Monday, October 09, 2006
Oh, right, the election
Well, I decided that I'm never going to be able to sit down and do the rest of the propositions in great detail, so here's the blitz:
Prop 1A seeks to stop fund-raiding, this time for transportation. As most folks know, the government borrows between its various funds to do stuff. Prop 1A wants to stop folks from borrowing from some transportation money. The problem with the inflexibility caused by this is that it might mean that new revenues would have to be raised to deal with other, non-transportation stuff. There's also an aspect of risk-pooling involved with that borrowing ability. So, I think I'm going to endorse NO.
Props 1B, 1C, 1D, and 1E are bond measures to get more money because the state of California doesn't want to be bothered with governing within its means. Instead, it'll take out huge loans in order to accomplish things, pretend like the problem is solved, and then take out even more huge loans. I'm inclined to say "make do with what you've got," so I say vote NO on all four.
Prop 83 I've done, and it's a "tough on crime" measure that isn't actually tough on crime. It will make soccer moms feel better, I guess, and cost us a bunch of money. Yay! I'm thinking vote NO.
Prop 84 I've mentioned, though I couldn't get into the excitement. It's another "Borrow a shitload of money because fiscal responsibility is too hard" measure, this time aimed at making overpopulation even worse. I'll recommend NO.
Prop 85 is yet another parental notification thingie. I plan to vote YES on it simply to spite the ASUC, though I'm pretty indifferent towards the actual policy.
Prop 86 is a cigarette tax, which taxes a few people who don't care about their health and puts their money towards people who do. Or something. I say NO. Even the Chron says no.
Prop 87 is a reverse tariff, which seeks to make it more difficult to make money from California oil. It also purports to magically prevent this cost from being passed on to the consumers, though there doesn't appear to be a wizard powerful enough to do so. The Chron has a good quote, for once: "No initiative can suspend the laws of supply and demand." If you read blogs, you know that the opponents insist that this will increse our dependence on foreign oil, which, if I remember my government PSAs correctly, means voting yes on Prop 87 is the same as murdering people in Iraq. So vote NO.
Prop 88 is a tax increase for schools. There's always a tax increase for schools. Maybe if schools actually used the money they got properly, I might be willing to support this, but throwing more money at a broken management system just doesn't work. Tom McClintock had a great column on this a few years back, and I recommend you read it. Do what I say and vote NO. Or else. (That is, or else abstain, or vote yes)
Prop 89 is a free speech reduction act, which recognizes that the people who should determine who is allowed to speak in politics is the government. The same government which maintains the restriction of broadcast political advertising to the hands of the rich. No, I don't think we should trust them. Let's vote NO.
Prop 90 is the eminent domain plus initiative, which seeks to make it harder for the government to take your property because someone else could make more money from it. Most of the criticism is that it goes too far, in making the city liable when it takes action to reduce the value of your property. I don't see how this is really any different from the complaints about eminent domain, though. When the government takes action to take stuff from you, be it property or money, you deserve compensation. Maybe passing Prop 90 will convince the government to engage in less social customization and more "let people have their fucking freedom"ism. So I'll endorse a YES.
There are also some elections, but California elections are pretty boring. Arnie is going to win regardless, and though there are candidates for other offices, I have no idea who they are.
. . .
|
. . .
|
