![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
arkuatPlease advise:
My default strategy with California propositions (and I won't bore you with any further discussion of Alameda County or Oakland propositions) is to vote no.
On Proposition 8, my default strategy is eminently confirmed.
Now I'm going to discuss my puzzlements about which props I'm tempted to vote yes on, because that is the smaller set. Please do set me straight if you see that I'm stumbling into some sort of error.
These are my (tentative) yes props:
1A: will commit the state of California to building high-speed rail transit between the northern and the southern cities. Perhaps not phrased as well as an act of legislation ought to be, but I'm tempted to vote yes for it anyway.
5: Provides therapy and treatment to non-violent drug offenders instead of prison time. Given California's budget problems produced in part by prison overcrowding and inadequate prison health care (being rather harshly and expensively redressed by California courts right now), I'm inclined to vote for this. The opposition assures me that I'm voting for a get-out-of-jail-free card for the wickedest sort of meth dealer, but I'm thinking about more effective ways to steer California kids away from overuse and abuse of cannabis. Plus that fucking monstrous prison bill we pay out of every paycheck in this state and how to reduce it.
11: You had to be here. But if you've been watching poor Arnold struggling with the California budget this year, if you've been watching him closely, then you know that he was right in trying to reform California redistricting in his first package of proposition reforms. That one went down in flames (largely because the other propositions he was proposing back then were so bad), but Prop 11 meets with the approval of the League of Women Voters, and when the League of Women Voters and Arnold "My opponents are all girly-men" Schwarzenegger agree on something, I think it's time to reform California redistricting, and allow voters to choose their legislators instead of having legislators choose their electorate, the way it has been done recently in California to our disappointment and our dismay.
As for the rest of the non-local propositions on the California state ballot, if our legislators can't deal with these things without involving the electorate, then they aren't earning their legislative paychecks. Vote no, no, no, on all the rest. And especially vote no on prop 8: prop 8 is designed to undermine established Californian society, is un-American, unethical, and just plain nasty.
My default strategy with California propositions (and I won't bore you with any further discussion of Alameda County or Oakland propositions) is to vote no.
On Proposition 8, my default strategy is eminently confirmed.
Now I'm going to discuss my puzzlements about which props I'm tempted to vote yes on, because that is the smaller set. Please do set me straight if you see that I'm stumbling into some sort of error.
These are my (tentative) yes props:
1A: will commit the state of California to building high-speed rail transit between the northern and the southern cities. Perhaps not phrased as well as an act of legislation ought to be, but I'm tempted to vote yes for it anyway.
5: Provides therapy and treatment to non-violent drug offenders instead of prison time. Given California's budget problems produced in part by prison overcrowding and inadequate prison health care (being rather harshly and expensively redressed by California courts right now), I'm inclined to vote for this. The opposition assures me that I'm voting for a get-out-of-jail-free card for the wickedest sort of meth dealer, but I'm thinking about more effective ways to steer California kids away from overuse and abuse of cannabis. Plus that fucking monstrous prison bill we pay out of every paycheck in this state and how to reduce it.
11: You had to be here. But if you've been watching poor Arnold struggling with the California budget this year, if you've been watching him closely, then you know that he was right in trying to reform California redistricting in his first package of proposition reforms. That one went down in flames (largely because the other propositions he was proposing back then were so bad), but Prop 11 meets with the approval of the League of Women Voters, and when the League of Women Voters and Arnold "My opponents are all girly-men" Schwarzenegger agree on something, I think it's time to reform California redistricting, and allow voters to choose their legislators instead of having legislators choose their electorate, the way it has been done recently in California to our disappointment and our dismay.
As for the rest of the non-local propositions on the California state ballot, if our legislators can't deal with these things without involving the electorate, then they aren't earning their legislative paychecks. Vote no, no, no, on all the rest. And especially vote no on prop 8: prop 8 is designed to undermine established Californian society, is un-American, unethical, and just plain nasty.
