Printable View
This is mostly for my fellow Californians, but you can check out this site if you feel like jumping into the discussion.
Basically, how do you feel about the propositions that are being lined up for Governor Schwarzenegger's special election? How do you feel about the media blitz on the initiatives from both sides? All that kind of thing, you know.
Well I think I will just give some views on each one... even if I ain't Californian.
I would probably vote yes for this. I see no reason against it and I personally think it could be a good thing.Quote:
Proposition 73. Waiting Period and Parental Notification Before Termination of Minor's Pregnancy -- State of California (Initiative Constitutional Amendment)
Should the California Constitution be amended to require notification of the parent or legal guardian of an unemancipated, pregnant minor at least 48 hours before performing an abortion on the minor?
This I am unsure of... how accurate will these analysis be? If it will indeed help weed out bad teachers then I am all for it... but if it will end up hurting hard working teachers then no... I ain't sure on this too much.Quote:
Proposition 74. Public School Teachers. Waiting Period for Permanent Status. Dismissal -- State of California (Initiative Statute)
Should the probationary period for public school teachers be increased from two to five years, and should the process by which school boards can dismiss a permanent certificated employee be modified?
All this would do is require people to sign something to let unions that they area part of to use thier money, right? Isn't that kind of redundant... but anyways I have yet to see anything that is super bad for this. I am neutral till I see more.Quote:
Proposition 75. Public Employee Union Dues. Restrictions on Political Contributions. Employee Consent Requirement -- State of California (Initiative Statute)
Should public employee unions be required to obtain annual written consent from each member in order to use a portion of that member's dues for political activity?
Just plain unsure.. but I don't seem ot be liking the sound of it.Quote:
Proposition 76. State Spending and School Funding Limits -- State of California (Initiative Constitutional Amendment)
Should Californians make major Constitutional changes to create an additional state spending limit, grant the governor substantial new power to unilaterally reduce state spending, and revise key provisions relating to Proposition 98, school and community college funding, and transportation funding authorized by Proposition 42?
Another unsure one... Is there actually a problem here that needs fixed?Quote:
Proposition 77. Redistricting. Initiative Constitutional Amendment -- State of California (Initiative Constitutional Amendment)
Should the California Constitution be amended to change the process of redistricting California's State Senate, State Assembly, Congressional and Board of Equalization districts, transferring the implementation of redistricting from the Legislature to a panel of three retired judges, selected by legislative leaders?
Are both of these needed? Wouldn't just one work? Anyways I like the idea of helping the poor help rid themselves illness. Afterall not all people are pissass lazy... and when poor illness can really reak havoc.Quote:
Proposition 78. Discounts on Prescription Drugs -- State of California (Initiative Statute)
Should the state adopt a new state drug discount program to reduce the costs of prescription drugs for Californians at or below 300 percent of the federal poverty level?
Proposition 79. Prescription Drug Discounts. State-Negotiated Rebates -- State of California (Initiative Statute)
Should the state of California create a new prescription drug discount program for residents at or below 400 percent of the federal poverty level, and change state law to make it illegal to engage in profiteering from the sale of prescription drugs?
I don't like the sound of this... limiting your about to change electric providers?!Quote:
Proposition 80. Electric Service Providers. Regulation -- State of California (Initiative Statute)
Should the state expand its regulation of the electric industry?
I couldn't care less about any of it, to be honest with you.
I live in Hawaii now, but seeing as how I go "back home" to Murrieta, CA every vacation and I'm a native Californian:
No. This defeats the entire purpose, and I don't care if the girl is twelve - the circumstances are merely too great for the state to intervene. This would invade the right to privacy. Hell no.Quote:
Proposition 73. Should the California Constitution be amended to require notification of the parent or legal guardian of an unemancipated, pregnant minor at least 48 hours before performing an abortion on the minor?
I don't have an opinion on this one because I don't believe in public education.Quote:
Proposition 74. Should the probationary period for public school teachers be increased from two to five years, and should the process by which school boards can dismiss a permanent certificated employee be modified?
Yes.Quote:
Proposition 75. Should public employee unions be required to obtain annual written consent from each member in order to use a portion of that member's dues for political activity?
This is far too vague to answer. Why increase the state spending limit - and grant what new powers? No, because I don't like increasing a state's power "just because".Quote:
Proposition 76. Should Californians make major Constitutional changes to create an additional state spending limit, grant the governor substantial new power to unilaterally reduce state spending, and revise key provisions relating to Proposition 98, school and community college funding, and transportation funding authorized by Proposition 42?
No real opinion.Quote:
Proposition 77. Should the California Constitution be amended to change the process of redistricting California's State Senate, State Assembly, Congressional and Board of Equalization districts, transferring the implementation of redistricting from the Legislature to a panel of three retired judges, selected by legislative leaders?
If the state was being run the way it should be, then a most definiate no. Considering it's not, and knowing the prices of drugs, it becoms a "no comment".Quote:
Should the state adopt a new state drug discount program to reduce the costs of prescription drugs for Californians at or below 300 percent of the federal poverty level?
No. I do hope that "profiteering" is never regarded as a crime in the States.Quote:
Proposition 79. Should the state of California create a new prescription drug discount program for residents at or below 400 percent of the federal poverty level, and change state law to make it illegal to engage in profiteering from the sale of prescription drugs?
Over my dead body.Quote:
Proposition 80. Should the state expand its regulation of the electric industry?
I'm voting no on 73 because I think it's stupid.
I'm voting no on 74 because I'm about to enter into that field and a five year probationary period would suck fat balls.
I'll probably say yes to 76 'cause it looks like it'll do something interesting. Any change it good at this point.
No on 80 'cause they've already pissed me off, keeping Corona from creating a new electric company to protect poor Edison. smurf Edison! Rolling blackouts my black ass.
The rest I'm not too sure about.
Alright... From all the No's on 73 I am begining to think I misunderstood somthing about it. Hmmm.... Perhaps.. perhaps not. Anyways at least we all aggree on 80... I can't really think of a way in which that is good.
Btw.. since I am lazy and don't care to research into a state politics of a state I do not reside in(it is generally a pain in the rear to find relevent info on such politics) I will say that if anyone wants to describe the situation for these I would be much obliged. YThat site gives a general idea.. .but I don't trust much beyond that(the yay and nay sound too biased for me to tolerate).
[edit]
I wouldn't say that.. with our politics and canidates these days they may very well try something like that :(. Why can't we get at least ONE good(or even semi-good) canidate?Quote:
Over my dead body.
I have a question about 80. To me it seems like a good thing but I don't live in California. Wouldn't more supervision and regulation over a monopoly be a good thing...unless you guys don't have a electic company monopoly. I think I just need this one explained.
Also if I did live out there I would vote yes for 73. Everything else medical or otherwise requires parental consent and this should be no different. It creates a retarded double standard.
Well it's the government that bails Edison out when another electric company tries to start up; that's where I'm seeing it from.
Hell no. In most cases, a girl would go to her parents anyway. If she doesn't, she generally has a damn good reason.Quote:
Proposition 73. Should the California Constitution be amended to require notification of the parent or legal guardian of an unemancipated, pregnant minor at least 48 hours before performing an abortion on the minor?
It's hard enough to keep teachers as it is. Definently not.Quote:
Proposition 74. Should the probationary period for public school teachers be increased from two to five years, and should the process by which school boards can dismiss a permanent certificated employee be modified?
Interesting theory, but I suspect the aim is simply to lessen the ability of unions to get involved. I'm ambivalent. No longer unsure. Members of unions are free to say they don't want their dues used for politics, and the unions have to comply. This is a ploy to weaken their influence.Quote:
Proposition 75. Should public employee unions be required to obtain annual written consent from each member in order to use a portion of that member's dues for political activity?
No, don't trust this one.Quote:
Proposition 76. Should Californians make major Constitutional changes to create an additional state spending limit, grant the governor substantial new power to unilaterally reduce state spending, and revise key provisions relating to Proposition 98, school and community college funding, and transportation funding authorized by Proposition 42?
I like this idea. They should do it on the federalQuote:
Proposition 77. Should the California Constitution be amended to change the process of redistricting California's State Senate, State Assembly, Congressional and Board of Equalization districts, transferring the implementation of redistricting from the Legislature to a panel of three retired judges, selected by legislative leaders?
level.
Its backed by the drug companies. Need I say more?Quote:
Should the state adopt a new state drug discount program to reduce the costs of prescription drugs for Californians at or below 300 percent of the federal poverty level?
I dislike the "profiteering" part.Quote:
Proposition 79. Should the state of California create a new prescription drug discount program for residents at or below 400 percent of the federal poverty level, and change state law to make it illegal to engage in profiteering from the sale of prescription drugs?
*Cough*Enron*cough*Quote:
Proposition 80. Should the state expand its regulation of the electric industry?