Nov

9

Welcome Back to the Status Quo, Well, Not Really

Filed Under California, Election 2005 | Leave a Comment

I think the Los Angeles Times puts it best:

No Times 8

The official message is “Welcome Back to the Status Quo, Well, Not Really” and for good reason. Even though, legally, nothing has changed in California, the political atmosphere has altered incredibly.

What essentially has been proven is that Californians are fed up. Fed up with how our government, and specfically our leadership, is unable to develop solutions to the problems facing our state.

Governor Schwarzenegger’s “year of reform” is dead and if he decides to run for re-election, hs faces an uphill battle. I’ll be the first to say, the Governor has made bold statements, decisions and moves, but he hasn’t be able to effectively communicate and relate his agenda to the people.

California has changed, the peoples’ perspectives have changed, and now the government must change.

Nov

8

OMG, Elections Overload! ;-)

Filed Under California, Election 2005 | 2 Comments

Visit http://vote2005.ss.ca.gov/ for Live Election Results. Look at those election results scroll!

And tonight (about 5 minutes ago or so) I realized that I am a political junkie and I am not afraid to admit it due the fact that I am pressing F5 (Refresh) at least 2 times each minute.

I love politics! ;-)

Nov

8

8 Statewide Propositions, 1 Future

Filed Under California, Election 2005, Personal | Leave a Comment

Political participation is incredibly important to me.

Whether it’s knowing that there is an election tomorrow, discussing politics with colleagues, writing a letter to the editor, communicating a concern to a legislator, speaking during a public forum, contributing resources to and/or volunteering for a campaign, voting in all elections, and/or running for public office, each of these activities (and more) are a form of political participation and each of us participates in our political system is some unique way.

With that said, Tuesday, November 8, 2005 California registered voters will vote on eight (8) statewide propositions and I graciously ask you to vote in tomorrow’s election for the good of our state.

Like you, I don’t know or fully understand each proposition, but I have made a respectable attempt by reading through the 75+ page Voter Information Guide, visiting and browsing through proponent/opponent and various other websites, reading newspaper editorials and talking with friends.

And now it’s time to vote. It’s time to make a choice that will affect you, your fellow Californians and the millions of people who, in the future, will call California their home.

Below, I have listed the 8 propositions and link to corresponding California Connected’s webpage because CC does an excellent job succinctly describing each proposition and providing links to other websites.

Propositions

  • Proposition 73: Waiting Period and Parental Notification Before Termination of Minor’s Pregnancy. Initiative Constitutional Amendment.
    http://www.californiaconnected.org/wp/archives/308
  • Proposition 74: Public School Teachers. Waiting Period for Permanent Status. Dismissal. Initiative Statute.
    http://www.californiaconnected.org/wp/archives/301
  • Proposition 75: Public Employee Union Dues. Restrictions on Political Contributions. Employee Consent Requirement. Initiative Statute.
    http://www.californiaconnected.org/wp/archives/303
  • Proposition 76: State Spending and School Funding Limits. Initiative Constitutional Amendment.
    http://www.californiaconnected.org/wp/archives/300
  • Proposition 77: Redistricting. Initiative Constitutional Amendment.
    http://www.californiaconnected.org/wp/archives/307
  • Proposition 78: Discounts on Prescription Drugs. Initiative Statute.
    http://www.californiaconnected.org/wp/archives/309
  • Proposition 79: Prescription Drug Discounts. State-Negotiated Rebates. Initiative Statute.
    http://www.californiaconnected.org/wp/archives/310
  • Proposition 80: Electric Service Providers. Regulation. Initiative Statute. 50
    http://www.californiaconnected.org/wp/archives/311

    • How Am I Going to Vote?

    Like a lot of other Californians, I am still undecided on some, if not all, of the propositions. Below, I write whether I am leaning for (yes) or against (no) a proposition and brief reason why.

  • Proposition 73: Waiting Period and Parental Notification Before Termination of Minor’s Pregnancy.
    I am leaning no because I believe this would encourage a minor to get an unsafe or “back-alley” abortion.
  • Proposition 74: Public School Teachers. Waiting Period for Permanent Status. Dismissal.
    I am leaning yes because if I was a teacher I would appreciate the fact that I had to work and perform well to obtain tenure after 5 years of proven commitment and dedication to students.
  • Proposition 75: Public Employee Union Dues. Restrictions on Political Contributions. Employee Consent Requirement.
    I am leaning no because I view unions as the counter weight to corporations and since this proposition does not apply to corporations, it’s unfair.
  • Proposition 76: State Spending and School Funding Limits.
    I am leaning yes because even though I know for a fact that this will adversely affect K-14 institutions now, it is needed for the long-run viability of this state and the state’s ability to fund education. In other words, this is heart-breaking sacrifice that we have to make.
  • Proposition 77: Redistricting.
    I am leaning no because I believe the problem is not so much the shape of the current districts as it is the size and lack of them. I would like to amend the California Constitution to increase the size of the State Assembly from 80 to 160 seats. This is whole another issue unto itself and we’ll be discussed later.
  • Proposition 78: Discounts on Prescription Drugs.
    I am leaning yes because I believe if this propositions fails to produce its intended results of providing more prescription drug coverage for those who need it, then the government can take steps in the future to be more forceful. I would like to give companies an opportunity to prove that they actually care for the public good by volunteering to participate.
  • Proposition 79: Prescription Drug Discounts. State-Negotiated Rebates.
    I am leaning no because of the reason I stated for proposition 78.
  • Proposition 80: Electric Service Providers. Regulation.
    I am leaning no because I believe it is too much regulation.

    • To conclude, the polls are going to open in about 7 hours and I am so excited; I know I am going to dream about voting tonight. ;-)

    Oct

    15

    Gearing Up

    Filed Under Election 2005 | 2 Comments

    As a student of government and public policy, this is an exciting time for me.

    With the 2005 California Special Election less than a month away, politics is increasingly becoming the talk of the town. I love it! ;-)

    Over the coming weeks, I will profile each proposition (8 in total) and either recommend or not recommend each proposition.

    I have added the California’s Voter Information Guide link under the Political Participation section (located in the right side bar). At the very least, visit the Voter Information Guide and read the summary of each proposition.

    Also, start talking about the propositions with your family, friends and others about what each proposition means to you.

    Just yesterday, California Connected featured a “Kid Review Bills” segment where “high school debate students [were asked] to dissect [Proposition 76, "Live Within Our Means Act"] and tell us how they would vote, if only they could.” It’s an excellent segment and it highlights how some research and discussion can go a long way.

    Stay tuned! :-D

    Aug

    2

    $116 Million Raised for Upcoming California Elections, Is this Good or Bad?

    Filed Under Election 2005 | Leave a Comment

    Today, the Los Angeles Times reported that over $116 million dollars has been raised for the upcoming 2005 and 2006 elections in California.

    An interesting point was brought forward within the article is that elections seem to be occurring with greater frequency in California and voters don’t necessarily appreciate it.

    The campaign reports come as opinion polls show that voters are skeptical of the need for a special election and question the wisdom of the measures on the ballot. But donors appear undeterred, giving an average of more than $540,000 a day to various causes.

    “All the inside players view this as a life-or-death battle, but the average person is really sick of it,” said Barbara O’Connor, director of the Institute for the Study of Politics at Cal State Sacramento.

    “And they’re tired of relegating government to the election box. They don’t want to have to do this.”

    California is inching closer and closer towards a real democracy; a democracy where each person has an opportunity to vote on each piece of legislation. But what is the cost? Apparently the cost is reduced voter confidence in state government and its leaders.

    But there are benefits as well.

    I believe, on balance, it’s more beneficial because the electorate is inevitably becoming more informed about the political process. As the electorate better understands government, it’s institutions, actors and how each interacts, a person is better able to critique it and recognize the deficiencies. In turn, a person is able to propose solutions to increasing the efficiency of government.

    So, what can we expect as November 8th approaches? We can expect more political activity, media coverage and participation. Stay tuned! ;)

    Jun

    14

    Special Election Slated for Nov. 8th

    Filed Under Election 2005 | Leave a Comment

    Yesterday, Monday, June 13th, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger called for a Special Election to be held on Tuesday, November 8, 2005.
    According to the Los Angeles Times’ “Governor Puts Agenda on the Ballot” article, the Governor is pursuing the passage of the following three measures to “alter the way Sacramento operates.”

    The three measures are:

  • Spending cap measure that “would limit amount that government spending could increase each year. Would force automatic cuts if the state budget was not in place by the July 1 deadline. Would give the governor the power to cut programs midyear if the budget fell out of balance. Would remove some school spending obligations from state law.”
  • Teacher tenure measure that “would increase to five years from the current two the period of service required before public school teachers could receive tenure. Would allow teachers to be fired after two consecutive unsatisfactory performance evaluations.”
  • Redistricting measure that “would require a panel of retired judges to draw election districts for state legislative, Board of Equalization and congressional offices. Takes away power of state legislators to draw their own districts. Voters would approve or disapprove the judges’ redistricting plan.”

    • I believe the public is polarized because not enough emphasis is being placed on compromise, a cornerstone of all democracies. Regardless of political affiliation, members of the public should expect, demand and require results from their government.

    Visit the California Secretary of State - November 8, 2005 Statewide Special Election Information website for more information about the election and ballot measures.