McClintock Reviews the November Ballot Propositions

Tom McClintock.net ^ | July 28, 2006 | Tom McClintock

[FairOpinion]

My vote recommendations match Tom McClintock's in all but one proposition. I will vote YES on 1B, he recommends NO.

See my recommendations on July 9, 2006.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1662959/posts?page=5#5


And Tom and I also agree on the vote recommendation for Governor: Arnold Schwarzenegger.

[hedgetrimmer]

Thanks!

[LexBaird]

Sorry,read it wrong, Why would anybody oppose 90?

Ahh. Lots of reasons. Fer instance, it endangers the tactic of using some "environmental" reason for taking land without paying for it, such as finding an endangered blue-spotted fart warbler skink in some "endangered" privately owned "wetland" that someone is trying to develop. It might be applied by the Courts to require just compensation for land use deprivation. Look for the NIMBY types to oppose it, too, for similar reasons.

[LexBaird]

And Tom and I also agree on the vote recommendation for Governor: Arnold Schwarzenegger.

Has Arnold Schwarzenegger published a list of his vote recommendations on the Props.?

[Getready]

If the governor steps down, will the Lt. Governor take over
till the next election? or will a new election be done?

I would love to see Arnold win, then step down after
2.5 years or so, and let us see what McClintock can do...

I'm sure the Dems would go nuts, but if Mc Clintock does
a good job, he will be re-elected governor...cuz we
totally sick of our dollars going to ingrates, inmates,
high tax-rates, and people with gender confusion traits.

[Seadog Bytes]

Thank you! Good stuff.

[kmiller1k]

83 worries me a bit. It seems like the urban areas would have no paroled sex offenders living in them at all --2000 feet from a school or park would effectively send all to the suburban and exurban areas that are more spread out in their city planning. Can't we keep the sex offenders out in a remote prison somewhere? Or make them their own town with a high fence around it away from children?

It just worries me as a citizen of the great Central Valley of California--we have enough problems without the urban sex ickies coming to living here.

[calcowgirl]

If the governor steps down, will the Lt. Governor take over till the next election? or will a new election be done?

Yep. The Lt. Gov. steps in--no new election.

I would love to see Arnold win, then step down after 2.5 years or so,

As long as we're fantasizing, why wait so long? LOL How about January 2007?

[FairOpinion]

CA: A rare pair of running mates (Schwarzenegger and McClintock)

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1582375/posts


Typically in California, candidates for governor and lieutenant governor don't campaign as running mates -- but you would never guess it by watching Republicans Arnold Schwarzenegger and Tom McClintock lately.

The 2006 campaign is still young, but Schwarzenegger, the incumbent governor seeking an uncertain re-election, and McClintock, a state senator from Ventura County running for lieutenant governor, look very much like a tag team.

Personal friendship -- and political necessity -- have forged an alliance between the two that mirrors a presidential-vice presidential slate, with each shoring up the other's weaknesses.

Same-party candidates for governor and lieutenant governor here mainly do their own thing. They may team up at conventions and scattered events, but their campaigns are distinct.

So far, this year is an aberration.

The two men have separate campaign arms, but "they are running as a de facto ticket," said GOP consultant Kevin Spillane.

[SmithL]

It's not like we've never disagreed before. I can live with that.

I'm pre-disposed to reject all bond measures in California. I'd like to see roadwork and infrastucture taken care of, but low-cost housing doesn't meet my definition of infrastucture. Nevertheless, I saw what happened the last time the California levees broke down, and it's a scary thing to behold.

[goldstategop]

It would do more to cripple the Left than Proposition 13 which is why big dollars will be spent to stop Proposition 90. "Eminent Domain" is more than just about the government condemning private property for its own use. Its about the government impose regulatory restrictions on private property that prevents the owner from the full use or enjoyment of that property without due compensation. Among other things, Prop 90 will put to end that abuse of eminent domain. To put it quite simply, whenever the government wants to interfere with private property, it ought to bear the full costs of that interference. No wonder every bureaucrat and special group that benefits from the unlimited power of government will be up in arms over this measure.

(Go Israel, Go! Slap 'Em Down Hezbullies.)

[E.G.C.]

BTTT

[kellynla]

Thanx for the thread.
I disagree with Mac on any spending bond...
they have plenty of money to spend on a levee,
they just need to be more efficient with the money they have.

I wish CA would create a state Dept. of Waste, Fraud & Abuse.
The welfare fraud, waste & abuse in this state alone would pay for levees & a BORDER WALL!

[Smogger]

I'm voting yes on Prop 85. I need to review Prop 1A. As for Jessica's Law, if they are so dangerous DON'T LET THEM OUT OF PRISON. Unworkable in my opinion.

NO on EVERYTHING ELSE!

[Smogger]

Sorry,read it wrong, Why would anybody oppose 90?

My city uses eminent domain as a last resort to acquire the land for badly needed redevelopment projects. Without eminent domain uscrupulous absentee slumlords living in can hold up a badly needed redevelopment, by trying to extract huge sums of money for their blighted properties.

[djreece]

Thank you! I've been waiting to see his take on them.

[going hot]

They don't get a dime for ANY bond until they prove they can responsibly handle what they already get.

Agreed 100%

[Dante3]

bttt

[editor-surveyor]

"Since the prop system was devised as a way to bypass the state legislature..."

California has never been without the Initiative and Referendum processes.

[editor-surveyor]

"What would be the reason to vote for 90?"

To restore lost property ownership rights. The Kelo v. New London decision turned your property ownership from alloidal title into a mere revocable leasehold.

Emminent domain has outlived it's purpose, and needs to be terminated; this is a minimum first step toward that goal.