A brief word on the California propositions

Super Tuesday is two weeks from tomorrow and, in California, we will also be voting on several propositions. You really should read them before you vote, but here’s some things I have observed.

You can no longer determine who supports or opposes what because they create an organization to serve their purpose. You also have to look very carefully to follow the money. The propositions seem simple this time around, but they are not.

Be careful on 91. There is no argument against it, but the argument for it says it is not needed and please vote no. I suppose it was too late to remove it from the ballot, but I am curious to see how many votes it gets.

Prop 92, in effect, separates Community Colleges from K-12 education and out from under the influence of the CTA. I would normally think that to be a good idea, but the proponents of this law are students wanting to lower their own costs. No one else seems to think this is a good plan because it doesn’t consider where the expense of educating these students will come from and it virtuaslly removes community college cost from the influence of inflation. California Community Colleges are already the best deal in education in the nation and low income students already get their fees waived.

You have to ask yourself who really benefits from Prop 93. It changes the term limit law to allow elected officials to remain in the same branch of the state legislature for 12 years. It is true that it lowers term limits from 14 years to 12, but it allows current elected official to stay in their current position for 12 years. This dramatically increases the time in office for many of those currently “representing” us. Honestly, if you can’t get anything done in 2 terms (8 years) in the Senates and 3 terms (6 years) in the Assembly, you probably shouldn’t get re-elected anyway. I am not one to use the “slippery slope” argument, but I wouldn’t be surprised to see an attempt to change something again 10 years from now to allow these career politicians to stay in office again. We passed term limits for a reason. We should probably leave it alone.

The Governator and four large Native Tribes negotiated a deal of mutual benefit to the tribes and the State. The results of these negotiation are Props 94, 95, 96, & 97.¬† Here the opponents are the tell-tale indication. Nevada casinos don’t want to risk losing customers to those who would stay home in California. The Casino Workers’ Unions are not provided enough of a grip on the Indian Gaming employees by these propositions. These are the major groups against these propositions which allow the tribes to increase their income potential by expanding their business on their land in exchange for more income for California.

Truth Be Told: I vote for propositions that raise money without raising taxes. I vote against anything that raises taxes or doesn’t provide a tax free method for paying for itself. One more rule… if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *