CA: Yes on Propositions 1B, 1E; no on 1C, 1D

The Argus ^ | Oct. 1, 2006 | The Argus

[FairOpinion]

-Proposition 1B: The biggest chunk, $19.9 billion, is for transportation projects that will cost $38.9 billion to repay. Most of the money, $11.3 billion, would be spent to improve highways and local roads... YES

Proposition 1C allots $2.85 billion for housing and shelter...But this is a sector of our economy in which public and private funds compete. NO

Proposition 1D would upgrade and build more schools at every level...NO

Proposition 1E is a $4.1 billion bond to improve disaster preparedness and flood prevention...YES

We cant afford everything we need right now. But voting no on every measure is not in our states best interest, either. Providing funds for our crumbling transportation infrastructure and vulnerable levees are our most pressing needs.

[FairOpinion]

I am in complete agreement. These are my recommendations also.

[b9]

Many agree.

[NormsRevenge]

Many don't . :-D

[FairOpinion]

My recommendations:

1A YES (spend gas tax on roads)
1B YES roads/infrastructure bond
1C NO housing bond
1D NO school bond
1E YES levees bond


83 YES Jessica's law
84 NO parks, conservation
85 YES parental notification (predecessor of which, prop. 73 in the special elections was defeated, because conservatives stayed home)
86 NO cigarette tax
87 NO tax on "big bad oil companies" (incentive for them to leave state)
88 NO real estate tax increase "for the children" :(
89 NO "campaign funding" funded by tax increase on corporations
90 YES limiting eminent domain ( although I have to read it, because I heard it's not quite what we think it is)


And STRAIGHT REPUBLICAN TICKET: starting with Arnold all teh way down the line.

With a good Republican turnout, we have a chance to elected Arnold and other Republicans. See this article:


CA: Capital Notebook (California Elections)

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1711795/posts


"If Angelides can't inspire Democrats to vote -- and the best way to do that is to close the gap in the polls -- Republican turnout could be just enough to topple other Democrats. "

[NormsRevenge]

And STRAIGHT REPUBLICAN TICKET: starting with Arnold all teh way down the line.


Does that include Mountjoy for the Senate as well? :-)

[calcowgirl]

Vote NO on all of them (Prop 1 B-C-D-E). They are pork filled and represent a tax on the future generation.

CA: 'Pay as you go' for transit projects - No on 1B
Sacramento Bee ^ | September 26, 2006 | Michael N. Villines (REPUBLICAN ASSEMBLYMAN)

Those in support of Proposition 1B would have us believe that bonding is the only way our state can raise the money we need to achieve our desired transportation goals. They would say this because lawmakers don't have the spine for hiking taxes to pay for these projects.

Let's set the record straight. The majority party in Sacramento rarely meets a tax increase it can't support. The fiscally responsible members of the Legislature understand that higher taxes and bonding are not the only way to fund transportation projects.

We should demand that our children and grandchildren have a transportation system that meets the needs of the 21st century. That's why the citizens of California should vote No on Proposition 1B. Force the Legislature to produce a transportation infrastructure plan for our future that is responsible, realistic and result driven.

Road money spread thin in transportation bond ($20 Billion Prop 1B)
AP - Contra Costa Times ^ | Sep. 09, 2006 | AARON C. DAVIS

...a detailed review by The Associated Press also shows that more than 40 percent of the nearly $20 billion will not go toward the well-advertised road projects. Rather, billions will go toward projects that have tenuous connections to relieving the state's worst traffic jams.

New fences around ports in Long Beach and Oakland, school buses for Los Angeles, and security cameras and disaster-plan studies for San Francisco's subway and ferry terminals are just a few of the projects that would see a slice of the money if voters say yes.

Billions also would go to buying land for railroad crossings, expanding programs to reduce harmful emissions and perhaps even building a new border crossing into Mexico.

[DB]

Why would I want to vote for any of these bonds?

We are in debt up to our eyeballs as it is.

[calcowgirl]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Statewide CRA Endorsements
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
U.S. Senate                        Dick Mountjoy 
Lt. Governor                       Tom McClintock 
Secretary of State                 Bruce McPherson 
Attorney General                   Chuck Poochigian 
Controller                         Tony Strickland 
Treasurer                          Claude Parrish 
Board of Equalization, Dist. 2     Bill Leonard 
Board of Equalization, Dist. 4     Glen Forsch 
Insurance Commissioner             Steve Poizner 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ballot Initiatives
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Prop. 1A – Transportation Funding         YES 
Prop. 1B – Transportation Bond             NO 
Prop. 1C – Housing Bond                    NO 
Prop. 1D – Education Bond                  NO 
Prop. 1E – Levee Bond                      NO 
Prop. 83 – Jessica’s Law                  YES 
Prop. 84 – Park Bond                       NO 
Prop. 85 – Parental Notification          YES 
Prop. 86 – Cigarette Tax                   NO 
Prop. 87 – Oil Tax                         NO 
Prop. 88 – Parcel Tax                      NO 
Prop. 89 – Taxpayer Funding of Campaigns   NO 
Prop. 90 – Protect Our Homes              YES 

[FairOpinion]

CA has the worst roads in the nation and they continue to deteriorate. We have to fix them NOW. The nonsensical "pay as you go" proposal would not correct the problem. An analogy -- do you borrow and buy a house, than pay on the loan, while using the house and living in it or do you think it's smart to buy a few bricks and build it a few bricks at a time -- and maybe finish it in 40 years? Where would you live in the meantime?

CA roads are in horrible condition. Anyone who drives can see that daily.

====

California Tops the List of Worst Roads in the Nation

http://www.allstays.com/Features/CaliforniaWorstRoads.htm


Dec. 27, 2001--California's rutted, cracked and neglected roads now rank at the bottom of all 50 states in roadway quality and per capita dollars being spent to improve them, according to a new study from Transportation California.

Last year the state's roads were third worst in the nation. With 37 percent of 168,000 miles of state and local roads rated poor, the state has fallen to dead last on the list, according to The Road Information Program, which prepared the study. Other states in the bottom five were Louisiana, 27 percent; Massachusetts, 25 percent; and New Jersey and Missouri, 21 percent.

``A generation of underinvestment in California's streets, highways, overpasses and bridges has resulted in a shameful deterioration of what once was a showcase transportation network,'' said Larry Fisher, executive director of Transportation California, the state's leading transportation advocacy and public education organization.

[Mojave]

The CRA? Why, they're Republicans! Harrumph!!!

[Mojave]

Rather, billions will go toward projects that have tenuous connections to relieving the state's worst traffic jams.

New fences around ports in Long Beach and Oakland, school buses for Los Angeles, and security cameras and disaster-plan studies for San Francisco's subway and ferry terminals are just a few of the projects that would see a slice of the money if voters say yes.

[crickets]

[FairOpinion]

CRA should be ashamed of themselves. By NOT endorsing Arnold, THEY ARE ENDORSING SOCIALIST LEFTIST ANGELIDES, who is counting on the conservatives to NOT vote for Arnold, to help Angelides win. If the race between Arnold and Angelides is competitive, that gets the Dem turnout up, which makes it harder for the rest of the Republican candidates to win.


======

Don't forget, the Dems are COUNTING on the conservatives to win -- it's part of their win strategy.

=====

A Recipe for Success (for Angelides) (Conservatives are Angelides' secret weapon)

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1689690/posts

Here are some things he could do:

o Attack Arnold from the right :

§ Illegal immigration–Arnold has angered the conservative base with some of his comments on this issue. The Angelides campaign, or perhaps an anti-Arnold independent expenditure campaign, could attack Arnold in the mail or on the radio and use Arnold’s own words against him.

§ Taxes/government spending–The state government continues to run what is essentially a deficit and Arnold’s numerous proposals to increase government spending and borrowing turn off Republicans. This line of attack could also mitigate some of the tax attacks against Angelides.


====

Schwarzenegger Hears Rumbles From the Right

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1685932/posts


" low conservative turnout will loom as a key peril for the governor and a prime source of hope for Democrats."


====


"Angelides ... must win 80% of the Dems and a solid majority of the DTS (declined to state) registrants, TO ACCOMPANY THE 15% REPUBLICANS WHO DON'T VOTE FOR THEIR PARTY'S TICKET"

ANGELIDES IS COUNTING ON THEM.


http://www.californiaprogressreport.com/2006/07/new_poll_result.html


=====

Angelides team bullish on California's blue state math (counting on CONSERVATIVES, to win)

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1676818/posts

Angelides' camp believes that while the governor enjoys support among some Democrats now, by the time ballots are cast in November, the base will remain loyal.

They also believe that the opposite will occur with the Republicans because Schwarzenegger's recent move to the left on key issues such as immigration and the environment has alienated conservatives.



====


To pull off a win, Angelides must seize his opportunities

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1683377/posts


"But it will not be easy, and Angelides must take full advantage of the opportunities: ... the governor's sometimes tense relationship with conservatives; "

====

[FairOpinion]

Proposition 1B: The biggest chunk, $19.9 billion, is for transportation projects that will cost $38.9 billion to repay. Most of the money, $11.3 billion, would be spent to improve highways and local roads; $4 billion goes to public transportation; $3.2 to improving the movement of goods through ports, highway and rail systems; and the final $1.5billion advances disaster response on transit systems and upgrades rail crossings, bridges, ramps and overpasses. We recommend a yes vote on Prop. 1B.

[Mojave]

Too bad California doesn't have gasoline and other taxes for roads.

[FairOpinion]

Prop. 1A YES

[calcowgirl]

Billions also would go to buying land for railroad crossings, expanding programs to reduce harmful emissions and perhaps even building a new border crossing into Mexico.

Global warming and free-flowing borders! YAY! /s

[Mojave]

Prop. 1A YES

What did Arnold and his fellow Rats do with the road taxes we've already paid?

[NormsRevenge]

CRA should be ashamed of themselves. By NOT endorsing Arnold, they are endorsing socialist Philthy

--
No they are not. You would like to portray it that way , but as usual you have it wrong. lolol (at least , you're consistent, consistently wrong)

It looks more like they chose to not endorse either socialist running for Gub. :-)

btw, will you answer me if you support all the Gop tcket candiates including Mountjoy.. I's not like Im asking the gub too, we know he won't for whatever reason escapes all of us.. and you so readily will supply, Im sure.

[ModelBreaker]

CA has the worst roads in the nation and they continue to deteriorate. We have to fix them NOW. The nonsensical "pay as you go" proposal would not correct the problem. An analogy -- do you borrow and buy a house, than pay on the loan, while using the house and living in it or do you think it's smart to buy a few bricks and build it a few bricks at a time -- and maybe finish it in 40 years? Where would you live in the meantime?

Used to live there. Every time I visit these days, the roads are even worse. But I question whether the solution is more borrowing. The problem is the legislature spends money on its silly leftists pet projects and nothing on what the people want. Seems to me all the borrowing approach would do would be to let the leftists satisfy the clamor for better roads without sacrificing any of their pet programs. Make them choose. Make them run on more medicaid instead of repaired roads. We just allow them to hide their irresponsibility by fixing one of the apparent problems that people actually see and care about.

[calcowgirl]

They raided the fund and still haven't paid it back.
Had to make room for solar roofs and after-school-programs.