Jackie Goldberg's Ballot Recommendations

Here I reprint the California Ballot Recommendations from LA Dean of Progressive Politics, Jackie Goldberg.

Goldberg’s Ballot Recommendations
November 4th, 2008


Hi Everyone, This edition of Goldberg’s unsolicited opinions is coming early because many of us will be voting by mail so we can work on Election Day for those candidates and issues we care about.

This truly is a watershed moment for our nation. After almost 30 years of Reagonomics, the economy is in the toilet, the wars continue, and Americans are truly afraid for their own future and for that of the next generation.

This is the time to vote for ALL Democrats on you ballot. I know many have done things you don’t like, and some have done little to nothing at all. But at this particular moment, large majorities of Democrats in Congress and in Sacramento are essential if the issues facing this state and nation are to be addressed in a more progressive manner.

It is absolutely essential to get progressive and even moderate voters to the polls! Turn-out will decide the future of this state and nation.

As to the Ballot initiatives, the Critical Measures to DEFEAT are Propositions 4, 6, 8, 9, and 10. These are ugly, reactionary and for the most part deceptive measures, funded by the foes of middle class folk. They are well funded, and some keep coming back in the hopes they will finally pass. And most of the truly ugly measures are Constitutional Amendments. Right now, I urge a NO on all Constitutional Amendments, and on all those listed below in the “ugly” category.

The Critical Measures to PASS are Propositions #2 and 5. These move forward the agenda of humane treatment of animals raised for human food, and the essential task of prison reform where drug addiction is at the core of the non-violent criminal behavior.


THE GOOD: Deserve your effort to help pass.

Proposition #2 gets my “YES” vote because it requires more humane treatment for calves, egg-laying hens and pregnant pigs that are
raised for human food.

Proposition #5 deserves an unequivocal “YES” recommendation on the November ballot, of statewide measures. You may or may not remember Proposition #36 which was passed by the voters to begin to treat drug addiction more as a medical
issue than as a criminal one. That measure was heavily supported by the Drug Policy Alliance, which are the key supporters of Proposition 5. Almost all police agencies and District Attorneys opposed Proposition 36. But it works! This measure ONLY applies to nonviolent drug offenses, and increases funding for Drug Rehab.Programs. It also would shorten Parole for non-serious Drug offenses, while lengthening parole for serious and violent felonies. Drug treatment works! Most addicts need more than one try at it, but it is the only thing that works over time, on a regular basis. Law enforcement and prison guards don’t like it. Nonetheless, this is a definite YES on Prop. 5.


THE GOOD, BUT EXPENSIVE:

Proposition #1 provides additional funding for the complex planning for a High Speed Rail system between Los Angeles and San Francisco. It does NOT actually build the High Speed Rail, but it does provide funding to plan it, and to improve existing public transportation that would ultimately connect to it.

The only question is whether or not to sell bonds would cost $19.4 billion over 30 years (Principal and Interest). In spite of the cost, I am personally voting YES on Prop. 1.

Proposition #3 will also get my “YES” vote as it provides funding for hospitals at University of California facilities, and for Children’s Hospitals around the state. It will increase access to pediatric care of children throughout California.
The cost, however, is $2 billion over 30 years, for both Principal and Interest.

Proposition #12 will provide home loan guarantees for about 3600 California Veterans. It does NOT have a “financial needs” test and it does not require the veteran to have served in combat or even in a combat zone. But, since most military members are there through the “poverty draft,” I will be voting YES on Prop. 12, the $1.8 billion dollar bond.


THE UGLY: Deserve your effort and money to oppose!

Proposition #4 on the ballot for the third time, and it is still rotten to the core. It would require young pregnant women, under the age of 18 to have parental notification, and to wait 48 hours AFTER that notification to get an abortion. This measure is a CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT, and therefore would take a 2/3 vote to change. It will harm the health of young people because more teens will seek unsafe and illegal abortions rather than tell their parents. Also, many times the person who impregnated the young woman is a family member, maybe even a parent or step parent. The measure would also authorize damages to be paid by a physician who violates the ban. CALIFORNIA VOTERS HAVE ALREADY DEFEATED THIS MEASURE TWO TIMES IN RECENT YEARS. It is only on the ballot again because of the belief that with a Presidential election going on, many will read the title and vote yes.
If you care about young women and their reproductive rights, if you are pro-Choice, this is a no-brainer. Keep voting no, and vote NO on Prop. 4.

Proposition #6 is just as “ugly” as Proposition 4. It is brought to you by the Runner family. Sharon and George Runner spend all of their time, money, influence, and effort trying to find ways to arrest, prosecute, and imprison for life the largest number of people in the world. This measure lengthens prison sentences on many non-violent crimes, raises Misdemeanors to Felonies, creates NEW crimes, and uses State Funding for increasing local police and sheriff departments. It is therefore NOT surprising that police chiefs and sheriffs around the state support this medieval measure. California already has the highest prison rate in the nation, and maybe in the world. We imprison for “Life” more people than the Soviets did at their height of power. And it will only cost about one billion dollars per year, on-going, with increases annually based on the Consumer Price Index. That cost will come ahead of Education, Healthcare, Infrastructure needs, and every other need of this state. But even if the price were “free,” the proposed sentences are so far out of kilter that they do not meet the simple criteria of
“let the punishment fit the crime.” THIS IS A CRITICAL “NO” VOTE. Vote NO on Prop. 6

Proposition #8 would amend the California Constitution to eliminate the right to marry for same gender couples. It is evil and wrong, and for the very first time would enact discrimination against a group of Californians into the state’s otherwise exemplary civil rights-oriented constitution. New polling shows that the religious right’s advertising is working, and now Prop. 8 leads by 5% in a shift in the polls. Do NOT assume that your friends and neighbors understand that “Yes” means NO to the civil rights of same-gender couples, and will require permanent discrimination in the California Constitution. Vote NO on Prop. 8

Proposition #9 appears to be a “victims’ rights measure, but the only goal of this constitutional amendment is to keep people in prison forever, even though they have served their sentence. It REDUCES the number of Parole hearings an inmate is entitled to. That is its real purpose. The rest is camouflage. Vote NO on Prop. 9

Proposition #10 is a wolf in sheep’s clothing. It looks like it would help get us to alternative fuel for motor vehicles. But really what it is does is provide subsidies to move us to natural gas to fuel our vehicles rather than oil. But here is the catch, natural gas is not a renewable energy source, and like oil, is a fossil fuel. And though it looks like it will help subsidize electric and hybrid vehicles, the wording would all but exclude hybrids, plug-in hybrids, electric cars, and other clean fuels from assistance. It would make natural gas billionaire T. Boone Pickens very happy and even richer than he already is. There are NO requirements to improve air quality or reduce greenhouse gases. And it does not require any of the industries that would get “clean energy” grants in the tens of millions of dollars to ever produce clean power! This is a $10 billion measure paid for by a very special interest group, without any clean air goals. In the right direction, but the WRONG policy method to get there. Vote NO on Prop. 10


PROPOSITIONS #7 AND #11

Proposition #7 Almost all groups and individuals are opposed to Proposition 7 because they say it would force small renewable energy companies out of business, and it would allow power providers to always charge 10% above market price of power to pay for the costs to shift to renewable energy. But, most of California’s electricity comes from burning coal and fossil fuels. And, most experts believe that 40% of global warming pollution comes from this type of electricity generation. One-half of all the electricity in Los Angeles is generated from out-of-state coal. California currently is the 16th world’s largest global warming polluter. The private, investor-owned utility companies do NOT want to be required to shift to clean, renewable energy. That is why Southern California Edison and others have spent so much money on a campaign to defeat this proposition and why you have been seeing “NO on 7” advertisements for months. Yes, there are problems, and I think it will go down to defeat. But I for one, probably will be voting “YES” on this, because it is TIME for us to seriously set goals and requirements to reduce pollution in California and the to reduce our share of the pollution that leads to global warming. I urge you to consider the positives and the negatives, and make up your own mind. It is a flawed measure, and maybe we should defeat it, fix it, and put it on the next ballot. I’m just not sure I want to wait another two years.

Proposition #11 is another difficult issue. It is absolutely true, in my opinion, that the current Assembly and Senate districts favor one political party or the other, and that that means that members can take more ideological views on issues than perhaps they might if they were in contested districts. And I believe that is why the California League of Women Voters supports this measure. But there are flaws in this thinking, because it does not take into account that the key reason for gridlock in Sacramento is that there are no moderate Republicans since the right-wing purged moderate Republicans from its ranks of officeholders. And, no redistricting plan will yield 2/3 for Democrats in both Houses, so the budget gridlock will be unaffected. Finally, I am not sure why the majority party would want to share redistricting power with the minority party in any state! These “commissioners” will be appointed, not elected. There really won’t be any way to hold them accountable. Thus far the only thing I saw in contested seats was that the Democrats, who won contested seats, were largely more like “moderate Republicans than like Democrats. I am not sure we need more of those in the state legislature. I plan to vote “NO” on Proposition 11, and would urge you to do the same. Vote NO on Prop. 11.


SUMMARY: Proposition 1--YES Proposition 7—Undecided
Proposition 2—YES Proposition 8—NO
Proposition 3—YES Proposition 9---NO
Proposition 4---NO Proposition 10-NO
Proposition 5—YES Proposition 11-NO
Proposition 6—NO Proposition 12-YES

(If you are unsure, except for Propositions 2 and 5, when in doubt, vote NO in spite of my recommendations.)




JUDGES

Office No. 72 Hilleri Grossman Merritt
Office No. 82 Cynthia Loo
Office No. 84 Lori-Ann C. Jones
Office No. 94 C. Edward Mack
Office No. 154 Rocky L. Crabb


County Measure R—places a ½ cent sales tax on L.A. County residents, for 30 years to pay for certain specified transportation costs. Many projects did NOT make the list, and that is why there are Supervisors both For and Against the measure. I do NOT like sales tax increases, and think maybe they should pass a list that helps ALL parts of the County, so I will be voting NO on this measure. However, you should read the list of projects, and if they seem good to you, you should vote YES on the measure.

SCHOOL, Los Angeles Community College District Proposition J—Vote “YES”

SCHOOL Angeles Unified School District Proposition Q—Vote “YES”


CITY OF LOS ANGELES:

Proposition A—Vote “YES”

Proposition B—Vote “YES”