Monday, July 14, 2008

2008 Ballot Initiatives

I decided to take a peek at the initiatives that will be on the ballot this November. Looks like there are eleven,so far. Forgive me for shortening the titles:

Prop 1- High Speed Passenger Train Bond: I'll probably vote NO on this one if only because I nearly always vote no on bond measures.

Prop 2- Treatment of Farm Animals: This one will require farmers to keep animals in cages with enough room to move around a bit, so to speak. Proponents are upset with laying hens, for example, being forced to live in cages so small they can barely stand up. I'm very sympathetic to this issue but realize enforcement might have drastic consequences for some farmers. I'll hold off on making a decision on this one.

Prop 3- Children's Hospital Bond Act: Doesn't it seem that every election there's at least one thing you need vote for for the children? Another bond issue so likely another NO vote from me. I also have to wonder why we need a bond act for children's hospitals? What about hospitals for everybody else?

Prop 4- Waiting Periods/ Parental Notification/ Abortion: Back again, this one prohibits abortions to minors without parental consent within 48 hours, or some such. I'll probably vote YES on this one in support of parental rights.

Prop 5- Non- Violent Offenders, Parole and Rehabilitation: I'll hold off until I can get a clearer picture of what's involved. This will cost more money for prisoner rehabilitation programs but certainly rehabilitation is a worthy goal. However, I have to wonder if the programs we already have actually do any good? This does look like it will reduce sentences for some drug offenses, so that might be a good thing.

Prop 6- Criminal Penalties and Laws. Public Safety Funding: Looks like it will give more money to law enforcement and crime prevention programs. Also increases penalties for some crimes. I'll hold off on this one, too, but might vote NO on it.

Prop 7- Renewable Energy: Requires all utilities to generate 20% of their power from renewable energy by 2010. I understand even a number of environmental organizations oppose this one and think it's a bad idea. I'd likely vote NO on it, anyway, as I think requiring such conversions without considerations of the costs involved isn't a good idea.

Prop 8- Limit on Marriage: This is the one to alter the state constitution to define marriage in the state as only between a man and woman. Definite NO vote on this one.

Prop 9- Victims Rights: Another one of those things where the victim's rights are supposed to be considered during various phases of the criminal justice system. I'm curious if there's a problem in regards this issue to begin with? No Position, pending further info.

Prop 10- Bonds for Alternative Vehicles and Energy: Probably a NO vote as I can't help feel that this one, if passed, would end up funding any number of boodoggles after all is said and done.

Prop 11- Redistricting: This is the latest attempt to end the gerrymandering where all the state legislators drew the lines of their districts so they're virtually guaranteed re- election. I'll probably vote YES, or stand aside. I'm skeptical there would be any meaningful change with this one even if it does work as planned.

There's one more initiative pending signature count verification, as best I can tell. That one will require that school administrators can't be paid more than the highest paid teacher at the school. Don't know what to think about that, but I won't worry about it until the signatures are verified.

17 Comments:

At 5:53 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Vote 'NO' on propositions ?
HMMMM ! Have to agree with you.
Unless when you vote 'NO', you are actually voting FOR something. I sincerely believe in the people of California being able to get some action done that the constipated legislature can not do. I also don't sign petitions as they are hawked by people who are getting paid per signature. I am at a loss as to why there so many of these propositions being proposed by Big Money Interests.

 
At 7:47 AM, Blogger Ernie Branscomb said...

Fred, Why would you vote no on the high speed rail???

California's infrastucture is behind the times and it needs to be rebuilt/upgraded. It would put many, many people to work, right here in california.

Plus, they need to take the money that was designated for the Eel River canyon and spend it somewhere. What beter place than to spend it on Los Angeles. You won't see them complaining that it just won't work.

 
At 8:54 AM, Blogger Carol said...

Please reconsider your "yes" vote on the parental consent initiaitve and do some further research. Thank you!

 
At 10:45 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

A self-professed "Libertarian" in favor of restricting abortion rights. What a sick joke.

 
At 11:50 AM, Blogger Fred said...

A self- professed libertarian who believes parents have a right to be informed of their children's medical situations.

 
At 11:50 AM, Blogger Fred said...

I'm not ignoring you, Ernie. Just busy.

 
At 5:19 PM, Blogger Carol said...

Well, Fred that is the way the iniative sounds - supporting parent's rights. This is the third time this iniative has been on the ballot: just tweaked a bit this time. And each time it gets voted down.

Like it or not, there are some girls who may want to be able to get an abortion if it is a case of incest. Also, it is just further assault on a women's right to choose.

 
At 5:47 PM, Blogger Pogo said...

Carol and 10:45 AM,
Is it "abortion rights" for children or notification/approval of their parents for the procedure? Some libertarians believe that unborn infants are humans and thus have rights to life too.
Just askin'.

 
At 7:22 PM, Blogger Fred said...

Carol writes: "there are some girls who may want to be able to get an abortion if it is a case of incest."

Isn't that so true: This whole thing is about incest?

This pretty wild that the push for this initiative seems to come from those fearing incest. How often does that happen?

Seems it happens all the time from what we hear from the lefties and feminists.

But, I can't imagine you, Carol, not caring if your daughter got pregnant and chose an abortion without notifying you.

Or does that happen all the time?

 
At 5:09 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Is it the "right to choose" or the "right to change her mind"? Most females these days are aware of the cause of pregnancy. When they "CHOOSE" to engage in that activity with predictable results they sometimes have "a change of heart". I guess it's a "girl thing".

 
At 7:49 AM, Blogger Carol said...

I have worked very hard at keeping the lines of communication open with my daughters. Yes, I would want them to tell me if they were going to have an abortion, but I would hope that by exposing them to family planning information while rearing them would prevent them from ever getting pregnant. My daughters and I have attended parent/teen workshops at Planned Parenthood. My oldest daughter was a member of the sex-education performing group, Spare Change for 3 years.

Education and communication is key to rearing children. Unfortunately, there are many children that do not communicate well with their parents.

Unfortunately, Fred, incest does occur more often than you would think, but that is not the only reason to oppose this initiative.

Where life begins is a point of disagreement. Some people think it is at the point of conception; other's believe it is at birth.

Family Planning education is key.

 
At 8:07 AM, Blogger Fred said...

I find it somewhat bizarre that you're using incest as the reason for denying the vast majority of parents their right to be informed of their kid's medical situation, or condition. Certainly incest exists, but I can't help but think it's relatively rare. Seems to me it would make more sense to deal with protection of the minor children who end up in incestual relationships and I believe such protections already exist.

 
At 8:13 AM, Blogger Fred said...

As far as the railroad, Ernie: First, we'll be doubling the cost of High Speed Rail by using bonds to get it started. Of course, you sometimes have to borrow money to build things and this probably would be one of those cases. Except railroads are heavily subsidized just about everywhere. I understand Amtrak is subsidized to the tune of something like 10 billion dollars a month and the only Amtrak lines that come close to paying their own way are a few in the North East.

So, the state's already broke and can't even really keep up the current roads and rails and we're going to create yet another railroad that's going to require yet even more taxpayer money to keep running, never mind paying off the original bonds?

Not something I would look forward to paying for.

 
At 8:28 AM, Blogger Carol said...

Fred, my daughter, Andrea, started a blog for her summer project at UCSC, and soon I will write a post on it. Perhaps, she can explain to you better than I why you should vote 'no'on prop 4. Glad to see that we are in agreement on Prop 8. Equality for all!

 
At 9:48 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"This pretty wild that the push for this initiative seems to come from those fearing incest. How often does that happen?"

What does it matter how often it happens? Only one American had his head sawed off by a fanatical terrorist on camera. Does that make it any less horrifying?

 
At 11:54 PM, Blogger Bitman said...

" Since its advent, Amtrak has never made money. Subsidies total $30 billion.

Amtrak's audited statement for fiscal 2003 (the most recent figures) show a loss of $1.3 billion, up from $1.1 billion in 2002. Amtrak's payroll alone exceeds its ticket revenues."

 
At 6:08 AM, Blogger Fred said...

9:48 wrote, "Only one American had his head sawed off by a fanatical terrorist on camera. Does that make it any less horrifying?".

No, but you don't go out and kill every arab in the world because of such an event. We also shouldn't be taking away millions of parent's rights because a handful of parents are involved in incest.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home