Posted on 09/24/2005 3:53:28 PM PDT by FairOpinion
Fair Question: My *personal* position is #14.
I was only speaking of the thinking/reasoning of most republicans/moderates in #2 and #12. That is also why Arnold came in favor of 78.
I am not advocating that 78 win. I am going to give what little money I can do defeat BOTH.
Only that the vast majority of Californians will reason that 78 is more modest and reasonable (compromise) and vote that way. It is rather the end result I am point to and the reasoning that will be given.
Arnold sponsored this measure from way back when. It was initially introduced as SB 19, but they couldn't get it out of committee. The language is mostly unchanged from that original legislation.
Governor backs parent notice on abortion
(snip)See also: Evaluating the Administration's California Rx Proposal, February 10, 2005.Schwarzenegger also said he supports Prop. 78 and opposes Prop. 79, which are two competing prescription drug discount measures. Prop. 78, which is backed by the pharmaceutical industry, is mirrored on a legislative initiative proposed by the governor that failed to win support in the Legislature.
Governor's Proposal. The Governor's 2005–06 budget plan for the Department of Health Services (DHS) proposes to establish a California Rx program aimed at reducing the costs certain California consumers would have to pay for drugs purchased at pharmacies. The California Rx plan was initially offered in a modified form as amendments to several legislative measures last year, but was not adopted. Since that time, the Governor has revised his legislative proposal in some significant respects (now contained in SB 19 [Ortiz]), and incorporated a request for 18.5 staff positions and about $3.9 million from the General Fund into the 2005–06 spending plan for DHS.
I am not so sure what point you are trying to pin me down on.
If both the measures are defeated, I will be opening a bottle of wine and saying "Cheers".
But, mark my words, at least 78 will WIN. Sad, but true.
I'm not trying to pin you down, just correct misperceptions.
If Proposition 78 wins, we have the GOP (who has apparently endorsed this) along with Schwarzenegger and others who think this is a good thing to thank. The Republican Party that I originally joined would have been speaking out strongly against this. When I see folks surrendering, accepting it as inevitable, it disturbs me. IMO, those who object should speak out and inform--not roll over. We already got a Stem-Cell Research scam, aided by GOP endorsements. What is next? Endorsing Hillary-Care?
Wow! Looks like we are not only on the same page, but literally zooming in on the same word.
Agreed 100%!!!!
Problem is the following: Who to turn to for being your moutpiece in the political arena. We have nobody in CA.
>>zooming in on the same word
Hillary care? LOL
That is a phrase. :-))
I meant the word "Conservatism"!! :-)
McClintock is against both 78 and 79.
I have his list - but I'm waiting until it's closer to the election - hoping that people will copy down the info to vote correctly.
We were discussing Prop. 76 -- some so-called conservatives here are against it, don't want to have limited spending, even though they claim they do. They also claim to be big McClintock suppoerters, yet in such fundamental area, such as reduced spending, they are AGAINST it.
Propl 78 and 79 are a whole different issue. McClintock goes by principle, but doesn't consider the ultimate result. Ideally, I agree they neither of these will pass. But in reality, Prop 79 was proposed first and it was going to pass. The only "defense" is to call it that, was to put a competing proposition, Prop 78 on the ballot, which is at least more reasonable, in fact much more reasonable, because it's a voluntary program by the drug companies.
If all conservatives vote no on both, prop. 79 WILL pass. If we vote yes on 78 and no on 79, there is a chance that 78 will pass and will override 79, if it gets more votes than 79.
The choice is between "the worst" or a "moderate" one. Again, voting NO on both, will get you "the worst". That's why Arnold sensibly supports 78 and is against 79.
Outside of these 2 propositions, McClintock and Arnold have exactly the same recommendations.
That just doesn't make sense. Voting in a more capitalist fashion will cause the legislature to be more socialist, but voting in a less capitalist fashion will cause the legislature to be less socialist?
What you are not taking into account, is that CA is overwhelmingly Democratic.
The point is that if conservatives vote NO on both, the socialist prop 79 WILL PASS.
Here is what I got from Tom's email:
Voting recommendations from Tom McClintock
#73 – YES
#74 – YES
#75 – YES
#76 – Yes
#77 – Yes
#78 – NO
#79 – NO
#80 – NO
I saw his article.
Voting recommendations from Tom McClintock
#73 – YES
#74 – YES
#75 – YES
#76 – Yes
#77 – Yes
#78 – NO
#79 – NO
#80 – NO
Arnold's recommendations are exactly the same, with the exception that he recommends a YES vote on 78, because, otherwise 79 will surely pass. So again, we don't have a choice of both 78 & 79 being defeated, we have to choice of ending up with 79, if we don't support and vote yes on 78. Even so, it will be touch and go -- 79 is highly supported by a lot of CA people, who like the handouts, and "let the state take care of us". 78 was put on the ballot precisely, because they knew, that 79 passing was a sure thing -- this gives it a chance to have the votes split and end up with 78, instead of the dreadful 79.
If they both pass, and 78 has more votes, IT will prevail, nullifying 79.
Don't these initiatives require 2/3?
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.