#caelection

[reagangomez]

Me 😂...naw but for real😠. #ElectionDay #CAElection #Midterms2018 https://www.instagram.com/p/Bp3AZ7kD0SV/?utm_source=ig_tumblr_share&igshid=10qimnjdq1buf

[pdamerica]

Update On Our Work Counting FL, GA, and CA. Can You Help?

[blanco-journey]

Your Vote Doesn't Matter - Now What?

The ladies continue to discuss.  

[pauljmcmurdie]

Tired of proposition propaganda? Read on :-)

by: Rakesh Patel

Hey friends :-)

After reading the official CA voters' guide that came in the mail, I still didn't feel confident enough to vote on each of the state propositions. The arguments for/against felt overly simplistic and super biased...and my lack of a law degree or any working knowledge of the city/state politics & finances left me unqualified to draw any conclusions from reading the full text.

...So instead I looked at our state's 5 major newspapers, and it turns out that

the major newspaper editorial boards are a great source of nuanced and informative arguments

(and interestingly they unanimously agree on 11 out of the 17 propositions).

Here's a summary of the stances the newspapers took, in case you may find it useful :-) When multiple newspapers took the same stance, I linked to the LA Times editorial as it was consistently the most in-depth.

(protip: you can get around all newspaper paywalls by browsing in incognito mode)

Prop 51: School construction bonds.

4 no (no editorial), 1 yes (yes editorial)

Surprise! 4/5 newspapers recommended against funding public schools. Nobody was against public education, but the opposers point out some flaws in who would benefit (not the schools that need it the most) and the high interest payments of the bonds.

52: Additional revenue for hospitals.

5 yes (yes editorial)

All 5 newspapers agreed that the way this bill raises and allocates funds is good. The benefit mainly goes to low-income families.

53: Voter approval for bonds $2 billion and more.

5 no (no editorial)

Kind of a snooze-fest. Local governments today can issue bonds without voter approval, and this measure would force a public vote for all large bonds. None of the newspapers thought this is a good idea since the system works well today and this change could delay the funding of infrastructure projects.

54: Publish all bills online at least 72 hours before the final vote.

5 yes (yes editorial)

More transparency in government? Duh.

55: Extend income tax hike on the wealthy.

3 no (no editorial), 2 yes (yes editorial)

Editorials in favor acknowledged this is a band-aid but emphasized the governor's lack of a real tax reform plan that could reliably fund essential services. Editorials against pointed out that CA's wealthiest citizens derive most of their wealth from stock market and other windfalls which creates budget volatility that has already caused problems.

56: Raises tobacco and e-cigarette taxes.

5 yes (yes editorial)

In CA alone, tobacco usage results in billions of dollars of healthcare costs and 40k+ deaths annually, and CA has one of the lowest cigarette taxes in the nation. It's not obvious that increasing the tax is the right thing to do however. The editorial link above addresses each of the counterarguments.

57: Sentencing, earlier parole for nonviolent offenders.

3 yes (yes editorial), 2 no (no editorial)

Newspapers were split on the details & the editorials are worth reading. The main argument against was that some violent offenders could get early parole under this law. The main argument for acknowledges this but cites that this happens anyway due to loopholes, and that this measure could constitute real prison reform that rehabilitates prisoners.

58: Restores bilingual education.

3 yes (yes editorial), 2 no (no editorial)

The editorials make for very interesting reading. No newspaper was against bilingual education, but the data has shown that limiting bilingual education in CA has helped immigrants by decreasing dropout rates and making students more college- and job-ready. The editorials in favor cite that bilingual education can be done in a more effective way that won't increase dropout rates.

59: Urges Citizens United be overturned.

3 yes (yes editorial), 2 no (no editorial)

Nobody made an argument that it shouldn't be overturned. The disagreement here centered around what this proposition actually does (nothing) and what it asks lawmakers to do (try and pass a constitutional amendment to overturn it). The editorials capture the arguments well.

60: Requires adult film actors to wear condoms during sex.

5 no (no editorial)

All 5 newspapers point out flaws in this proposition that may end up inviting unnecessary litigation and pushing the porn industry further underground rather than intelligently regulating it.

61: Limit prices on prescription drugs.

5 no (no editorial)

All 5 newspapers acknowledge that pharma companies' price-gouging is a problem, but that this bill is not the right way to do it and may have unintended negative consequences.

62: End death penalty in favor of life without parole.

5 yes (yes editorial)

The main arguments against are that it is inhumane and disproportionately affects minorities. The 5 newspapers unanimously agreed.

63: Gun control. Tightens weapons restrictions.

5 yes (yes editorial)

California already has the strictest gun laws in the U.S., but lots of people still die from guns. All 5 newspapers agree that this proposition is a great opportunity to impose even more restrictions on guns.

64: Legalizes, commercializes marijuana use.

4 yes (yes editorial), 1 no (no editorial)

Marijuana is already effectively legal in CA and anyone can get it pretty easily. This law would end the medical marijuana ruse. The devil is in the details with this proposition. Those in favor acknowledge its flaws. The Sacramento Bee, which was the only one opposed to it, placed greater weight on the flaws.

65: Plastic bags. Requires proceeds to go to environmental fund.

5 no (no editorial)

The newspapers point out that prop 65 is funded by plastic bag manufacturers and is likely meant to mislead voters into thinking that the entire plastic bag ban is just a money-making scheme. They argue that grocery stores should keep the proceeds from bag charges since it helps cover the costs of providing paper bags which are more expensive.

66: Speeds up death penalty proceedings.

5 no (no editorial)

All 5 newspapers agreed on abolishing the death penalty in prop 62, and all 5 agree that prop 66 probably can't deliver on its promises and may deny prisoners their constitutional rights.

67: Referendum on state ban on plastic bags.

5 yes (yes editorial)

All 5 newspapers agree: ban plastic bags. It's a no brainer.

Sources:

Los Angeles Times guide to CA propositions

San Francisco Chronicle national, state, and local election guide -- also has a guide to the 24 SF-specific measures.

San Jose Mercury News election editorials

San Diego Union Tribune editorials list

Sacramento Bee election editorials

CA.gov offical voter guide: summary and nonpartisan analysis of all bills