Thursday, April 30, 2009

Hot topic: May election

The following from an SF K Files reader:
I was wondering if you might be able to post info on the upcoming May special election and how the propositions will effect funding to our schools. Our son's preschool is urging everyone to vote "NO" on 1D because it will severely cripple early education funding, but what about the others?

13 comments:

  1. my initial reaction is a definite yes on 1F, is it? the one that says no pay increase when their is a budget deficit for the legislators.

    they already get a car, and lots of other expenses paid for on the taxpayer dime.

    granted, its probably a thankless job. but better than lots of other jobs I can think of that pay a lot less, with no auto pay increase.

    ReplyDelete
  2. oops. I meant "there" in line two.

    I'd like to know more about 1A and 1B, I hear lots of ads, but the public poll rating is a strong No right now.

    Maybe just a backlash?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Please tell your childless friends to vote NO on 1D.

    If it passes it will be devastating for preschools.
    In particular it will completely KILL First 5 funding.

    The only thing I could find for the other props was that Schwartzenegger supports all of them.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Beware of the deceptive wording in these props!

    ReplyDelete
  5. http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/editorials/la-ed-endorse29-2009apr29,0,4936062.story

    ReplyDelete
  6. These props are hard--a deal with the devil. 1D would be devastating to children's funding. 1C borrows against future lottery revenue, continuing our policy of funding our state on a "poor tax" on people's unrealistic dreams. 1B is okay, moving money to the schools, but will only pass if 1A passes--and 1A is the biggest deal with the devil of all, a spending cap that will devastate future funding for human needs and education, tying the hands of the state no matter how any future situation changes. Colorado passed one of these and then had to rescind it; Oregon refused to pass it.

    It's a really, really bad way to make policy, but the top Dems voted to put 1A on the ballot based on getting 1B--and avoiding massive cuts to the schools this year. Future hands tied for present mitigation of devastation.

    What is really needed is tax reform and overturning the 2/3 rule in the legislature that is allowing the California GOP, aka the party of death, to hamstring the legislative process. Many of our legislators are okay people who want to to the right thing, but their hands are tied. So it gets put to the people. And the way that big money and coalitions and voters work with the direct ballot, it is almost impossible to get "the people" to make the hard decisions, looking at the situation as a whole, to reform the tax code, raise taxes, and trim spending where possible. All of these things need to be done. That's why we need an effective representational government that can make the deals to raise the taxes and trim wasteful programs.

    But instead we run government by initiative--thus the 2/3 rule, which was put in by initiative; also the infamous Prop 13; we refuse to raise taxes in general; we encumber the general budget with special programs; yet we say we don't want deep cuts to the schools. Hmmmm, since we can't print money in CA, where is this school money supposed to come from?

    Bottom line, I don't know how I'm going to vote. I want to vote NO across the board! Prop A is a terrible, terrible idea. Yet I don't trust that the Repubs, many of whom are also opposing this deal on anti-tax grounds (they just want the deep school cuts to go through), won't just push through those cuts after all rather than go back to the drawing board on taxes and tax restructuring. I may hold my nose and vote yes on A and B and C (not D!).

    These are terrible choices.

    ReplyDelete
  7. 7:25: Why must HUGE cuts be made which will effect the most vulnerable members of our population: the mentally ill and young children?!? It seems amazingly cruel that ANYONE could support these two propositions.
    Sorry but I think we need to have some sort of guaranteed safety net for these two groups.

    A agree with the previous poster who suggested getting rid of the 2/3 rule.

    Read more here: http://noprop1d1e.com/

    ReplyDelete
  8. It is ridiculous that you need 2/3 to pass a budget or raise revenue, but only a simple majority to amend the state constitution (Prop 8--though I realize that's in litigation limbo as to whether Prop 8 was an "amendment" or "revision"). I'm starting to want to go homestead and home school in northern Michigan or something. All of these propositions scare the bejeebers out of me. California's governance is so screwed up. Our legislators are termed out as soon as they've found their way to the capitol bathroom, and no offense, but there's no way most voters have the time or skills to actually read, understand, and think through the implications of laws they are asked to vote on through the initiative process so they rely on advocacy groups whose positions they generally agree with or sound bite ads. That's no way to run anything, much less the world's 8th largest economy and one of the most diverse populations on the planet.

    ReplyDelete
  9. They're all bad. Vote no on all of them.

    Taxes need to be raised and spending needs to be cut. These are all twisted ways of trying to borrow money from the future to pay for things now. We need to reduce our dependence on debt.

    I guess Prop 1F is okay, but it's just petty spite from the voters to the legislators.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I think all of the propositions are terrible. Here's a link to a column I wrote about them:

    http://www.beyondchron.org/news/index.php?itemid=6841

    ReplyDelete
  11. Thanks, Lisa.
    I'm going to post your link on my FB page.

    ReplyDelete
  12. I'm thinking of voting no on all but Prop B--I know it won't matter if Prop A goes down, but at least it says, please do fund the schools (just not in these other twisted ways).

    ReplyDelete
  13. Here's another good article courtesy the Huffington Post: http://tinyurl.com/cv8pz5

    ReplyDelete