The important bit of the election: Propositions

Manic Moran

Especially here in California, the Presidential elections are a bit redundant. We're voting for Obama. But most everywhere, there is the opportunity to have a say in things which affect your daily lives a bit more frequently.

So, in my county of Contra Costa, in the Great State of California.... (Numbered props are Statewide, lettered are local)

Prop 30: Four-year Tax increase, and the State Governor's pet proposition. Extra .25% on sales tax, and individuals earning over $250k get increased income taxes. Like most people, I'm not affected by the income tax issue. California has the highest State sales tax in the nation (7.5%), and add county tax, it's 8.25% here. In fairness to the Governor, he's at least proposing a viable solution to help California's budget issues, and it can be reasonably carried out. In the past, I've generally gone with any tax increases that have crossed my ballot, but I'm getting a bit fed up. There's a tax increase -every- ballot. Further, the pro Prop 30 radio adverts are not mentioning the sales tax, they're only commenting on the tax of the wealthy. I tend to be more receptive to people that go with full disclosure.

Prop 31: State Budget Process Reforms. Significantly, goes from an annual budget to a two-year budget. (Not that unusual: Texas, for instance, only operates its legislature every other year. It's certainly cheaper and more reliable a process). Also adds requirements such as "No new programs in excess of $25m without finding funding, and no tax cuts in excess of $25m without cutting programs". Requires that the proposed State budget be made public before being voted upon. Advertising on the radio for and against has been a bit quiet on this one. On the plus side, it devolves a lot of responsibility and decision making to regional governments.

Prop 32: Our union proposition. Prohibits mandatory payroll deductions for union members for political purposes, and prohibits both unions and business corporations from making political contributions. The for and against camps in propositions are usually arguing over matters of opinion, but on this one, they're arguing over matters of fact. Against (mainly the unions) are saying "It has loopholes for corporations", pro (mainly business corporations) are saying "It does not have loopholes". My reading of the text of the law itself (Which, I will wager, most people won't go as far as to read) indicates to me that it does not, but of course, both sides are going to find ways around it and donate political money anyway.

Prop 33: Car insurance. Changes the law to allow companies to give discounts to drivers who have had a history of car insurance with other companies. Currently you get a credit for your own company, and you have to start anew when you change to a new company. Exactly why the State is involved in this to begin with, I'm not sure, but the State Insurance Commissioner has placed the current prohibition in place. Also adds a few exemptions for certain circumstances. For example, military deployed overseas who don't bother to insure a car they don't (can't) drive won't lose their 'continually insured' status.

Prop 34. Death penalty. Simple one, really. Keep or ban. Not sure if it'll pass in this State or not.

Prop 35. Human Trafficking. Increases penalties for human trafficking, requires offenders to register as sex offenders (I'm not sure why) and a few other details. The most significant thing about this is the argument against in the State voter's guide, submitted by Maxine Doogan, Erotic Services Provider Legal. I think there are some holes in the prop, but not enough to warrant not voting for it.

Prop 36: Three-Strikes Law. Removes the mandatory life imprisonment for non-violent offenders, allows currently sentenced personnel to appeal for a reduction. I'm OK with this in theory. Of interest, the major supporters of this proposition are the DAs of San Francisco and LA and the current Chief of Police of LA, whilst opposing it are the State Sheriff's Association, the California Peace Officer's Association, and the California District Attorney's association. With that significant opposition, the devil is in the details of the proposition (release process, oversight and so on).

Prop 37: Genetically Engineered Foods Labelling. Generally speaking, requires genetically modified foods to be labelled as such. Again, the devil is in the details, with a lot of fine print, apparently put in by the various lobbies. (eg genetically engineered soy milk must be labelled, milk from GE cows need not be).

Prop 38: Taxes for Schools. This one rather annoyed the Governor, as it's an alternate proposal for raising taxes for education. Voters don't like multiple taxes on a ballot sheet, tends to sour them off any raises at all. It's a fairly noticable income tax rate hike, everyone gets affected to one extent or another (sliding scale, low-earners get a smaller percentage hike than higher ones) but on the positive side, it is very clear about where the money will go, unlike more nebulous proposals usually put forward. I'll say it's unlikely to pass.

Prop 39: Multi-state corporation taxing. Alters the rules under which corporations which operate in multiple states determine their California tax liability. Also funds some clean energy programs. To be honest, I'm not sure I understand it all. I doubt many voters will. Requires further investigation.

Prop 40: New State Senate redistricting. This is a follow-on from the previous ballot, and is a simple approval/denial of the new districts as drawn up by the recently created districting committee. However, since the proposition was put on the ballot, actions in the State Supreme Court have rendered the proposition moot, so opposition has been withdrawn.

There actually don't seem to be any county propositions for me to vote on, which is a bit odd.

Fr Tod Umptious

That waht I love about the American system, there are so many state and local issues that the people get a vote on.

Ozymandius2011

It looks like WA and MD will vote to legalise gay marriage, while Minnesota's referendum banning it is too close to call.

Be like Nutella

much better system - being able to vote on all these individual issues for your state... where ya live. Must have a look at some of the other ones.. wonder if there's some mad ones like amendments to really old state laws like getting whipped for eating onion soup in public and all that funny ****..

Fr Tod Umptious

Be like Nutella wrote: »

much better system - being able to vote on all these individual issues for your state... where ya live. Must have a look at some of the other ones.. wonder if there's some mad ones like amendments to really old state laws like getting whipped for eating onion soup in public and all that funny ****..

There is an interesting one in MA called 'Right to Repair', which is about allowing independent garages to use the same tools and software as the dealerships to diagnose and fix problems in your car.

Apparently the dealership were not not allowing independent garages access to these and as a result car owners had to go to the dealership for repairs

As it turns out the bill was passed already but not in time to take it off the ballot.

Be like Nutella

and in one single situation you have the entire story of democracy.... red tape, big government, big business bullying, attempt to balance the power of corporations and finally bureaucratic error... a perfect operatic reflection of the reality we all argue about.

Manic Moran

Well, my sales tax is going up, Prop 30 is passing. On a related note, Alameda County was looking to try to pass an even higher sales tax, bringing it to something akin to 9.5% in order to fund transportation projects, that one is failing.

31 is a definite no, we're going to stay on the one-year cycle.

32, the prohibition on paycheck deductions has failed.

33, changing the law on insurance rates has failed.

34, we're keeping the death penalty.

35, increased sentencing for human trafficking is the most lopsided one so far, at 81% yes.

36, the three strikes rule is being relaxed.

37, labelling genetically modified foods, has failed.

38, a competing tax measure to 30, has failed soundly.

39 is the one which befuddles me. It's labelled "Clean energy initiative", which seems to have very little with the primary issue of how corporations are taxed. (Yes, there's a little something in there about diverting some dollars to clean energy, but it's a subsidiary issue). It's passed, but I stronly suspect people were just voting on the title.

Manic Moran

Hmm. I just caught this bit.

Democracts in California now hold the Governor's Mansion, and hold supermajorities on both the House and Senate. This should be interesting. Not necessarily good, but interesting.

InTheTrees

Here in Washington State, along with Colorado, we just legalized Marijuana use.

Not for medical use, not decriminalized, but fully, go buy it in the store, Legal.

The proposition detailed sale, taxation etc, and its going to take over a year to fully set up the system but as of december 6th this year it will be fully legal.

Chuck Stone

Great to see some US states giving up on the prohibition farce with marijuana.

I'm cynically awaiting a concerted effort by social conservatives (spit) big pharma, the alcohol industry, and elements of the justice system to have the relaxing of drug laws reversed.

Ozymandius2011

The DOJ has released a statement that Marajuana remains illegal in the US and they are "reviewing the ballot initiatives". I think ultimately the conservative SC will decide on this. In the past they have ruled that the "Commerce Clause" allows the Feds to regulate and prohibit narcotics. In Gonzales v. Raich (2005) this is what they decided but interestingly, Clarence Thomas and O'Connor disagreed but the latter is retired now. Interestingly the liberals on the court upheld the Feds right to ban marijuana. But perhaps the climate is more favourable for liberalisation now after these referendums.

InTheTrees

The Federal government will certainly try and block Washington states law but the buzz is that they'll only go after fiscal details that involve tax revenue.

I don't think the Bureau of Alcohol and Tobacco know what to do. they're probably considering name changes now.

So on December 6th it will be legal, even if all the other details have to be ironed out.

It should be noted that Washington State previously had a particularly antiquated marijuana law that upon conviction required a day in jail even for a trace amount. It was a farce where the convicted would assemble on a friday evening, take a bus to a special facility where they stay overnight and then get bused back the next day. The dark side of it was that for the rest of your life any form/application etc that asks "have you ever been in prison" you have to answer Yes.

InTheTrees

Ozymandius2011 wrote: »

The DOJ has released a statement that Marajuana remains illegal in the US and they are "reviewing the ballot initiatives". I think ultimately the conservative SC will decide on this. In the past they have ruled that the "Commerce Clause" allows the Feds to regulate and prohibit narcotics.

The conservative members of the supreme court are the most active proponents of States rights arent they? It will be a dilemma for them.

After the ruling on "Obamacare" and previous rulings around what constitutes interstate commerce the method suggested in South Park would be as accurate as any other to predict what the decision would be. http://www.fedupusa.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/southpark-margaritaville-Chicken.jpg

Ozymandius2011

Missouri and Montana also voted to ban aspects of Obamacare in their state, such as compulsory mandates and state insurance exchanges. More SC cases will likely follow. They can't repeal it while Obama is President without a GOP supermajority in the Senate, but they may be able to make it unworkable. A crucial legal challenge by members of the Cato Institute against taxing businesses to pay for the Federal insurance exchanges (used where the states refuse to set them up) is a serious threat to Obamacare.

Black Swan

Manic Moran wrote: »

Democracts in California now hold the Governor's Mansion, and hold supermajorities on both the House and Senate. This should be interesting. Not necessarily good, but interesting.

One party rule is bad news in the American political system, regardless if they be Democrats or Republicans in control. It greatly reduces the checks-and-balances between branches of government, and leaves room for potential abuse.

Ozymandius2011

On the state assemblies, the Dems have retaken the NH, Maine, Minnesota, Colorado and Oregon houses and likely the NY Senate, while the GOP has increased its majorities in NC, Georgia but lost 9 seats in the Florida House and some in Arizona and Texas. The FL one will probably flip in a couple of years.

InTheTrees

A little update on the Washington State Marijuana initiative;

Yesterday Police in King County (Seattle is in King Co), dropped all pending Misdemeanor Marijuana prosecutions. Done. Even though the law doesn't start until december they didnt see any point in bringing cases to court once the law has changed.

Form today on there will presumably be no more arrests either. No point in arresting anyone if they're not going to ever go to court.

Changing times.

Ozymandius2011

There could still be Federal arrests presumably?

Manic Moran

The feds haven't quite figured out what they're going to do about it. The devil may be in the details, such as if the State propositions legalised personal use, or all posession and manufacturing regardless of the amount. As it is, the Feds don't normally waste time prosecuting individual users.

InTheTrees

Ozymandius2011 wrote: »

There could still be Federal arrests presumably?

The feds have very limited jurisdiction but technically there could be.

I'm not sure how many Federal agencies are involved in law enforcement and whether they could even get involved in state misdemeanors.

There's the FBI, Homeland Security and the park service?

None of them are involved in day-to-day policing though.

Manic Moran

You missed the big one on this topic: DEA.

Again, though, they don't waste their resources on individual users.

InTheTrees

Manic Moran wrote: »

You missed the big one on this topic: DEA

Duh! I must have hit the bong a little early this morning!