a place for basketball games that most of us can't afford to go to. I could go on, but I'll stop there.

US Rep will be Matsui
State Senator will be Steinberg again
State Assembly will be Dave Jones
Yeah, sure on all the judges here
And I'm probably going with Roy Grimes, Jerry Houseman, and Ellyne Bell for school board, though the only one I -don't- like is Ganchenko.


Another one for our side. (0.00 / 0)
I just got an email from a friend who's busy and not a political junkie (like I am...), asking about the bonds and props and what to vote for and why.

Nice to be honored with the trust of being a fair guide.

I told him what I was voting for and against, and why.


That's the way to win (0.00 / 0)
If everybody tells 5 friends about the issues, we'd be living in a much better place.

I'm proud to work for Kamala Harris for AG.

[ Parent ]
Calitics in the Media
Archives & Bookings
The Calitics Radio Show
Calitics Premium Ads
Photobucket


Support Calitics:

Shop on Amazon.com

Advertisers

California Friends
Shared Communities
Resources
California News
Progressive Organizations
The Big BlogRoll

Referrals
Technorati
Google Blogsearch
Powered by: SoapBlox