State Propositions

California sends hundreds of representatives to the state house to decide our issues of the day, yet with the kooky proposition process people spend hundreds of millions of dollars on advertising, mail-outs, and robo-calling to try change the workings within.  People complain that the state house cannot balance the budget but every election they rush out to vote for their favorite pork barrel on the proposition merry-go-round.

If I have to vote on everything, what am I paying all those legislators and lobbyists for?...

Proposition 19 – Legalize Marijuana Under California Law

Proposition 19 allows people 21 and over to possess cultivate, or transport marijuana for personal use; the local governments to regulate and tax production; and limits employees ability to address marijuana use in the work place.  Despite what many Californians and most San Franciscans think, Federal law still trumps local initiatives.  Until the policy on marijuana changes at the Federal level no law in California or any other state will make it legal.  This is a sloppy proposition.

Besides the fact that the drug would still be illegal under Federal law, the proposition does not establish any state regulations over distribution and/or product standards.  This leaves it up to each city and county to cobble together their own laws (and before some people try to compare the drug to cigarettes and liquor, there are very defined federal guidelines on distribution and quality control on those products).  For the greedy politicians who see this as a taxation cash cow, the proposition establishes no uniform statewide taxation policy on the product.  Finally, the law specifically allows passengers in moving vehicles to smoke which makes no sense as drivers could be impaired through a contact high.

While a large number of Californians may be anxious to get in on the drug trade and participate in the North American cartel, this proposition is bad.

I’m voting no on Prop 19.

Proposition 20 – Redistricting Rules of Congressional Districts

In the last election, Californians voted to create a citizens commission to draw the boundaries for state Senate and Assembly seats (Proposition 11).  Prop 11 is a great example of how people use the proposition process as a trojan horse.  Instead of including the United States Congressional districts in the process, which would have drawn the attention of national players, the organizers slipped an incremental change past the voters.  Now they are using the “if you voted for that, you might as well vote for this” sell point.

The existing Citizens Redistricting Commission will be no more effective at eliminating the current gerrymandering process than leaving it up to the Legislature.  All it does is add more cost to the process (an estimated $3 million, as stated in the Official Voter Information Guide) and create another set of plush political posts to be bartered with by the existing parties.

Prop 20 is just more budget bloat without any results.

I am voting no on 20.

Proposition 21 – Establish $18 Annual Vehicle License Fee to Help Fund State Parks and Wildlife Programs

Propostion 21 is a tough call.  The state parks system continues to be underfunded.  During last year’s budget battle, the governor threatened to close more than 200 out of 278 state parks so the state could balance the budget.  The parks have become a political chip in the larger budget game.

On the surface, Prop 21 looks like a good idea to get money for the park system.  All funds are guaranteed to go to support the parks.  However, this can fall under the “fees disguised as taxes” issue that Proposition 26 refers to.  While Prop 21 specifically states that anyone paying the fee gets free access to the parks, it comes off as an unfair tax on vehicle owners when we all benefit from using the state parks.

Proposition 21 is just another in a long line of state propositions that removes flexibility in needed to set priorities and write a state budget.  After much internal debate, I am voting no on Prop 21.

No on Prop 21.

Proposition 22 – Prohibit State from Borrowing or Taking Funds Used for Transportation, Redevelopment, or Local Initiatives

I searched (“googled”, to be exact) on the phrase “robbing Peter to pay Paul” and a picture of Colonel Sanders came up.  I am not sure what he has to do with the phrase but who doesn’t love the Colonel or his tasty chicken?  Anyway…

Like most states, California is required to balance its budget on a yearly basis.  Much of the time, instead of making painful cuts, the state will “borrow” money from other sources to cover their shortfall.  This leads to the cascading effect of counties and cities having to scramble to balance their budget.

Does Prop 22 fix the budget problem?  No, but it forces the issue of having to address spending versus revenue.

I am voting yes on Prop 22.

Proposition 23 – Suspends Air Pollution Control Law (AB 32)

This proposition is the one where the ads are telling Texas not to mess with California.  The message is stupid but simple so it will probably be effective.  Which is fine by me.  Just as long as nobody brings back the crying Indian.

Prop 23 is totally short sighted.  The state will not losing jobs by requiring tighter pollution standards.  California is the most populous state in the nation and contributes a proportional amount of air pollution.  To put it into an international perspective, California would rank 8^th in GNP in the world; it takes a lot of smoke stacks to make that kind of coin.  Since nothing is done at the federal level (even under the Obama administration), someone needs to take the lead here.

The auto and energy industries can meet these standards.  It just means temporarily making less profit.

I am voting no on Prop 23.

Proposition 24 – Repeal Legislation on Tax Liability for Businesses

The California State House cannot plan.  For twenty-three of the last twenty-four years the state legislature has been late with a budget.  Much of the delays are around the wrangling done to try and squeeze ten pounds of spending into an eight pound sack.

Prop 24 has been mislabeled a Tax Fairness Act but it would eliminate the corporate tax breaks in the 2008 and 2009 budgets designed to lure businesses back to California.  There is nothing fair about playing budget ping-pong and impacting other group’s abilities to make sound financial decisions.  The rollback of these tax breaks could have serious implications on job growth and research in the tech sector as well as further damage California’s already weak relationship with job growth businesses.

California needs businesses to come to the state, not flee the state.

I am voting no on Prop 24.

Proposition 25 – Change the Vote Required to Pass CA Budget from Two-Thirds to Simple Majority

California is one of three states that requires a supermajority for passage of a budget. The others are Rhode Island (also two-thirds) and Arkansas (which imposes a three-fourths threshold).  Prop 25 wants to move that line from the two-thirds supermajority to the one-vote, simple majority.

In essence, this gives the party in power at the time the ability to ram through a budget without an intelligent discourse on the topic.  Some may think that is a good idea but a shining example on why this is a bad idea is our current Health Care Plan at the national level.  Speaker Pelosi shoved that $1.3 trillion dollar spend down the American gullet with no chance for discussion because she knew she had the votes in her pocket.  Now people are just starting to get a peak about what that means for your parents, grandparents, and children.

The current two-thirds majority requires all parties to work together, and do a little horse trading, to get a budget in place.  By law, California is required to have a balanced budget each year so there is no chance that there will ever be a stalemate.

I’m voting no on Prop 25.

Proposition 26 – Requires Certain State and Local Fees Be Approved By Two-Thirds Vote

Proposition 26 is 100% political and 100% crazy.  Oil, alcohol, and tobacco companies bankrolled the signature drive for this dozy to get it on the ballot.

Prop 26 is yet another way to constrain the state from meeting budget.  The state house is not sneaking a bunch of taxes through as fees.  A yes vote on this means that the state will be driven into further budget chaos.

I'm voting no on Prop 26.

Proposition 27 – Eliminate State Commission on Redistricting

Proposition 27 and Proposition 20 are two sides of the same coin.  Two years ago, the voters decided to spin off control of redistricting the state senate and house to the Citizens Redistricting Commission.  Prop 27 is trying to reverse Prop 11 and stop Prop 20.

As contradictory as it sounds, I am voting no on Prop 27.  Let the statewide experiment on redistricting continue.  If in a few years down the road we find one or the other to be more effective, then we can consolidate.  We’ve already spent the money on Prop 11; let’s not throw it away.

No on Prop 27.