California Special Election

[erikred]

Prop 73: Waiting Period and Parental Notification before termination of a Minor's Pregnancy: NO

While minors should be talking to their parents before getting abortions (or pregnant, for that matter), making it impossible for them to get abortions without doing so doesn't mean that they will talk to their parents; it means they're more likely to get dangerous and illegal abortions instead. If the people behind this measure really wanted to help minors, they should push for legalization of Plan B in conjunction with better sex education.

Pro 74: Public School Teachers' Waiting Period for Permanent Status: NO

Let's not confuse terms here: "Permanent Status" does not mean that a teacher is impossible to fire or somehow free to teach whatever the hell they want. "Permanent Status" means that you can actually plan to be working next year rather than waiting to find out if the school that you work for doesn't want to go to the bother of paying your benefits. Sure a probationary period is good and proper, and that's what the schools have now. Extending it to five years means that schools can have their teachers on pins and needles even longer, worrying how to make ends meet. This makes the teaching profession even less attractive than it already is.

Prop 75: Public Employee Union Dues: NO

Do unions need reforms? Hell, yes, they certainly do. But the image of the union as the great political machine is already a thing of the past. This is just another attempt by people with a lot of money to drive a wedge between unioin leaders and their members. Do not give in to this pettiness. If you want reform, become a shop steward.

Prop 76: State Spending Funding Limits: NO

There's a reason we don't put the power to make a budget in one person's hands: it's way too much power, dammit. If you don't like the way the current state congress drones are making up the budget, elect somebody else to do it. Allowing the Governor to "reduce budget appropriations of [his] choosing" is letting him design the budget. He's got enough power. Let him learn to use what he has instead.

Prop 77: Redistricting: NO NO NO

Do we have a perfect distrcting system at the moment? Of course not. But that's no reason to chuck it out and hand over the reins to three political appointees. Don't get me wrong, I work for Judges, and they're sterling creatures, but they're also political creatures. Do not be mistaken: we're not going to get Solomons here. This is a bald power grab by the Governor. NO NO NO.

As for Props 78-80, I really don't have enough information. 78 and 79 look remarkably similar, which is really never a good sign, and 80 looks like it could go either way.

Anywho, now go fill out those Absentee Ballots already.

Comments

Re: special= retarded?

[lara7.livejournal.com]

ha! We have yet ANOTHER "are you SURE you still want a monorail?" monorail proposition ( I think its #7, no lie), an "advisory propositon" which says " seattle thinks Congress should give everyone health care" (it does nothing even if passes, so why is it on the ballot?), and a state wide non smoking in public proposition which seems okay until they get to the part about no smoking 25 FEET next to a door of a bar/business. Needless to say, selective enforcement would be a problem, and the fear is it would be used against businesses the cops don't like (hip-hop clubs, gay clubs, live music halls, etc),

The one nice thing is there is a "repeal the gas tax" prop that looked like it was going to pass due to voter tax revolt about high gas prices, even though this one goes to specific transportation projects and road/bridge repairs. But now that Katrina happened and the levees broke, it looks like voters might be a little more willing to fund infastructure stuff now, rather than having a bridge collapse happen later, since no one here wants to live in a FEMA trailer, either.

Re: special= retarded?

[alfvaen]

In Edmonton it's now completely illegal to smoke in a bar or restaurant. I was walking to the convenience store one evening, past the neighbourhood pub a few doors down, and got more second-hand smoke than I ever would have if the five people standing on the sidewalk had been able to smoke inside.

So if the whole point is to make it easily possible to avoid second-hand smoke if you don't want it, then a 25-foot limit doesn't sound that bad. Of course, the dangers of second-hand smoke may have been exaggerated anyway, but I still don't like it. Admittedly, I wouldn't mind it if each bar got to choose its smoking status, and post it prominently, but then I don't go to bars.

Personally, I'd prefer spreading a vicious blight that destroys all tobacco plants anywhere in the world, but that's just me.