Primary Election, June 8 2010
So, you should go vote just so that you can vote No on Prop 16, the "Have the Government Enforce PG&E's Monopoly" statute. In case you'd like to see my thoughts on the rest:
Prop 13, fixing your place up so it's earthquake-safe doesn't trigger a property tax update: Yes.
Prop 14, only 2 people from any and all parties advance to the general election: No. Found here: 2. Prop. 14 bans counting write-in votes in November for Congress and state office. Three times, Californians have elected someone to congress in November by write-in votes (1930, 1946, 1982). We do know how to cast write-ins in California. Voters of Long Beach elected a Mayor on write-ins in 2002, and voters of San Diego almost elected Donna Frye Mayor on write-ins in 2004.
3. Prop. 14 changes the requirements for a party to remain ballot-qualified. Now they stay on by polling 2% of the vote for any statewide race in midterm years (they get a free ride in presidential years), but Prop. 14 says parties don't have nominees any longer, so that wouldn't work. The only other way is for parties to have 100,000 registrants. Peace & Freedom, with 58,000, would go off the ballot. . . .
5. Finally, it says that members of unqualified parties can't have their party label on the June ballot. This is because neither the measure nor its implementing legislation amend sec. 8606 of the election code, which defines "party" to be "qualified party."
And: This primary election for CA governor is a perfect example. The two Republican candidates are pouring tons of their own money into their campaigns to sling mud at each other, while Democratic candidate, Gerry Brown is sitting idly on the sidelines letting the two Republicans duke it out. He doesn't have a contender so he can save his war chest for the general election. Historically, the Republicans are always the ones with the most money in elections so in the end, it will come down to who has the most money wins. Sound famaliar? The system is already based on who has the most money wins. This legislation will excacerbate that even worse.
There's no benefit to this: it's still going to be 1 Republican and 1 Democrat as contenders in November, just with a lot of needless restrictive cruft around it. And even in the cases where there might be 2 Democrats, you can get that today by just voting in the damn primary. Not a Democrat/Republican? There is plenty of time to switch into the appropriate party once you know where the interesting fight is.
Speaking of interesting fights, I'm diverting momentarily: Attorney General. I'm for Pedro Nava. Source:Assemblyman Pedro Nava, D-Santa Barbara, thinks he would be the best choice for Attorney General in part because he doesn't want to be governor. Ever.
. . .
Nava, who worked as a prosecutor in Fresno and Santa Barbara before going into private practice for 15 years, also touted his environmental credentials (including eight years on the powerful California Coastal Commission), liberal arts education (he majored in sociology), and 100 percent record voting for gay rights, civil rights, women's reproductive rights and consumer affairs. And he spoke about how his own experience as the son of Latino parents whom he recalls being harassed by police has informed his notion of justice.
Chris Kelly is a completely unqualified dumbfuck whose vanity is telling him that he's rich and thus he gets to buy himself a title... Come on, his resume is that he was a legal guy for Facebook? Facebook is to Legal as the Mafia is to Kindly. Might happen, but hardly relevant to the point of the endeavour. Kamala Harris hasn't won over SF. Rocky Delgadillo has too much smell of corruption around him. Alberto Torrico talks about education, but I don't see that as a major function of the AG. Ted Lieu seems fine, but his opposition to early release of prisoners is silly since that's mandated by the feds since our prisons are cruel and unusual from overcrowding.
Pedro Nava seems to me to be closest to the kind of crusading AG that California's been in need of.
Prop 15, public funding of the Secretary of State election: Yes. Sounds worth a shot.
Prop 16, can PG&E's wealth buy it an indulgence: No.
Prop 17, can Mercury Insurance's wealth buy it an indulgence: No.
Lieutenant Governor: Cripes, they all fill me with meh. I think I'll go Eric Korevaar; I'd like to see if it would work to cut all the staff out of the LG office. Gavin Newsom hasn't done a lot in SF and is just out for name recognition; Janice Hahn only talks about who supports her, not what she'd actually do, and she's also just out for name recognition.
Insurance Commissioner: Hector de la Torre. We need a crusader here, and I like his story about how he got jerked around by his health insurance when his baby was on a respirator. Dave Jones, also probably fine, but worse website.
Superior Court Judge, Office #9: Victoria Kolakowski. We need more liberal transgender judges... Like, 1 would be a good start.
State Superintendant of Public Instruction: Larry Aceves. Talks about finding more money in a real-sounding way.
State Board of Equalization, 1st District: ?? I don't know enough about this one to vote.
Member, Board of Education, 1st Trustee Area: Joaquin Rivera. Experienced. Also, his opponent, Lois Corrin, is from Piedmont.
16th Assembly District: I'm writing in Sean Sullivan. Who isn't running, but whatever, I have at least seen him around. Anyone would be preferable to Swanson.
Other unopposed stuff: not voting for anyone running unopposed, except Debra Bowen for Secretary of State, because I still like her for her voting machine stance.
'I am not the Dread Pirate Roberts', he said. 'My name is Ryan; I inherited this post from the previous Dread Pirate Roberts, just as you will inherit it from http://zdashamber.dreamwidth.org/124491.html.
Prop 13, fixing your place up so it's earthquake-safe doesn't trigger a property tax update: Yes.
Prop 14, only 2 people from any and all parties advance to the general election: No. Found here: 2. Prop. 14 bans counting write-in votes in November for Congress and state office. Three times, Californians have elected someone to congress in November by write-in votes (1930, 1946, 1982). We do know how to cast write-ins in California. Voters of Long Beach elected a Mayor on write-ins in 2002, and voters of San Diego almost elected Donna Frye Mayor on write-ins in 2004.
3. Prop. 14 changes the requirements for a party to remain ballot-qualified. Now they stay on by polling 2% of the vote for any statewide race in midterm years (they get a free ride in presidential years), but Prop. 14 says parties don't have nominees any longer, so that wouldn't work. The only other way is for parties to have 100,000 registrants. Peace & Freedom, with 58,000, would go off the ballot. . . .
5. Finally, it says that members of unqualified parties can't have their party label on the June ballot. This is because neither the measure nor its implementing legislation amend sec. 8606 of the election code, which defines "party" to be "qualified party."
And: This primary election for CA governor is a perfect example. The two Republican candidates are pouring tons of their own money into their campaigns to sling mud at each other, while Democratic candidate, Gerry Brown is sitting idly on the sidelines letting the two Republicans duke it out. He doesn't have a contender so he can save his war chest for the general election. Historically, the Republicans are always the ones with the most money in elections so in the end, it will come down to who has the most money wins. Sound famaliar? The system is already based on who has the most money wins. This legislation will excacerbate that even worse.
There's no benefit to this: it's still going to be 1 Republican and 1 Democrat as contenders in November, just with a lot of needless restrictive cruft around it. And even in the cases where there might be 2 Democrats, you can get that today by just voting in the damn primary. Not a Democrat/Republican? There is plenty of time to switch into the appropriate party once you know where the interesting fight is.
Speaking of interesting fights, I'm diverting momentarily: Attorney General. I'm for Pedro Nava. Source:Assemblyman Pedro Nava, D-Santa Barbara, thinks he would be the best choice for Attorney General in part because he doesn't want to be governor. Ever.
. . .
Nava, who worked as a prosecutor in Fresno and Santa Barbara before going into private practice for 15 years, also touted his environmental credentials (including eight years on the powerful California Coastal Commission), liberal arts education (he majored in sociology), and 100 percent record voting for gay rights, civil rights, women's reproductive rights and consumer affairs. And he spoke about how his own experience as the son of Latino parents whom he recalls being harassed by police has informed his notion of justice.
Chris Kelly is a completely unqualified dumbfuck whose vanity is telling him that he's rich and thus he gets to buy himself a title... Come on, his resume is that he was a legal guy for Facebook? Facebook is to Legal as the Mafia is to Kindly. Might happen, but hardly relevant to the point of the endeavour. Kamala Harris hasn't won over SF. Rocky Delgadillo has too much smell of corruption around him. Alberto Torrico talks about education, but I don't see that as a major function of the AG. Ted Lieu seems fine, but his opposition to early release of prisoners is silly since that's mandated by the feds since our prisons are cruel and unusual from overcrowding.
Pedro Nava seems to me to be closest to the kind of crusading AG that California's been in need of.
Prop 15, public funding of the Secretary of State election: Yes. Sounds worth a shot.
Prop 16, can PG&E's wealth buy it an indulgence: No.
Prop 17, can Mercury Insurance's wealth buy it an indulgence: No.
Lieutenant Governor: Cripes, they all fill me with meh. I think I'll go Eric Korevaar; I'd like to see if it would work to cut all the staff out of the LG office. Gavin Newsom hasn't done a lot in SF and is just out for name recognition; Janice Hahn only talks about who supports her, not what she'd actually do, and she's also just out for name recognition.
Insurance Commissioner: Hector de la Torre. We need a crusader here, and I like his story about how he got jerked around by his health insurance when his baby was on a respirator. Dave Jones, also probably fine, but worse website.
Superior Court Judge, Office #9: Victoria Kolakowski. We need more liberal transgender judges... Like, 1 would be a good start.
State Superintendant of Public Instruction: Larry Aceves. Talks about finding more money in a real-sounding way.
State Board of Equalization, 1st District: ?? I don't know enough about this one to vote.
Member, Board of Education, 1st Trustee Area: Joaquin Rivera. Experienced. Also, his opponent, Lois Corrin, is from Piedmont.
16th Assembly District: I'm writing in Sean Sullivan. Who isn't running, but whatever, I have at least seen him around. Anyone would be preferable to Swanson.
Other unopposed stuff: not voting for anyone running unopposed, except Debra Bowen for Secretary of State, because I still like her for her voting machine stance.
'I am not the Dread Pirate Roberts', he said. 'My name is Ryan; I inherited this post from the previous Dread Pirate Roberts, just as you will inherit it from http://zdashamber.dreamwidth.org/124491.html.