Tack's voting guide 2008
These are my positions on candidates and propositions for federal, california and san francisco candidates and initiatives we're voting on in november 2008. You can reference legislation directly here:
http://www.voterguide.sos.ca.gov/
http://www.sfgov.org/site/uploadedfiles/elections/Nov2008_VIP_EN_2.pdf
Federal:
PotUS: Barack Obama. A McCain, or worse - Palin Presidency would be an absolute trainwreck. Reckless and ideological (Or, could that be McCain/Palin's nicknames respectively). Obama is the first candidate worth voting FOR (not merely against the greater stooge) I've seen since I started voting. Even if you're not with where he stands on the political spectrum he's an open-minded pragmatist. He's going to take the best ideas from everybody and make them better than the sums of their parts. I don't think McCain will listen to advise he disagrees with. It's clear that Obama is the only candidate with the judgement and character to preside during these difficult times.
Congress: Nancy Pelosi. I was going to abstain on this race because I'm pissed about her poor leadership on FISA, the war and the bailout. However, a lot of these have been Pelosi having a progressive solution, Steny Hoyer and the blue dogs pushing back hard and her striking a lame compromise that turns into capitulation once the senate spits it back. If Pelosi is out, Hoyer could be Speaker and that would be worse. Sheehan is a carpetbagger pulling a stunt who will get eaten alive on the hill. And the republicans need to get rid of the crackpots in their party before they can be taken seriously.
State:
Geeze I wish we could get a new governor.
Senator: Mark Leno.
Assembly: Tom Ammiano.
1a. Absolutely YES. The airline fleet and carriers have been scaling back service and it's coming to a head. It's simply not going to be able to meet the demands of the Sacto, SF, LA, Sunny-D transit corridor in the future for anybody who isn't rich. It's going to be a whole lot cheaper to start building High Speed Rail now than in a crunch later. And this can be very timely application of Keynesian economics. Construction can generate a crap-ton of new jobs so people can keep their homes. High-speed rail has a proven economic track record, which is why the rest of the world has been doing it without us for decades. Yes on 1a.
2. Yes. Not my issue per se but how can you not vote for something that says "stop being a prick" without being a prick yourself.
3. Yes. Again, how can you vote against hospitals for children without being a prick.
4. NO NO NO!!! These laws lead to young women being murdered by their fathers. States that pass them always end up with the murders. No on fathers murdering daughters. No on 4.
5. Yes. First time prisoners who spend a year or more in the clink keep coming back for more. If they're non-violent treatment may give us back a productive member of society rather than a repeat offender.
6. No. Funding comes from education, health and environment budgets... which are getting slashed already. Then it gives the money to enforcement. I think money going the other way would do well at giving people alternatives to crime.
7. No. It would make it harder for renewable plants smaller than 30 megawatts to get in on the market, which is kinda counterproductive. And one of my hangups is transfer of permitting authority from PUC's to State Energy Commission. This is a tactical gripe, as I'd like very much to see public power in SF. And we already do have a standard in place.
8. NO NO NO. Saying "these citizens over here have this right, but those citizens over there do not" is fundamentally anti-American. We don not use constitutions to take rights away from people. Your opinion about marriage equality doesn't need to be as much a factor as your concern that once we use the constitution to discriminate against one group, it will be easier to use it to discriminate against you the next time. Don't be a fool. No on 8.
9. No. Can you tell yet that I don't like amending the state constitution by ballot initiative? Besides, this one takes more judging away from judges and mandatory sentencing turned out to be discriminatory last time we took judging away from judges.
10. No. This is T. Boone Pickens, an oilman, trying to drink our milkshake. He wants us to go $5 billion in debt so we'll buy natural gas (fossil fuel) cars instead of hybrids and electrics. It's like using your credit card to pay a mugger to steal your shoes. We don't have the money to do this. Or the shoes. Also I think if we want to increase the amount of efficient vehicles without paying $5 billion, we should do the opposite: we should create a surcharge on vehicles that are not efficient and close our budget shortfalls.
11. No. This is Arnold trying to gerrymander the state for GoP control. And right now, we have direct control over who's around to do redistricting (elections) whereas this would put the governors hand in it all. Bad for democracy.
12. Yes. Everybody could use some farm and home aid right now. And I don't mind if veterans are first in line.
San Francisco County:
District 9 sup: Toss up.
A: Yes. Remember Katrina? Were you here for the quake in '89? The state is gonna shut down SF General if we don't get it up to seismic codes. The Hayward fault is overdue and the last time it threw a big fit it completely leveled every building in SF. That was in the 1800's and we've since rebuilt with better buildings. But SF General could fall down during a crisis during which we would desperately need it.
B: Yes. Affordable housing.
C: I don't know.
D: I don't know. I'm concerned over who these third parties are. I don't want to subsidize a new disney store or bubba gumps. But it's a good idea otherwise.
E: Yes. Simplifies things.
F: Yes. We'd save a lot of money and be subjected to half the seasons of campaign ads.
G: Yes. Legislative bugfix.
H. Yes. We've been talking about municipal power for years, but this is the law that would actually start the study, design, funding and building of a municipal electrical system. PG&E is fighting tooth and nail against this because they'd be out of the power business in SF. So they're saying all kinds of crazy stuff to defeat it. Whatever will stick. What we do know: In Palo Alto, municipal power has been a resounding success. Remember Enron's rolling blackouts? Palo Alto didn't have them. We wouldn't have to deal with that kind of stuff either.
I: No. We hire a consultant to do this periodically. The appeal would seem that a board/office would be able to act and report on what they felt was correct without having to think about wether they'd get hired again. But if the City Administrator would have the sole authority to hire or fire the IRA then we aren't getting that benefit. And so to me the question is why have a permanent office/board/panel whatnot for a job you do periodically when the supervisors could just use parliamentary process to decide who to hire when it's time?
J: I'm gonna stay out of this one.
K: Yes. It's silly that sex work is illegal. Driven underground coercion, violence and trafficking are hard to detect and fight. And no laws ever stopped the worlds oldest profession. Sex workers put this on the ballot. It wouldn't make prostitution legal. It would instruct the police to de-prioritize it's enforcement and cut down it's funding. And it would require them to go after violent pimps and human traffickers.
L: I'm gonna stay out of this one.
M: Yes. This would mean the Rent Board could step in to stop harassment instead of you having to sue after the fact. Many families can't afford to 'front' the cash for a lawyer and either have to endure the harassment or move instead of stay in their home and have it end.
N: Yes. Closes a loophole and helps with solar rollout.
O: No. Taxing VoIP as a utility to increase revenue is stupid and wrong. The other part of this bill is good, fixing a potential legal vulnerability to ensure we can fund 911. But the VoIP redefinition would mean many companies and homes could end up paying the tax twice. If you run PSTN to your building and have VoIP inside with phones ringing on DIDs you may pay the tax through your LEC and a second time on the connection between your PBX and the handset. And this language of services like voice conferencing being hit too: if it's VoIP over softphones (like iChat between your friends) you'd be charged. Now, if the reason we're taxing phones to fund 911 services is to treat it as a use tax... how many times have you conferenced 911 into your WOW campaign? I'm all for the part where they go from a fee to a tax to avoid weird legal pitfalls. If they make that it's own bill I'll vote for it. But this slight of hand to suck $80 million out of citizens and small businesses stinks. Vote no.
P: No. It's Newsome replacing oversight with Brown-style appointees.
Q: No. This closes a loophole, sure. But I'd like to see it be a progressive tax rather than a flat tax. As it stands small firms where there are partners, the employee/partner ratio is pretty low and the pay difference is pretty small too would get a brutal kick in the nuts while fancypants firms which could easily afford it don't pay nearly as dearly as the others. This IS closing a loophole but it needs to be progressive to protect jobs. Next time maybe.
R: Yes. I understand the counterarguments, but I really REALLY want the door to hit W on the way out.
S: No. Ain't broke, don't fix it.
T: Yes. Some people are getting turned away for treatment. T tries to make sure they get treatment.
U: Abstain. This reminds me of the finger wagging Iraq bills congress passed that did nothing to stop the war and just made representatives able to go home and say they voted against the war. If you were angry at the Congress for copping out instead of passing real legislation to end the war, you should be angry at yourself for passing this do-nothing piece of fluff. A no vote would be be a victory for conservative wingnuts. A yes vote would be a victory for cowardly washington insider types.
V: No. JROTC isn't the only game in town. There are the Sea Cadets (Navy) and Civil Air Patrol (Air Force) kids can participate in extracurricularly if they choose to do so. I'm actually not against JROTC per se, but I think our kids could use that class period learning math. Our schools are at capacity and this would take away resources. Maybe if the JROTC teachers were required to be accredited and teach other core subjects on the DoD's dime I'd vote for it. But not this measure.
http://www.voterguide.sos.ca.gov/
http://www.sfgov.org/site/uploadedfiles/elections/Nov2008_VIP_EN_2.pdf
Federal:
PotUS: Barack Obama. A McCain, or worse - Palin Presidency would be an absolute trainwreck. Reckless and ideological (Or, could that be McCain/Palin's nicknames respectively). Obama is the first candidate worth voting FOR (not merely against the greater stooge) I've seen since I started voting. Even if you're not with where he stands on the political spectrum he's an open-minded pragmatist. He's going to take the best ideas from everybody and make them better than the sums of their parts. I don't think McCain will listen to advise he disagrees with. It's clear that Obama is the only candidate with the judgement and character to preside during these difficult times.
Congress: Nancy Pelosi. I was going to abstain on this race because I'm pissed about her poor leadership on FISA, the war and the bailout. However, a lot of these have been Pelosi having a progressive solution, Steny Hoyer and the blue dogs pushing back hard and her striking a lame compromise that turns into capitulation once the senate spits it back. If Pelosi is out, Hoyer could be Speaker and that would be worse. Sheehan is a carpetbagger pulling a stunt who will get eaten alive on the hill. And the republicans need to get rid of the crackpots in their party before they can be taken seriously.
State:
Geeze I wish we could get a new governor.
Senator: Mark Leno.
Assembly: Tom Ammiano.
1a. Absolutely YES. The airline fleet and carriers have been scaling back service and it's coming to a head. It's simply not going to be able to meet the demands of the Sacto, SF, LA, Sunny-D transit corridor in the future for anybody who isn't rich. It's going to be a whole lot cheaper to start building High Speed Rail now than in a crunch later. And this can be very timely application of Keynesian economics. Construction can generate a crap-ton of new jobs so people can keep their homes. High-speed rail has a proven economic track record, which is why the rest of the world has been doing it without us for decades. Yes on 1a.
2. Yes. Not my issue per se but how can you not vote for something that says "stop being a prick" without being a prick yourself.
3. Yes. Again, how can you vote against hospitals for children without being a prick.
4. NO NO NO!!! These laws lead to young women being murdered by their fathers. States that pass them always end up with the murders. No on fathers murdering daughters. No on 4.
5. Yes. First time prisoners who spend a year or more in the clink keep coming back for more. If they're non-violent treatment may give us back a productive member of society rather than a repeat offender.
6. No. Funding comes from education, health and environment budgets... which are getting slashed already. Then it gives the money to enforcement. I think money going the other way would do well at giving people alternatives to crime.
7. No. It would make it harder for renewable plants smaller than 30 megawatts to get in on the market, which is kinda counterproductive. And one of my hangups is transfer of permitting authority from PUC's to State Energy Commission. This is a tactical gripe, as I'd like very much to see public power in SF. And we already do have a standard in place.
8. NO NO NO. Saying "these citizens over here have this right, but those citizens over there do not" is fundamentally anti-American. We don not use constitutions to take rights away from people. Your opinion about marriage equality doesn't need to be as much a factor as your concern that once we use the constitution to discriminate against one group, it will be easier to use it to discriminate against you the next time. Don't be a fool. No on 8.
9. No. Can you tell yet that I don't like amending the state constitution by ballot initiative? Besides, this one takes more judging away from judges and mandatory sentencing turned out to be discriminatory last time we took judging away from judges.
10. No. This is T. Boone Pickens, an oilman, trying to drink our milkshake. He wants us to go $5 billion in debt so we'll buy natural gas (fossil fuel) cars instead of hybrids and electrics. It's like using your credit card to pay a mugger to steal your shoes. We don't have the money to do this. Or the shoes. Also I think if we want to increase the amount of efficient vehicles without paying $5 billion, we should do the opposite: we should create a surcharge on vehicles that are not efficient and close our budget shortfalls.
11. No. This is Arnold trying to gerrymander the state for GoP control. And right now, we have direct control over who's around to do redistricting (elections) whereas this would put the governors hand in it all. Bad for democracy.
12. Yes. Everybody could use some farm and home aid right now. And I don't mind if veterans are first in line.
San Francisco County:
District 9 sup: Toss up.
A: Yes. Remember Katrina? Were you here for the quake in '89? The state is gonna shut down SF General if we don't get it up to seismic codes. The Hayward fault is overdue and the last time it threw a big fit it completely leveled every building in SF. That was in the 1800's and we've since rebuilt with better buildings. But SF General could fall down during a crisis during which we would desperately need it.
B: Yes. Affordable housing.
C: I don't know.
D: I don't know. I'm concerned over who these third parties are. I don't want to subsidize a new disney store or bubba gumps. But it's a good idea otherwise.
E: Yes. Simplifies things.
F: Yes. We'd save a lot of money and be subjected to half the seasons of campaign ads.
G: Yes. Legislative bugfix.
H. Yes. We've been talking about municipal power for years, but this is the law that would actually start the study, design, funding and building of a municipal electrical system. PG&E is fighting tooth and nail against this because they'd be out of the power business in SF. So they're saying all kinds of crazy stuff to defeat it. Whatever will stick. What we do know: In Palo Alto, municipal power has been a resounding success. Remember Enron's rolling blackouts? Palo Alto didn't have them. We wouldn't have to deal with that kind of stuff either.
I: No. We hire a consultant to do this periodically. The appeal would seem that a board/office would be able to act and report on what they felt was correct without having to think about wether they'd get hired again. But if the City Administrator would have the sole authority to hire or fire the IRA then we aren't getting that benefit. And so to me the question is why have a permanent office/board/panel whatnot for a job you do periodically when the supervisors could just use parliamentary process to decide who to hire when it's time?
J: I'm gonna stay out of this one.
K: Yes. It's silly that sex work is illegal. Driven underground coercion, violence and trafficking are hard to detect and fight. And no laws ever stopped the worlds oldest profession. Sex workers put this on the ballot. It wouldn't make prostitution legal. It would instruct the police to de-prioritize it's enforcement and cut down it's funding. And it would require them to go after violent pimps and human traffickers.
L: I'm gonna stay out of this one.
M: Yes. This would mean the Rent Board could step in to stop harassment instead of you having to sue after the fact. Many families can't afford to 'front' the cash for a lawyer and either have to endure the harassment or move instead of stay in their home and have it end.
N: Yes. Closes a loophole and helps with solar rollout.
O: No. Taxing VoIP as a utility to increase revenue is stupid and wrong. The other part of this bill is good, fixing a potential legal vulnerability to ensure we can fund 911. But the VoIP redefinition would mean many companies and homes could end up paying the tax twice. If you run PSTN to your building and have VoIP inside with phones ringing on DIDs you may pay the tax through your LEC and a second time on the connection between your PBX and the handset. And this language of services like voice conferencing being hit too: if it's VoIP over softphones (like iChat between your friends) you'd be charged. Now, if the reason we're taxing phones to fund 911 services is to treat it as a use tax... how many times have you conferenced 911 into your WOW campaign? I'm all for the part where they go from a fee to a tax to avoid weird legal pitfalls. If they make that it's own bill I'll vote for it. But this slight of hand to suck $80 million out of citizens and small businesses stinks. Vote no.
P: No. It's Newsome replacing oversight with Brown-style appointees.
Q: No. This closes a loophole, sure. But I'd like to see it be a progressive tax rather than a flat tax. As it stands small firms where there are partners, the employee/partner ratio is pretty low and the pay difference is pretty small too would get a brutal kick in the nuts while fancypants firms which could easily afford it don't pay nearly as dearly as the others. This IS closing a loophole but it needs to be progressive to protect jobs. Next time maybe.
R: Yes. I understand the counterarguments, but I really REALLY want the door to hit W on the way out.
S: No. Ain't broke, don't fix it.
T: Yes. Some people are getting turned away for treatment. T tries to make sure they get treatment.
U: Abstain. This reminds me of the finger wagging Iraq bills congress passed that did nothing to stop the war and just made representatives able to go home and say they voted against the war. If you were angry at the Congress for copping out instead of passing real legislation to end the war, you should be angry at yourself for passing this do-nothing piece of fluff. A no vote would be be a victory for conservative wingnuts. A yes vote would be a victory for cowardly washington insider types.
V: No. JROTC isn't the only game in town. There are the Sea Cadets (Navy) and Civil Air Patrol (Air Force) kids can participate in extracurricularly if they choose to do so. I'm actually not against JROTC per se, but I think our kids could use that class period learning math. Our schools are at capacity and this would take away resources. Maybe if the JROTC teachers were required to be accredited and teach other core subjects on the DoD's dime I'd vote for it. But not this measure.