California Propositions + Pizza

Posted by on Nov 2, 2012 in Democracy | No Comments
California Propositions + Pizza

PIZZA +POLITICS = PARTY?

Recipe for disaster, right? Knowing I was at risk of losing a couple of friends or ending up with enough pizza to feed myself for the month, I did it anyway. Luckily, I had a great partner in crime (and chef extraordinare). Thanks, Marty B!

As it turns out: HOMEMADE PIZZA + IPA + POLITICS + GOOD PEOPLE = SUCCESS!

More than 15 of my friends — ranging in age from 2 to 52 — crammed into my studio apartment one week before elections to discuss and decode California’s propositions. Some came early, everyone ate pizza and almost everyone stayed late. After more than 5 hours of cheat sheets, iPhones, computers and discussions, I’ve still got all my friends.  In fact, I was blown away at how informed the conversation was.  To my awesome, smart friends, I love you! 

I know not everyone has time for propositions and pizza, so i’m sharing the cheat sheet from our deliberations.  Quick answers above, explanations below. 

HAPPY VOTING!

30 – Yes
31 – No
32 – No
33 – No
34 – Yes
35 – Um?
36 – Yes
37 – Yes
38 – No
39 – Yes
40  – Yes
A – No
B  – You Decide
J – Yes

_________

PROP 30 = YES (LET’S FUND EDUCATION)

STRONG YES.  A Yes vote increases sales tax by .0025 cents and puts all that money towards education.  Who else agrees? Bill Clinton, all of CA’s major newspapers, schools, and universities, California League of Conservation Voters, League of Women Voters & Sierra Club.

PROP 31 = NO (LOCAL AUTHORITY SHOULD NOT OVERRIDE STATE BUDGETS)
A two-year state budget cycle is reckless.  Local government having the authority to override State laws is not in the best interest of the environment or public health. Who else agrees? California League of Conservation Voters, League of Women Voters & Sierra Club.

PROP 32 = NO (THIS IS A TRICK, LET’S NOT GIVE CORPORATIONS ADDITIONAL POWER OVER ELECTIONS)
This prop claims to prevent corporations and unions from contributing to candidates, which would be awesome. But don’t be fooled. This proposition will only truly limit union campaign spending, giving corporations even more influence over elections. Who else agrees? California League of Conservation Voters, League of Women Voters & Sierra Club.

PROP 33 = NO (WE DON’T NEED HIGHER INSURANCE PREMIUMS)
This prop is funded mainly by the chair of a large insurance company and is an attempt to raise insurance company profits by giving them the power to raise already ridiculous rates for many Californians. Who else agrees? California Young Democrats and the President of the Consumer Watchdog.

PROP 34 = YES (REPEAL DEATH PENALTY, SAVE MONEY, REDUCE INDUSTRIAL PRISON COMPLEX)
In addition to setting a precedent that has the ability to reduce our nation’s industrial prison complex, a yes vote will save the state more than $100 million every year by reducing the exorbitant court and incarceration costs associated with the death penalty. These savings will be allocated to pay for increased investigation of unsolved rape and murder cases. Convicted killers will be required to work and pay restitution into a victims’ compensation fund. Who else agrees?  League of Women Voters, American Civil Liberties Union.

PROP 35 = EH? (HUMAN TRAFFICKING)
This one is tricker than expected. What I don’t like about it: It’s expensive and requires “sex offenders” (even those who are accused of indecent exposure) to submit ALL of their online usernames and logins to police within 24 hours of creating them. If they don’t, they are slapped with a felony. It’s mainly funded by Chris Kelly (who drafted it), former chief of privacy at Facebook, whom I’m sure is familiar with the impact of human trafficking. It’s also supported by Gavin Newsom and Barbara Boxer. Opposers include ACLU, President of the Exotic Service Providers Legal Education and Research Project and people working with human trafficking victims. I’m learning towards no, but I’m going to let you decide on this one. Here are a couple of videos from ACLU and California Channel that might help.

PROP 36 = YES (REVISES THREE STRIKES TO LIFE SENTENCE ONLY SERIOUS/VIOLENT CRIMES)
A yes vote would change the law so it prevents someone accused of non-violent crimes (i.e. possessing weed) more than twice from being imprisoned for life on their 3rd strike.  It still allows the option of life imprisonment, just doesn’t REQUIRE it. It will save the state money ($100 million/year) and reserve the system for more serious offenders.  Who else agrees? NAACP. 

PROP 37 = YES (LABEL GMO)
Uh, YES! This requires companies to label vegetables and meats they’ve genetically modified. I’ll start by mentioning who opposes this one: Monsanto, Dupont, Pepsi, DOW, Coca-Cola, Kraft, Nestle….a.k.a. the big corporations that genetically modify our foods and make a $hit ton of money doing it. Who agrees? League of Women Voters, MoveOn, Public Citizen & Sierra Club.

PROP 38 = NO (THIS WOULD OVERRIDE PROP 30, WHICH IS BETTER)
This sounds good, but only prop 30 OR 38 can pass, and 30 is far better. Who else agrees? The Democratic and Republican parties and all the California Newspapers.

PROP 39 = YES (PAY FAIR TAXES ON THE BUSINESS YOU DO IN CA)
Corporations doing business in California are evading taxes on that business by registering in different (tax haven) states.  This proposition would require them to pay for the business (and benefit received) from being in California. The proposition allocates that money towards “clean energy” projects, which we agreed we’d like to know more about, but either way, we think its a win-win situation. Who else agrees? National Resource Defense Council, League of Conservation Voters, Californians for Clean Energy.  Who opposes: General Motors, Kimberly-Clark Corporation.

PROP 40 = YES (REDISTRICTING BY CITIZENS)
A yes vote approves redistricting lines drawn by citizens instead of letting the Supreme Court decide. We’ve already been through this once on the last ballot.  A yes vote approves, once again, what we already decided on. Who else agrees? League of Women Voters, AARP & The CA Chamber of Commerce. 

MEASURE A = NO
Let the people decide. 

MEASURE B = UNDECIDED
We’re going to let you make the decision on this one. Some of us thought: “Hey, lets set a good example and make porn responsible”….others argued “A county measure to require condoms will only move porn out of LA, not increase use of condoms”….”Keep Porn Local.”  I’ll ask, do you think this is the role of government or commercial contracts? Whatever you vote, we encourage you to practice safe sex. 

MEASURE J =YES (MORE PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION)
DUH!