How to Vote on the Propositions if You Don't Want a Toilet State in California
Claiming new taxes are for the schools, is like Lucy promising Charlie Brown she won't sweep the football away
October 26, 2020
There are many alarmingly radical propositions on the ballot this election. Please go through the many measures, educate yourself, and vote. Otherwise, you will be unpleasantly surprised with the results, which could include your favorite businesses closing, increased costs for everything - including ride shares - and uncontrollable crime on the streets.
Proposition 14 - Bonds for Stem Cell Research-- NO
This bond essentially borrows $7.3 billion for medical research. While it would feel good to be a part of curing Alzheimer's, this isn't the job of the public state and its taxpayers. Investors who are experts in calculating potential benefits should fund medical research, not a government bureaucracy which is only expert at wasting and misusing money.
Proposition 15 - Raising Tax Assessment -- NO
This measure will destroy the protections of Proposition 13, which holds property taxes to levels people can actually pay, a maximum of 2 percent increase annually. While residences are exempt from this proposed increase on commercial property tax, all of California's citizens will end up paying. Businesses with (much) higher property taxes will pass those costs on in higher cost of goods, higher rents to small business tenants, and so on. Companies will leave the state in even greater numbers than they already are. Other companies will have to fold. In addition, every proposed tax to help the schools, as this one claims, has failed to be faithful to its promise. Governors sign "emergency" orders and the we-promise-only-for-school money gets swept into the general fund. Claiming new taxes are for the schools is the political equivalent of Lucy promising Charlie Brown she won't sweep the football out of the way.
Oh, and the bill's promoters have already admitted they're going after our residential property taxes next. Don't give them the opening!
Proposition 16 - Allowing Race, Sex, and Ethnicity as Factors in Public Employment and Contracting Decisions -- NO
Currently, the state constitution supports a color-blind, merit-based approach to hiring candidates for public jobs and awarding contracts. This bill would turn that on its head and allow (that is, force) public entities to give preference to certain races, sexes, and national origins over others. It's racism. Legitimized.
Proposition 17 - Allows parolees to vote. -- NO
The title of this bill is a lie. It sounds as though it allows people who have completed a prison sentence to be restored their right to vote (and run for office). In fact, the bill specifically allows those on parole - who have not concluded their sentence in prison - to vote. Since Proposition 57 allows many more prisoners to be released on parole, this means many more criminals voting. They could vote on more measures like this one that reduce punishments and grant unearned privileges.
Proposition 18 - Lowers voting age. -- NO
This bill allows 17-year-olds who will become 18 by the next general election to vote in the primary election preceding. It is an obvious slippery slope to lowering the voting age entirely.
Proposition 19 - Ends property tax savings on inherited property. -- NO
Read this bill carefully. It does not do what it claims. Seniors and those affected by natural disasters are already protected from higher taxes if they are forced to move. The true purpose of this measure is to strip tax relief from family members inheriting real property.
Proposition 20 - Repairs the damage wrought by Props 47 and 57. -- YES
This measure is endorsed by the Association of Deputy District Attorneys and many other law enforcement agencies. It repairs the mistakes of Proposition 57, which gave early release to such "nonviolent" offenders as those who shoot at someone with a gun, bomb a church, or kidnap a child as a sex slave. And that's only a partial list. The bill also repairs some of the damage of Proposition 47, which reduced most theft to a misdemeanor. Under Prop 20, stiffer sentencing will be allowed for repeat offenders.
Proposition 21 - Gives power over rent control back to local government. -- NO
Santa Monica underwent a renaissance in 1999, when vacancy decontrol went into effect. Properties that had been allowed to languish by landlords who could not afford to maintain them suddenly became beautiful again. Prop 21 wants to undo the benefits of the Costa-Hawkins law, which limits how much financial strain local governments can put on landlords. Promoted as a way to reduce homelessness, the law would actually increase it by killing motivation to build more housing. Even Governor Newsom opposes this proposition.
Proposition 22 - Classifies ride-share drivers as independent contractors
This proposition repairs half of the problem created by AB5, the law that forced Uber drivers - and many other gig workers - to be classified as employees. In response, most of these workers were fired since their employers could not afford to pay the benefits associated with official employment. In addition, many workers could not afford the time demands of an official employer. This law only addresses app-based drivers though many, many other jobs were affected, including captioners for the deaf, freelance writers, and other professions not wealthy enough to lobby for one of the many exemptions granted. AB5 is an anti-market, anti-independent worker, prosperity-killing law. Anything that can be done to blunt it is good.
Proposition 23 - Requires doctor on site at dialysis clinics
The California Medical Association urges a no vote on this measure. Dialysis patients are already under a doctor's care. Adding a full-time doctor to a clinic that performs technical functions only adds cost to dialysis patients' treatments. Further regulation of these clinics is unnecessary and counter-productive. This proposition does nothing for dialysis patients, so it probably puts money into somebody's pocket.
Proposition 24 - Adds (and subtracts) consumer privacy rights
This is yet another deceptively written law that attempts to sell you on the idea it is going to provide you with more online privacy and restrict business's ability to collect data on you. It does not do this. Instead, it reduces the number of businesses currently required to follow current privacy laws. It allows companies to charge you money for your privacy. It allows big tech to collect even more data on you, such as from health and financial apps. Worse yet, it creates YET ANOTHER GOVERNMENT AGENCY. The ACLU opposes this bill, for which input was sought from big tech but not from consumer groups.
Proposition 25 - Referendum on the no-cash bail law. -- NO
A "no" vote means you want cash bail back. We have been subjected during the pandemic lockdown to a preview of what the state will look like should the no-cash bail law (SB 10, signed by Gov. Jerry Brown in 2018) clears its legal hurdles and becomes effectuated. Criminals are immediately released on their own recognizance rather than having to post bail and are free to commit more crimes. And they have. Although defendants who are considered risks to the public are supposed to be held, that often doesn't happen. Terrible people are released after law enforcement have put themselves at risk to capture them. This last is possibly the largest and most dangerous consequence of no-cash bail. It destroys motivation for the police to catch criminals. Why bother? They are only going to have to catch the same criminal again - and again.
I agree with DC3. Thanks for this information which I will use!
10/09/2020, 3:34 pm
Copies of this article need to be printed out and distributed door-to-door. No kidding. CRAZY is all over the California ballot this November. I hope enough people are aware.
10/08/2020, 7:19 pm