Hey everyone!
With all the talk about the Presidential election coming up, some of us might be so overwhelmed that we're forgetting about the Propositions. You know, those little tiny things that change our every day life more quickly than the "settling in" process of our new president. In case you've been a little bit lax on the Props, fear not! I am here to lay them out for you. I will even be discussing them and telling you on which I will vote yes, and the ones I will vote no. That way if you're scared and confused, I fully encourage voting just the way I am. Thank you and enjoy!
PROP 1: Removed from ballot. Oooh, scandalous!
PROP 1A:
SAFE, RELIABLE HIGH-SPEED PASSENGER TRAIN BOND ACT.
- Provides long-distance commuters with a safe, convenient, affordable, and reliable alternative to driving and high gas prices.
- Reduces traffic congestion on the state's highways and at the state's airports.
- Reduces California's dependence on foreign oil.
- Reduces air pollution and global warming greenhouse gases.
- Establishes a clean, efficient 220 MPH transportation system.
- Improves existing passenger rail lines serving the state's major population centers.
- Provides for California's growing population.
- Provides for a bond issue of $9.95 billion to establish high-speed train service linking Southern California counties, the Sacramento/San Joaquin Valley, and the San Francisco Bay Area.
- Provides that at least 90% of these bond funds shall be spent for specific construction projects, with private and public matching funds required, including, but not limited to, federal funds, funds from revenue bonds, and local funds.
- Requires that use of all bond funds is subject to independent audits.
- Appropriates money from the General Fund to pay bond principal and interest.
Summary of Legislative Analyst's Estimate of Net State and Local Government Fiscal Impact:
- State costs of about $19.4 billion, assuming 30 years to pay off both principal ($9.95 billion) and interest ($9.5 billion) costs of the bonds. Payments of about $647 million per year.
- When constructed, additional unknown costs, probably in excess of $1 billion a year, to operate and maintain a high-speed train system. The costs would be at least partially, and potentially fully, offset by passenger fare revenues, depending on ridership.
VOTE YES ON 1A! THIS IS SOMETHING I WOULD LIKE TO SPEND MY TAX DOLLARS ON! Our Public Transit here is garbage. I would love to see us functioning like a real city - California's (mostly the Valley and Los Angeles) has been behind since the 1940s!
PROP 2:
STANDARDS FOR CONFINING FARM ANIMALS. INITIATIVE STATUTE.
- Requires that calves raised for veal, egg-laying hens and pregnant pigs be confined only in ways that allow these animals to lie down, stand up, fully extend their limbs and turn around freely.
- Exceptions made for transportation, rodeos, fairs, 4-H programs, lawful slaughter, research and veterinary purposes.
- Provides misdemeanor penalties, including a fine not to exceed $1,000 and/or imprisonment in jail for up to 180 days.
Summary of Legislative Analyst's Estimate of Net State and Local Government Fiscal Impact:
- Potential unknown decrease in state and local tax revenues from farm businesses, possibly in the range of several million dollars annually.
- Potential minor local and state enforcement and prosecution costs, partly offset by increased fine revenue.
VOTE YES ON PROP 2! There is absolutely no reason why our animals should not be treated more humanly. It does not look like there will be any sort of tax increase, and happier animals = tastier meat. Just ask the Kobe beef in Japan!!! I can't understand why anyone would say no on this one. Shit...even prisoners can turn around in their cells!
PROP 3:
CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL BOND ACT. GRANT PROGRAM. INITIATIVE STATUTE.
- Authorizes $980,000,000 in bonds, to be repaid from state's General Fund, to fund the construction, expansion, remodeling, renovation, furnishing and equipping of children's hospitals.
- Designates that 80 percent of bond proceeds go to hospitals that focus on children with illnesses such as leukemia, cancer, heart defects, diabetes, sickle cell anemia and cystic fibrosis.
- Requires that qualifying children's hospitals provide comprehensive services to a high volume of children eligible for governmental programs and meet other requirements.
- Designates that 20 percent of bond proceeds go to University of California general acute care hospitals.
Summary of Legislative Analyst's Estimate of Net State and Local Government Fiscal Impact:
- State cost of about $2 billion over 30 years to pay off both the principal ($980 million) and the interest ($933 million) costs of the bonds. Payments of about $64 million per year.
This one is debatable. Personally, I'm going to vote NO on Prop 3. It sounds like a great idea, but the way I see it, Children's Hospitals are privately owned and funded. There are children's wards in public hospitals, and those should get the funding from the state. However, this is provided that public hospitals get state funding. I'm guessing that some of our tax dollars go to them. I would love it if Children's hospitals could save everyone, but at this time, I don't think it's something I want my money to. Just at this time.
PROP 4:
WAITING PERIOD AND PARENTAL NOTIFICATION BEFORE TERMINATION OF MINOR'S PREGNANCY.
INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.
- Changes California Constitution to prohibit abortion for unemancipated minor until 48 hours after physician notifies minor's parent or legal guardian.
- Permits notification to certain adult relatives if doctor reports parent to law enforcement or Child Protective Services.
- Provides notification exceptions for medical emergency or parental waiver.
- Permits courts to waive notice based on clear and convincing evidence of minor's maturity or best interests.
- Mandates reporting requirements, including reports from physicians regarding abortions on minors.
- Authorizes damages against physicians for violation.
- Requires minor's consent to abortion, with exceptions.
Summary of Legislative Analyst's Estimate of Net State and Local Government Fiscal Impact:
- Potential unknown net state costs of several million dollars annually for health and social services programs, court administration, and state health agency administration combined.
NO! NO NO NO NO NO!!!! Any young woman who has made a mistake and is BRAVE ENOUGH to go get an abortion should NOT have to get permission from her parents! That is unfair and takes (more) rights away from women! If a teenaged girl is old enough for sick old men to ogle, make uncomfortable, and have thongs designed in her size, she is old enough to make the decision to have an abortion without her parents knowing. HAVING AN ABORTION IS NOT A FUCKING FIELD TRIP! If she is old enough for someone in her family to RAPE HER and get her pregnant, she is old enough to go to the clinic on her own and make her own choice. PLEASE VOTE NO ON THIS ONE! It's one of the most important Props on the ballot!
Prop 5:
NONVIOLENT DRUG OFFENSES. SENTENCING, PAROLE AND REHABILITATION. INITIATIVE STATUTE.
- Allocates $460,000,000 annually to improve and expand treatment programs for persons convicted of drug and other offenses.
- Limits court authority to incarcerate offenders who commit certain drug crimes, break drug treatment rules or violate parole.
- Substantially shortens parole for certain drug offenses; increases parole for serious and violent felonies.
- Divides Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation authority between two Secretaries, one with six year fixed term and one serving at pleasure of Governor. Provides five year fixed terms for deputy secretaries.
- Creates 19 member board to direct parole and rehabilitation policy.
Summary of Legislative Analyst's Estimate of Net State and Local Government Fiscal Impact:
- Increased state costs over time potentially exceeding $1 billion annually primarily for expanding drug treatment and rehabilitation programs for offenders in state prisons, on parole, and in the community.
- State savings over time potentially exceeding $1 billion annually due primarily to reduced prison and parole operating costs.
- Net one-time state savings on capital outlay costs for prison facilities that eventually could exceed $2.5 billion.
- Unknown net fiscal effect on county operations and capital outlay.
Okay, this one is debatable too. Personally, I think I want to vote no on it. The truth is, I don't have any sympathy for drug addicts. They are not part of my life and I don't have ONE SINGLE friend who does drugs. I have a few...and I mean less than 5...close friends who will smoke the OCCATIONAL pot. Drugs really don't surround my life, and I'm very happy this way. Here's the thing though. This Prop brings up something in my mind that Dave once told me: Laws are constructed to protect the stupid and the weak. This prop is certainly catering to the stupid and the weak. I don't think that a teenager smoking some pot should end up in the same jail cell as the meth addict who was stealing cards and credit cards, but at the same time, I don't want that crack addict in some rehab clinic against their own will on OUR tax dollars. Until further notice, or someone can give me a good explaination, I'm fairly sure that I will vote NO on this one.
PROP 6:
POLICE AND LAW ENFORCEMENT FUNDING.
CRIMINAL PENALTIES AND LAWS. INITIATIVE STATUTE.
- Requires minimum of $965,000,000 each year to be allocated from state General Fund for police, sheriffs, district attorneys, adult probation, jails and juvenile probation facilities. Some of this funding will increase in following years according to California Consumer Price Index.
- Makes approximately 30 revisions to California criminal law, many of which cover gang-related offenses. Revisions create multiple new crimes and additional penalties, some with the potential for new life sentences.
- Increases penalties for violating a gang-related injunction and for felons carrying guns under certain conditions.
Summary of Legislative Analyst's Estimate of Net State and Local Government Fiscal Impact:
- Net increase in state costs that are likely within a few years to exceed $500 million annually, primarily due to increasing state spending for various criminal justice programs to at least $965 million, as well as for increased costs for prison and parole operations. These costs would increase by tens of millions of dollars annually in subsequent years.
- Potential one-time state capital outlay costs for prison facilities that could exceed $500 million due to increases in the prison population.
I don't think that now is the time. Sounds good on paper, though...But I'm more interested in health, hygene, and education. I think I'm voting NO on this one, but I'll give it an N/A for now.
PROP 7:
RENEWABLE ENERGY GENERATION. INITIATIVE STATUTE.
- Requires utilities, including government-owned utilities, to generate 20% of their power from renewable energy by 2010, a standard currently applicable only to private electrical corporations.
- Raises requirement for utilities to 40% by 2020 and 50% by 2025.
- Imposes penalties, subject to waiver, for noncompliance.
- Transfers some jurisdiction of regulatory matters from Public Utilities Commission to Energy Commission.
- Fast-tracks approval for new renewable energy plants.
- Requires utilities to sign longer contracts (20 year minimum) to procure renewable energy.
- Creates account to purchase rights-of-way and facilities for the transmission of renewable energy.
Summary of Legislative Analyst's Estimate of Net State and Local Government Fiscal Impact:
- Increased state administrative costs of up to $3.4 million annually for the regulatory activities of the California Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission and the California Public Utilities Commission, paid for by fee revenues.
- Unknown impact on state and local government costs and revenues due to the measure's uncertain impact on retail electricity rates. In the short term, the prospects for higher rates-and therefore higher costs, lower sales and income tax revenues, and higher local utility tax revenues-are more likely. In the long term, the impact on electricity rates, and therefore state and local government costs and revenues, is unknown.
I'm going to vote NO on this one. Put in back on the ballot in 4-8 years, and maybe I'll be all over it. I love the idea of it, but I don't think we're that far advanced, and I don't think any of us can afford to put our money toward research at this time. Eventually, this Prop can be a wonderful thing.
Prop 8:
ELIMINATES RIGHT OF SAME-SEX COUPLES TO MARRY. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.
- Changes the California Constitution to eliminate the right of same-sex couples to marry in California.
- Provides that only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.
Summary of Legislative Analyst's Estimate of Net State and Local Government Fiscal Impact:
- Over the next few years, potential revenue loss, mainly from sales taxes, totaling in the several tens of millions of dollars, to state and local governments.
- In the long run, likely little fiscal impact on state and local governments.
This shit is just constitutionally MEAN!!! It's making two people who just want to get married and/or have a family into FELONS! This country is so hypocrtical with it's veil of separation of Church and State. First off, the word CHURCH is offensive. Fuck your Church. I know this is a Christian country, but does it have to be shoved in my face ALL THE TIME? It all starts with getting penalized in school, or missing an important assignment because other religions' holidays aren't recognized. Then it's saying that two people of the same sex can not get married because "THE CHRISTIAN GOD" says that marriage is between a man and a woman for the reason of procreation.
But what about Green Card Marriages? No questions asked.
Tax Break marriages? No questions.
Marriage between two unwilling teenagers? Sounds great!
Some fucker on his 16th marriage because he just loves him some divorce? AWESOME!
What about a man and a woman getting married who sincerely love each other, but she is infertile? Well...ok. Good enough.
So why can't gay people try, too? I'd rather have grown up with 2 Daddies who loved me that a latchkey kid who has not heard a peep from her estraged father in 12 years! (True story).
Unless you have someone that you are constitutionally not allowed to be tied with via law-abiding paperwork, this Prop is none of your business! VOTE NO!!!
PROP 9:
CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM. VICTIMS' RIGHTS. PAROLE.
INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT AND STATUTE.
- Requires notification to victim and opportunity for input during phases of criminal justice process, including bail, pleas, sentencing and parole.
- Establishes victim safety as consideration in determining bail or release on parole.
- Increases the number of people permitted to attend and testify on behalf of victims at parole hearings.
- Reduces the number of parole hearings to which prisoners are entitled.
- Requires that victims receive written notification of their constitutional rights.
- Establishes timelines and procedures concerning parole revocation hearings.
Summary of Legislative Analyst's Estimate of Net State and Local Government Fiscal Impact:
- Potential loss of future state savings on prison operations and potential increased county jail operating costs that could collectively amount to hundreds of millions of dollars annually, due to restricting the early release of inmates to reduce facility overcrowding.
- Net savings in the low tens of millions of dollars annually for the administration of parole hearings and revocations, unless the changes in parole revocation procedures were found to conflict with federal legal requirements.
*Shrugs* So far it doesn't seem like it would affect our taxes. This seems like another one that is none of my business. I might vote yes on it. I'll leave this one as N/A for now.
PROP 10:
ALTERNATIVE FUEL VEHICLES AND RENEWABLE ENERGY.
BONDS. INITIATIVE STATUTE.
- Provides $3.425 billion to help consumers and others purchase certain high fuel economy or alternative fuel vehicles, including natural gas vehicles, and to fund research into alternative fuel technology.
- Provides $1.25 billion for research, development and production of renewable energy technology, primarily solar energy with additional funding for other forms of renewable energy; incentives for purchasing solar and renewable energy technology.
- Provides grants to cities for renewable energy projects and to colleges for training in renewable and energy efficiency technologies.
- Total funding provided is $5 billion from general obligation bonds.
Summary of Legislative Analyst's Estimate of Net State and Local Government Fiscal Impact:
- State costs of about $10 billion over 30 years to pay off both the principal ($5 billion) and interest ($5 billion) costs of the bonds. Payments of about $335 million per year.
- Increase in state sales tax revenues of an unknown amount, potentially totaling in the tens of millions of dollars, over the period from 2009 to about 2019.
- Increase in local sales tax and vehicle license fee revenues of an unknown amount, potentially totaling in the tens of millions of dollars, over the period from 2009 to about 2019.
- Potential state costs of up to about $10 million annually, through about 2019, for state agency administrative costs not funded by the measure.
I'm voting NO on this one. It is not the Government's job to help me get a more fuel efficiant vehicle. They should be spending this money on FIXING THE PUBLIC TRANSIT! There are plenty of people who do not need cars and they would be taking advantage of the system on this one. I'm voting no. I'll take a PS3 instead, please.
Prop 11:
REDISTRICTING.
INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT AND STATUTE.
- Changes authority for establishing Assembly, Senate, and Board of Equalization district boundaries from elected representatives to 14 member commission.
- Requires government auditors to select 60 registered voters from applicant pool. Permits legislative leaders to reduce pool, then the auditors pick eight commission members by lottery, and those commissioners pick six additional members for 14 total.
- Requires commission of five Democrats, five Republicans and four of neither party. Commission shall hire lawyers and consultants as needed.
- For approval, district boundaries need votes from three Democratic commissioners, three Republican commissioners and three commissioners from neither party.
Summary of Legislative Analyst's Estimate of Net State and Local Government Fiscal Impact:
- Potential increase in state redistricting costs once every ten years due to two entities performing redistricting. Any increase in costs probably would not be significant.
Talk to me about this one. I'm not 100% sure on what it wants. It doesn't look like it changes the amount of time those bastards are in office or anything. I'm really just not too sure what it wants from me. HAELP! XD
PROP 12:
VETERANS' BOND ACT OF 2008.
- This act provides for a bond issue of nine hundred million dollars ($900,000,000) to provide loans to California veterans to purchase farms and homes.
- Appropriates money from the state General Fund to pay off the bonds, if loan payments from participating veterans are insufficient for that purpose.
Summary of Legislative Analyst's Estimate of Net State and Local Government Fiscal Impact:
- Costs of about $1.8 billion to pay off both the principal ($900 million) and interest ($856 million) on the bonds; costs paid by participating veterans.
- Average payment for principal and interest of about $59 million per year for 30 years.
No thank you. I support veterans getting care after their service, but are they so messed up when they're done that they need us to buy houses for them? I'm voting NO on this one. The only way I'd ever have a child in the military is if Prop 5 goes through, and I have a kid who's a drug addicted cooz. Then I'll give this one more thought. /selfish.
And there you have it! Vote with L-chan and join the Rateater/Hamiltoe 2008 Campaign! You won't regret it. Let me repeat that...YOU...won't...REGRET IT!!!