Election Predictions?

Received an e-mail this morning reminding me I haven't made any predictions on the outcome of tomorrow's election. I e-mailed back that I'm usually not the one to throw out guesses on election outcomes.

About the only prediction I'm willing to make is that more bad things will result from tomorrow's election than good. In California, that's nearly always the case.

Feds Threaten CA over Prop 19

I'm sure many of you have heard by now that officials in the Obama Administration are threatening to take the State of California to court should Prop 19 pass on November 2. I've heard some people suggesting this, and the fact Prop 19 is contrary to federal law, are reasons we should vote against Prop 19.

I strongly disagree. If anything, this is a reason for people to vote for Prop 19. The feds shouldn't be dictating law to the states and they shouldn't interfere with state laws at all, unless those state laws violate the civil rights of that, or another state's, citizens.

I say vote YES on Prop 19, if for these threats alone. Let the feds take us the court and let the battle be joined!

Local Races

Just the ones I can vote in, anyway:

4th District Supervisor- I still haven't decided whether to stand aside, or vote for Virginia Bass. Stand aside seems like the best choice right now. I don't know that there will be all that much difference in what happens on the Board of Supes if Virgina were to win and I don't have much of a beef with Bon- Bon, really.

But Bon- Bon's supporters actually gave me two reasons to vote for Virginia:

My next door neighbor- a Neely supporter and San Francisco transplant- told me that just keeping Bon- Bon's seat on the Coastal Commission was enough reason to vote for her. That made me wonder if it might be a good reason to vote for Bass?

And, her supporters. After listening to Bon- Bon's supporters for months on end on other blogs, I can't help but throw Bon- Bon in with them and vote against all of them by voting for Virginia.

I know. Sounds petty, but I've said before I can vote for just as frivolous reasons as the next guy. Bottom line is, I still don't think it's going to make all that much difference in the larger scheme of things who gets the 4th District seat so I might well just avoid the issue and stand aside.

Assessor- I don't think there's any bad choices in this race. I'll be voting for Mari Wilson if for no other reason than she's worked there for so long and knows the job. I also like the idea of someone being able to work their way up in an organization and finally reach the top.

That goes back to my days in the National Guard as I moved up through the ranks. I never really coveted higher rank or authority. It did get a bit frustrating, though, when I'd be next in line for a Squad Leader position and some new guy with higher rank than I would enlist and jump into the position I was ready to take and that happened fairly often, as I recall.

If Mari proves incompetent for the position, we can always vote her out next time around. Until then, she should get the chance to prove she's capable of the job.

District Attorney- Allison Jackson is the most qualified and has the experience.

I think Paul Gallegos' heart is in the right place, but he just doesn't seem capable of much to me. Quite frankly, I feel embarrassed having him as our District Attorney, especially when the local pot growers hold a fund raiser for him.

Time to give Allison a chance.

Mayor, City of Eureka- Frank Jager. No explanation needed.

Ward 1, Eureka City Council- Marian Brady. No explanation needed, although I will say I'm surprised at how many signs of hers I've seen around town.

Ward 3, Eureka City Council- Mike Newman. No explanation needed.

Local Measures:

Measure N- Yes. No explanation needed.

Measure O- No. Believe it or not, I make that decision with a bit of a heavy heart. I do think the city needs the money. Of course, the city can always can use more money. I'm just not going to voluntarily accept another tax.

If this was the only tax increase we were facing, I'd be a little more inclined to vote for it, but it isn't. We're facing up to a 50% increase in our water bills in Eureka. Should Prop 23 fail, our utility bills might go up as high as 60%. Taxes are going to have to be raised, eventually, at the local, state and federal level to pay of all the debt we've acquired.

Things don't look good, and I'm going to try and protect my finances as best I can.

Nov. 2 Statewide Ballot Initiatives

Prop 19: YES. I’ll be holding my nose and voting Yes on this one. I’ve mentioned before it makes my skin crawl to vote for something just so it can be taxed and regulated, but we have to do something to start moving away from the pot wars.

Prop 20: I might not vote on this one. I’d like to stay out of the argument that, if we just set up our districts right, the state will start being run correctly.

But, I noticed Eric Kirk is voting No on this one because he’s worried the Democrats could lose some seats in Congress should it pass. Maybe I’ll vote for it now? I’ll either stand aside or vote Yes.

Prop 21: NO. Paying for our vehicle registrations is already a problem for us. I’m not going to vote to make it $18.00 more difficult.

Prop 22: Standing aside on this one and not voting.

It sounds like a good idea to make it harder for the state to take money from cities and counties as they’ve done before, but it also can put the state in a situation where it can’t be flexible with its finances. No good way to vote on this one so I'll let the rest of you deal with it.

Prop 23: YES. This is the most important one on the ballot as far as I’m concerned. Common sense would tell you it’s foolish to vote to raise your utility bill up to possibly 60% above what it currently is.

Voting Yes doesn’t eliminate any air pollution laws and utilities would still be required to get 20% of their power from renewable sources, just not the 33% AB32 requires. You can still take advantage of wind and solar power should you chose to do so. You just won’t be forced to if you can’t afford it.

Prop 24: NO. This would eliminate some tax breaks for businesses. Taxes will likely be going up pretty soon, anyway. Might as well try to hold the line as best we can.

Prop 25: NO, although a Yes vote is tempting. This one changes the vote requirement to pass a budget from 2/3 to a simple majority.

This one seems rather silly to me as proponents say they'll still need 2/3 to raise taxes but a simple majority is needed just to pass the budget. What sense does it make to pass a budget if you can’t just as easily increase taxes to pay for any increases in the budget?

I suspect the proponents are being less than truthful and they’ll be able to increase taxes to meet their budget just by calling them fees, as some opponents to this initiative have suggested.

The temptation for voting Yes is simply to put an end to the Democrats pointing fingers at Republicans for the state of the state. They'd have the majority and could pass the budget with their majority alone. After that, they can run the state even further into the ground, if that’s even possible, and the blame will fall on their shoulders alone.

Prop 26: YES. This one will require 2/3 voter approval for the legislature to raise user fees. This is important since, if Prop 25 passes, the Democrats are certain to try to convert as many taxes as they can to “fees”. That way they can raise “fees” to cover their increased budget.

Prop 26 could help protect taxpayers from potential runaway spending. Well, maybe not runaway spending, but runaway taxing to pay for runaway spending as might happen if Prop 25 passes.

Prop 27: NO. I don't have much faith that any group of people would be less corrupt than the ones we have in Sacramento, but I'll go ahead and leave the job of gerrymandering to whoever sits on the redistricting commission. It's tempting to just stand aside on this one, though, as with Prop 20.

How I'll Be Voting (State Races)

Governor of California- Dale Ogden (LP)

Yep, once again wasting my vote on the Libertarian Party candidate, but I can't think of a better opportunity.

I think both Brown and Whitman are pretty much of equal ability and both are just as likely to sign bad legislation. I had given Whitman the edge when she supported Prop 23 earlier on but, after she came out opposing 23, she lost that edge.

Not that supporting 23 is really an issue for the Governor's race. It simply shows common sense. Reversing her position shows either a lack of common sense or simply a desire to pander to what she thinks is popular opinion. It's probably a little of both.

I don't think either candidate is well suited for solving one of the state's biggest problems, either: The public pension crisis. But, it doesn't really matter. The state is broken and unfixable. It won't matter which one is elected.

Besides, this may be the last time I'll be able to vote for a Libertarian candidate in the general election since we'll be switching to the blanket primary. Might as well take advantage of the opportunity.

Lieutenant Governor- I'm stuck on this one between two candidates. Either Libertarian Party candidate, Pam Brown, or Republican candidate Abel Maldanado.

Despite thinking favorably of Gavin Newsom earlier on, I've come to think of him as power hungry authoritarian that wants to micromanage everyone's lives. He is a threat to everyone's liberty and must be stopped.

Problem is, Maldanado comes off to me as not too bright a guy. I don't want either of them as Governor, should Jerry Brown win the Governor's seat and not finish his term due to his age. I'm stuck, but my hatred of Newsom gives Maldanado the edge right now.

Secretary of State, Controller, Treasurer, Attorney General, Insurance Commissioner and Board of Equalization Member- I'll vote for the Libertarian Candidate in all those races.

I'm tempted to vote for the Republican candidates for Treasurer and Attorney General as both Democrat candidates have long time reputations as skuzbags, from a libertarian point of view. All I need is an excuse and I'll choose the Republican in those races. I'll be waiting for one.

U.S. Senator- Most likely Carly Fiorna. I'd really like to get rid of Boxer, despite her voting my way on one or two issues every now and then. I'll admit to not paying much attention to Fiorna, though. My biggest issue with her, from what little I've seen of her web site, is she sounds War Party.

I'll be keeping an eye on her for the next week or so. I can always vote for Gail Lightfoot if Fiorna seems too right wing for me.

U.S. Representative- I'll likely vote for Libertarian Party candidate, Mike Rodriguez. I'd like to vote for Republican Loren Hanks if we didn't have an LP candidate in that race. I really haven't looked too closely at Hanks yet. I'm guessing he's War Party as so many Republican candidates are and I don't want to vote for candidates that support aggressive military action.

I might do it this way: If the LP candidate doesn't show up for any candidate forums that are held, I might go for Hanks. If Hanks comes off too right wing, or too War Party during the forums, I might just stand aside and not vote in that race as I've done at least once before.

State Senate- Back when Lawrence Wiesner ran against Mike Thompson for Congress, I'd written here that I'd vote for Thompson if I thought Wiesner actually had a chance at winning. Wiesner comes off to me as War Party. But this is a state race and War Party doesn't enter the equation.

Wiesner gets my vote on this one. Even if he has some right wing positions I don't agree with- and I'm sure he has a lot of them- the Republicans are in the minority in the state legislature and will likely remain so in the foreseeable future. It would be nice to [hopefully] have one more NO vote in Sacramento to vote against the foolishness that so often comes from there.

State Assembly- Karen Brooks is the obvious choice here. Wes Chesbro has actually played a fairly significant role in running this state into the ground.

I've gotten the impression Karen might be one of those religious right- wing types but she's been prudent enough not to campaign as such. Regardless, the Republicans will likely remain in the minority and she'll be one more welcome NO vote against Sacramento nutiness... hopefully.

Judicial Seats- I guess I'll be standing aside on the judicial races, once again. That's a shame as these are important. Problem is, how does a libertarian decide?

I've brought up the subject before to other libertarians around the state. It would be nice if we had some libertarian oriented law folk around the state that could take a look at the candidates' records and give us an idea of what kind of decision the candidates would be likely to make.

Do they tend to favor government power over individual choice? Do they support more power for law enforcement? Questions like that would need to be answered to give a qualified vote.

Unfortunately, even non- libertarians seem to be left in the dark on the judicial races. I'd rather stand aside than take the chance on voting for someone that might threaten my liberty.

That's it for now. Other recommendations throughout the week, assuming I find the time.

Taxpayer's League Recommendations

The Humboldt Taxpayer's League recently released their recommendations for the statewide and local ballot initiatives:

Prop 19: Marijuana- No Position
Prop 20: Elections- No Position
Prop 21: Park Taxes- No
Prop 22: State Spending- No
Prop 23: AB32 Suspension- Yes
Prop 24: Tax Breaks- No
Prop 25: 2/3 Vote & Budget- No
Prop 26: Taxes- 2/3 Vote for increased fees- Yes
Prop 27: Elections- No Position

Local Ballot Measures:

Measure N: Balloon Tract Rezone- Yes
Measure O: Eureka Sales Tax Increase- No
Measure Q: School Bond Measure- No

No real surprises there for me except maybe Eureka's Measure O. For some reason I figured they might support O since local gadfly and past League President, Leo Sears, came out in favor of it.

It's also good to see the League once again not take positions on issues they either can't come to an agreement on, or feel don't have anything to do with the League's mission.

I'll post my positions on issues and candidates sometime this week. I know you're all sitting there with your absentee ballots waiting for your marching orders from me. Please be patient. I've been lazier than usual as of late.

Last Night's Gubernatorial Debates

Too funny. What Steve Greenhut said.

Great minds think alike. As I wrote here earlier on, it won't matter who the next Governor is. This state is unfixable.

Voter Recommendations

A couple tables available showing various organizations' recommendations on the ballot initiatives: The HOPE Coalition has theirs up. Then there's this one from California Choices.

I found it odd that the HOPE list shows the Libertarian Party of California not taking a position on Prop 23- the one that would suspend AB32- while the Cal Choices one shows (correctly, in my opinion) the LP of CA recommending a Yes vote on Prop 23.

An Argument For Prop 23?

I guess, but the writer of this piece in the Orange County Register makes a pretty convoluted case for it by concentrating more on AB32- the law that Prop 23 would suspend- and global warming. Not that I don't think he makes a good case. He just wrote too much. He's not alone in his thinking, either.

What I've found to be missing in the debate over Prop 23 is that passage of Prop 23 doesn't mean individuals and communities can't still pursue alternative energy. If you or your community wish to set up a solar or windmill farm after Prop 23 passes, by all means do so. You simply won't be FORCED to use more expensive energy sources that you might not be able to afford as will likely happen as AB23 is further implemented.

Seems simple enough to me and that's why I'm voting YES on Prop 23.

Kubby For City Council?

Steve Greenhut has a nice piece in the Orange County Register this morning expressing a bit of optimism toward the prospect of moving us back to a more freedom friendly society. He focuses on past Libertarian Party gubernatorial candidate and current candidate for South Lake Tahoe City Council, Steve Kubby.

His piece gives me a little more respect for Kubby than I'd had in the past- his seeming obsession with marijuana having been a problem for me earlier on. It looks like he's running a principled race for that city council seat, though, bringing up land use and regulation issues. I'll wish him luck. I think we could use some Kubby types on our city councils up here.

An Argument Against Prop 19

I'll take issue with at least one point this gal makes in a San Francisco Chronicle commentary arguing against Prop 19, the upcoming ballot initiative to legalize and tax marijuana in California. Susan Manheimer, police chief of San Mateo, claims passage of Prop 19 will allow people to legally drive cars "with marijuana in their system".

I don't know how she can say that. It's illegal to drive in California under the influence of alcohol, drug or narcotics. That applies whether the alcohol or drugs are legal, or not. Prop 19 won't change that and, as one comment to her commentary pointed out, people who smoke pot and drive are likely already engaging in such behavior.

We can quibble about some of her other arguments, and there are some legitimate- even libertarian- reasons to oppose Prop 19, but I don't think worrying about pot smoking drivers is one of them.

Marian Brady's Facebook Page

Candidate for Eureka City Council, Marian Brady, has started a Facebook page for her campaign. All Marian's supporters will want to add her page to your FB "Like" list.

Oh, another Eureka City Council candidate, Mike Newman, has started up his campaign page.

Dale Ogden For Governor?

At this point I think that's how I might be voting in November. Dale Ogden is the Libertarian Party candidate this time around. Am I wasting my vote? Hard to say.

I really don't have much of a beef with either Brown or Whitman. I don't think either of them can do much to get this state out of the mess it's in. California is unfixable.

I was actually favoring Brown over Whitman, earlier on. I kind of like his offbeat approach to issues. He was even quoted in the paper a while ago as saying "We have too many laws already". Wow! And that from a Democrat?

He's also done a few other admirable things from my perspective. One of them being joining the lawsuit against Chicago's handgun ban in his role as Attorney General, pissing off a lot of those from the Left.

But, he supports AB32 (that global warming prevention law) and opposes Prop 23- the upcoming ballot initiative to suspend AB32. Last I heard Christine Whitman supported suspending AB23, although I suppose that could still change.

I'd almost give Whitman the edge, at this point, although I can't help but think either of them would be willing to sign bad bills into law as our current Governator has.

I don't know that it will matter who wins. I don't see any compelling reason to chose one over the other, from a libertarian perspective, so I think this is the perfect opportunity to again throw away my vote on the Libertarian Party candidate.

Prop 19 Winning On Facebook

The Sacramento Bee reports the Prop 19 campaign- the upcoming ballot initiative to legalize and tax marijuana- has a Facebook page up with quite a lead over the opposition as far as Friends of the page go. Funny thing is, just yesterday I was searching Facebook for a Prop 19 site and couldn't find one.

I'm wondering if Facebook Friends numbers could be an half- way decent gauge of how campaigns might do in an election? I watched the Friends lists of both Downey and Hislop during our last Sheriff's race. I forget the exact numbers but Downey had Hislop beat early on with Facebook Friends and won the election handily.

Did anyone notice any instance this last election where a campaign with the fewest Facebook Friends won? Wouldn't it be weird if it turned out you had a good chance of predicting outcomes in elections by simply looking at which campaign had the most support on Facebook?

Election Day

Today is Election Day and some of you get to go to the polls. I won't be going since I voted by absentee ballot two or three weeks ago.
~~~~~~
Eric Kirk has his voting recommendations up on his blog. A clear Authoritarian slate he's picking, as would be expected, if only because he's voting in the Democratic primary. What other choices does he have?

But seriously, Gavin Newsom is a clear Authoritarian and Eric has long been a fan of his so the label fits if for that reason alone.

I see Eric also, as expected, is voting no on Prop 16 & 17- the PG&E and car insurance initiatives.

I mentioned here earlier I stood aside and didn't vote on those issues but, since Eric is voting against them, I'll go ahead and mark the YES box on the wife's sample ballot to nullify Eric's vote. Connie doesn't always follow my recommendations but she doesn't usually follow the issues that closely so often takes my advice.
~~~~~~
Kudos to Rose Welsh for posting Kevin Hoover's rather convoluted explanation of his endorsement in the District Attorney's race. Reading it, I got the impression he would be voting for Allison Jackson, only to come to the end and see he chose Paul Hagan. Strange line of reasoning, from the way I read it.
~~~~~~
So, the campaign signs in my yard come down at 8pm tonight when the polls close. I hope the rest of you do the same. If nothing else, just pull them up and lay them flat on the ground so we're not all being yelled at anymore.

And no, I don't stay up to watch the election results. Too many bad things happen on elections, especially in this state. I'll read the results in the paper tomorrow morning.

Hey, I don't mind watching car crashes, earthquakes, shootings or other disasters on YouTube after they've already happened. I don't like watching them in real life so I'm not going to stay up and see what will likely be more disasters taking place as election returns come in.

HOPE Voting Summaries

Humboldt Organized for People and the Environment (HOPE) has their summary of the various political party, organizations and newspaper recommendations for the June election online now.

It looks like the Los Angeles Times, San Francisco Chronicle and CA Nurses Association are closest to the exact opposite of my positions on the initiatives. The only surprise there is I expected more groups would take exact opposite positions from mine.

A Press- Democrrat NOTA Recommendation?

Don't know that I've ever seen the Santa Rosa Press- Democrat recommend None Of The Above before. Still, I'm not sure their editorial on the 2nd State Senate primary would qualify as a strict NOTA recommendation. It seems obvious to me they'll be recommending Noreen Evans in the general election.

Brooks For Assembly Kick- Off Thursday

Republican Candidate Karen Brooks Kicks Off Campaign For State Assembly District One

FOR PLANNING PURPOSES
Contact: brooksforassembly@gmail.com
Phone: (707) 822-7736
WHEN: Thursday, April 15th, 3-6 pm
WHERE: Wharfinger Building
One Marina Way (at Waterfront)
Eureka, CA 95501

Karen Brooks, citizen candidate, is challenging a career politician to win the people’s seat and bring common sense leadership back to Sacramento.

A 30-year resident of Humboldt County and small business owner, Karen and her family reside in Bayside, California.

Following the Tax Day Rally at the Courthouse, Karen Brooks will introduce herself to voters and kick-off her campaign. A brief press Q&A will follow Brooks’ comments around 3:45pm.

Karen Brooks For Assembly?

She sounds good to me, so far, from her letter that was published in the Times- Standard today. Does anybody know if she has a campaign web page up yet? I haven't been able to find it if she does.

Addendum: Karen Brooks had another letter published in the Santa Rosa Press- Democrat this morning:

New ideas

EDITOR: With the state facing a $24 billion deficit, it seems like the only news coming out of Sacramento is the dismal approval rating of 13 percent or legislative proposals levying fines against ski resorts and parents for failing to provide their kids with helmets.

Meanwhile, California is still facing 12 percent unemployment with no means of increasing opportunities for Californians to attain work. Small businesses are the lifeblood of this economy and offer the opportunities for millions of Californians to work and provide for their families.

It’s time for the people to establish priorities for their state, because as it stands now the only priorities out of Sacramento seem to be re-election and nanny government.

We need new ideas and a new voice to advocate common sense ideas for California.

KAREN BROOKS

Candidate, 1st Assembly District

Bayside

Downey Endorsements Up

I just noticed Mike Downey has a partial list of people endorsing him for Sheriff up on his campaign web site. It doesn't specify partial on the web page but I don't see a number of names of people I know are supporting him, my own and the Matteolis being a few of them.

Then again, maybe mine is one name a candidate wouldn't want seen on a list of his or her supporters? Hmmm...???