Prager California Voting Guide

Prager California Voting Guide Sunday, October 31, 2010 | Posted by: Dennis Prager at 10:16 PM

Many of you have asked how I'm voting. Since I live in California, here's my list and my reasons for California candidates, propositions and judges. Non-Californians may wish to read this for my thinking on similar propositions on other state ballots.

All Republicans. No exceptions. The notion that one votes “for the candidate, not the party,” may have once been valid. It is no longer. Unless you are a leftist, there is every reason to vote Republican. The Democratic Party in California is no more than an adjunct to the unions in California. One of the most prominent Democrats in California told me this in private years ago: “We do what the unions tell us to do.” It is worse today. The result is that the Democratic Party is ruining what no one ever believed could be ruined, the State of California. To reward these people is an act of self-destruction the likes of which have rarely been seen in democratic societies.

This is a classic case of liberal Stage One thinking. The results will be nothing like liberals envision. Nothing good will come of this (certainly not “the billions” they claim it will generate in tax revenue) and the quality of life in California will further deteriorate. When government sanctions something, people engage in more of it. Do we really want to encourage Californians to smoke more pot?

I would prefer that there be no human involvement in drawing Congressional districts. It escapes me why computers can’t simply calculate population figures and draw our districts that way. Well, actually, I do know the reason: politicians would have to pay attention to a diverse electorate to get elected. Redistricting lets them draw the political map to assure themselves safe seats. That is a major reason the California Democratic Party is so Leftwing: most Democratic congressmen don’t have to compete in their perfectly-designed-for-Democrats districts. This measure takes the power out of the state legislature’s hands and gives it to a neutral committee. I still prefer computers, but this is better than leaving the way it is now. I might add that I oppose the way it is now even in those states where Republicans control the state legislature.

Prop 22 – Pumbaa and Timon should be on the state seal (or something like that)– NO

The highly complex Prop 22 sounds reasonable once one begins to understand it; and the fact that the Teachers unions and the SEIU oppose it makes it painful for me to also oppose it. But listen to what a conservative Lew Uhler, President National Taxpayer Limitation Committee, says: “Prop 22 locks in protections for redevelopment agencies that take over 10% of all property taxes and use them to enter into billions of dollars of long-term debt without voter approval.”

Prop 23 – Suspends implementation of air pollution control law AB 32 – YES YES YES

Prop 23 would suspend California law AB 32 until the California unemployment rate goes does down for four consecutive quarters. As George Will, who does not live in California, writes in his latest column, AB 32 is a “loopy” “economy-suffocating” law “that preposterously aims to cool the planet by requiring a 30 percent reduction of carbon emissions by 2020.” He then adds, “If Californians reject [Prop 23] that would suspend this law . . . this latest act of self-impoverishment will be a (redundant) reason for making Californians clean up the mess they have made.”

Prop 24 -- Repeals legislation that would allow businesses to lower their tax liability – NO

One would think that voting no on Prop 24 is as obvious a recommendation as possible given how hostile California already is to business. But for the Left, taxing those who make money in business is a greater good than enabling those who make money in business to hire more workers.

Prop 25 -- Changes legislative vote requirement to pass budget from two-thirds to a majority – NO

One of the only things stopping California’s Titanic-like economy from sinking like the ill-fated ocean liner is that Democrats in Sacramento must take Republican objections on spending increases into consideration. If Prop 25 passes, there will no reason for Republican legislators to leave home. The Democrats will pass their union-pleasing budgets without one Republican’s vote. Which is why the unions are so supportive of Prop 25.

Prop 26 -- Requires that certain state and local fees be approved by two-thirds vote -- YES

Prop 27 ensures that state legislators continue to draw congressional districts. The proposition should be renamed “Ensure Democrats run for Congress in districts with little or no Republican opposition.”

I finally found a reliable guide to electing judges in California: Guide to Judges

For sake of comparison, here’s Tom McClintock on the Propositions:
(Basically, they just disagree on Prop 22)

Prop 19: When Worlds Collide. NO. If this simply allowed people to cultivate and smoke marijuana themselves and left the rest of us alone, it would be worth considering. But it goes much further and provides that “no person shall be … discriminated against or denied any right or privilege” for pot use, inviting a lawsuit every time an employer tries to require a drug test, for example. If you want to smoke pot in your own world, I don’t care. But don’t bring it into mine.

Prop 20: Congressional Redistricting. YES. This finishes the work we began in 2008 to get redistricting decisions away from self-interested state legislators and into the hands of a bi-partisan commission. The original reform omitted Congressional districts – this simply adds them.

Prop 21: Highway Robbery. NO. Right now, state park users pay a nominal fee that helps pay for upkeep, assuring that those who use our state parks help pay for them. This measure ends the day-user fee and shifts the cost to the rest of us by imposing an $18 per car tax increase whether we use the parks or not. Stealing money from highway travelers used to be called “highway robbery.” Now it’s called “Proposition 21.”

Prop 22: Hands Off Our Money. YES. This takes a giant leap toward restoring local government independence and protecting our transportation taxes by prohibiting state raids on local and transportation funds. Local governments are hardly paragons of virtue, but local tax revenues should remain local.

Prop 23: Liberation from the Environmental Left. YES. In 2006, Sacramento’s rocket-scientists enacted AB 32, imposing draconian restrictions on carbon dioxide emissions (yes, that’s the stuff you exhale). They promised to save the planet from “global warming” and open a cornucopia of new jobs. Since then, California’s unemployment rate has shot far beyond the national unemployment rate and the earth has continued to warm and cool as it has for billions of years. Prop 23 merely holds the Environmental Left to its promise: it suspends AB 32 until unemployment stabilizes at or below its pre-AB 32 level.

Prop 24: Because Taxes Just Aren’t High Enough. NO. This is a predictable entry by the public employee unions to impose an additional $1.7 billion tax on businesses. The problem, of course, is that businesses don’t pay business taxes – we do. Business taxes can only be paid in three ways: by us as consumers (through higher prices), by us as employees (through lower wages) and by us as investors (through lower earnings on our 401(k)’s).

Prop 25: Out of the Frying Pan and Into the Fire. NO. This changes the 2/3 vote requirement for the state budget to a simple majority – a reform I have long supported. Experience has shown that the current 2/3 vote requirement for the budget does not restrain spending and it utterly blurs accountability. But such a reform MUST repair the 2/3 vote requirement for all tax increases and restore constitutional spending and borrowing limits. Without these provisions, Prop. 25 would be a disaster for taxpayers and a recipe for bankruptcy.

Prop 26: Calling a Tax a Tax. YES. Under the infamous Sinclair Paint decision, virtually any tax may be increased by majority vote as long as it is called a “fee,” gutting the 2/3 vote requirement in the state constitution to raise taxes. Prop. 26 rescinds Sinclair Paint, restores the Constitution, and calls a tax a tax.

Prop 27: OMG. NO. Want to go back to the days when politicians drew their own district lines, literally choosing their own voters? This will get us there.

I voted absentee yesterday and turns out my ballot was marked EXACTLY as suggested by Praeger. I’m turning more and more for advice to various conservative websites when faced with confusing ballot initiatives. The first rule is NO TAXES, NO BOND ISSUES. I’ve also discovered the Judge Voter Guide as well and find it a reliable measure of the person seeking a judgeship. Unfortunately, this time round, all the state level judge candidates got terrible ratings, so it was a “NO” vote against them all.

Lastly, this is the first time in ages we do not have a single bond issue to spend $2 GAZILLION dollar to rescue some heretofore unknown species, pay for murdering embryos to harvest their cells, or build a super-duper shiny new toy somewhere in the state.

Prop 22 prevents the state from raiding local (city and county) tax revenues. Most of the counties here in CA have a small addition to the sales tax that is SUPPOSED to go to fix roads and such in that county (among other similar programs, and along with local general fund monies). The state has been reaching down and pulling the moneys from the local areas and using it to pseudo-balance the budgets over the last few years (with supposed IOUs that will be paid back “someday”) leaving the counties with bad local roads, and helping to bust the county and city budgets on top of the already-broken state budget.

Given that local governments are usually both more efficient and more responsive (especially in LARGE states like CA) having the state take the money like they do is totally irresponsible and just plain nuts.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.