Posted on 05/18/2009 9:44:25 AM PDT by SmithL
Hollywood director Rob Reiner stars in the only broadcast ad specifically opposing Propositions 1D and 1E.
The two items on Tuesday's special election ballot would temporarily shift funds to the state from local children's and mental-health programs, which voters approved in past years.
Reiner is involved in the campaign because in 1998 he spearheaded Proposition 10, which created the children's programs and the tobacco tax to finance them.
Proposition 10 proponents have merged efforts with those seeking to protect Proposition 63, the 2004 measure that imposed a "millionaire's tax" to fund mental health programs.
Following is the text of the radio ad and an analysis by Susan Ferriss of The Bee Capitol Bureau:
Text
This is Rob Reiner. Our kids don't know it, but on Tuesday, the state's budget mess will put them at risk. That's because Propositions 1D and 1E cut children's health and mental health care. These are some of the worst budget cuts in California history. 1D and 1E won't balance the budget
and they'll end up costing California more in the long run.
(Excerpt) Read more at sacbee.com ...
I’m planning on avoiding hurting them by not piling on more taxes and debt for them.
How ‘bout you?
Yep
I’m considering a yes vote on these propositions. I have generally opposed any proposition that mandates the spending of particular funds or a percentage of the general fund for any one purpose. It has seemed to me that mandating such spending every year just doesn’t make sense. We cannot determine now, for example, that a particular level of spending on K-12 education will be appropriate or necessary in succeeding years. The fact that Reiner opposes these propositions is a bonus. However, I will have to read them closely this evening. You really can’t rely on the published summaries of propositions here in California.
Please reconsider.
Yes, let’s pile mountains of debt on them instead.
Meathead indeed.
Thanks
The biggest reason to oppose this: The teachers unions are huge supporters. This would be a terrific boon to them and where will the additional cash flow the union skims go? Back into the campaigns pockets of the Democrats who are running the state to the ground.
Further, even as education spending has rocketed upward, student performance has dropped. Throwing money at education is not the solution. The system has figured out there is more money to be made by perpetuating problems than by actually fixing them. It is time to take a wrecking ball to the system and build something new that will actually educate kids rather than lining the pockets of the bureaucrats.
It’s sometimes sad to see actors become their make believe characters.
David Carradine became his Kung Fu character. The guy just wigged out.
Then there was Rob Reiner, who became meathead.
Reiner is a leftist poster child. He is Meathead. He is a major ass——.
Imagine what this world would’ve been like if Rob had gotten mental health assistance as a child.
To paraphrase the old South Park ad
“Vote against Propositions 1D and 1E, or else you hate children. You...don’t...HATE...children....do you?”
I think that any “sin tax” on tobacco should first go toward places for the costs burdens on smokers.
It’s why I believe that the states were due no money for “damages” from smoking when they sued the tobacco companies. The money did not go toward smoking problems and the settlement didn’t either.
Can’t complain about how your child is starving and you need your dead beat dad child support money and then spend the money received on a vacation.
He imposes his will on everyone. He’s my hero. - Eric Cartman
Almost makes me want to vote for 1D and 1E.
Almost.
Now I got to sterilize both the phone and the answering machine...
I really really hate that guy.
I did.
They won’t pass, but then, I’m used to making symbolic votes in California.
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.