11.03.2008

Props - my take

Without a doubt, my favorite part of elections are evaluting the merit and worth of propositions on the ballot. With those who are elected to office, it is hard to tell what the outcome is going to be. Who knew in 2000 that G.W. was going to face the biggest terrorist attack in modern American history? At least propositons are easier to analyze. So, here is how I voted (I'm absentee) and why.


Prop 1: High Speed Rail Bonds


This is a measure to sell government bonds to pay for a high speed rail line between LA and San Fransisco.


No.

Being a libertarian, and generally fiscally conservative, I fear that this bond act will eventually lead to higher taxes. And, although it seems as though we are moving in the direction of energy efficiency, we are not a culture of public transportation, at least outside of Los Angeles and the Bay Area, and a high speed rail will not make it so. We cannot guarantee that ridership will make up for the 19 billion dollar deficit of the bond act. Also, we this act only benefits those who travel between Los Angeles and San Fransisco, which is a small segment of the population.


Prop 2: Standards for confining farm animals


I'm sure you've all seen the commercials, but this initiative, if passed, would require larger cages for egg-laying hens, calves raised for veal and pregnant pigs.


No.


My roommate was laughing at me because I told her that I'm voting no for strict economic reasons. I'm tired of paying over 25 cents per egg, I don't want to pay more than that! Hahaha! Actually, folks, this proposition is about regulating industry, something that is deeply complicated, but generally more expensive to the consumer, either via direct business routes or taxes to increase agriculture subsidies.


There is another issue that I must address here, the issue of animal cruelty. This initiative is supposed to reduce the cruelty to animals and create a healthier enviornment, giving us healthier food. Folks, this sounds like a moral argument, shrouded in health. I cannot with good conscience vote to impose debateable morality upon another, especially if it has the potential to negatively affect someone else. That's using a majority to discriminate against a minority. Bad, bad, bad.


Prop 3: Children's Hospital Bond Act


Proposes $980 million in bonds to be sold for the improvement of children's hospitals. The improvements will be made via grants given to hospitals.


Sorry Jamie Lee Curtis, but no.


To be honest, this one was hard for me. I have seen the grant process work first-hand and it can be an effective process. But, it still requires someone to apply for it, and approval from an agency. Just because there is money available, it does not mean that it will be spent. Plus, from what I understand, there is money available for projects such as these already. I am of the opinion that this is not a prudent initiative at this point in time.


Prop 4: Waiting period and parental notification before termination of minor's pregnancy


The name on this proposition explains it well. Doctors have to provide written notification, either in person or via certified mail, to the parents or guardians of a minor before they can terminamte a pregnancy.


Yes.


Ironicly, the fact that a minor can obtain an abortion without parental consent or notification falls under a law that was enacted in 1953. This law, formed before abortion was legal, states that a minor can receive the same types of prenatal care as an adult without parental consent or notification. Now, the termination of needing prenatal care also falls under that law. I find this so ironic.


Before you get into a tizzy about the possible need for protection of the minor, this initiative has some protection built into it - if the minor fears abuse from the parents, they can obtain a waiver of notification from the court or the doctor can notify another adult family member. The doctor has to report the abuse to either law enforcement or the adult family member. And if the minor chooses to obtain a waiver from the court, the minor is supposed to be seen within 3 business days, will be appointed a lawyer and does not have to pay the filing fee.

OK, so why am I voting yes? 1. To make it more difficult to obtain an abortion. 2. My feminine intuition is telling me yes. 3. This is messy. I am under the impression that most teenagers who get pregnant come from a hard family life. But essentially, it seems as though this proposition has much more potential to make a better life for the minor. The doctor must report the abuse, if there is abuse. That means that the family could get a check-up, a wake-up call, whatchamacallit, or that the minor and any siblings would be taken into protective custody. Not necessarily the best place, but sometimes better than home.

Prop 5: Nonviolent Drug Offenses

Expands parole options and treatment programs for non violent drug offenses, while limiting court authority to incarcerate these offenders. Also, increases parole for serious and violent drug crimes.

YES!

Being libertarian (notice the small "l") I am for the decriminalization of drug offenses. This seems to be a step in the right direction. It changes many marijuana offenses from a misdemeanor to an infraction. It would be like issuing a speeding ticket versus being sent to court. There is also, for both minors and first time offenders, a chance to wipe the offense off the record, provided they follow through with their rehab and stay out of trouble. It also provides funding for certain rehab programs, to help correct the problem, rather than punish it.

Please also note that offenders who have previous records, or commit other serious or violent crime will not get the same cushy treatment.

YES!

Prop 6: Police and Law Enforcement Funding

Almost 1 billion dollars to be allocated for more law enforcement funding, while increasing sentences for gang related crime, methanphetamine sales and vehicle theft.

No.

Honestly, I did not read this prop that carefully, but I would argue that most of this money will go toward bigger jails. If all of these offenses are problems or threats, I think we need to rethink the solution.

Prop 7: Renewable Energy Generation

Will require govt-owned utilites to generate 20% of their energy from renewablesources by 2010, and 50% by 2025.

No!

Not to mention the fact that EVERYONE - INCLUDING GROUPS OF OPPOSING INTERESTS - oppose this proposition, but this is going to make it more expensive for the consumer. Yes, we need to move to more renewable energy. Yes, we want clean air, but this prop forces utilities into quick-fix expensive solutions or face a penalty. Sustainable clean air is coming, but some of the solutions need a bit more time than this prop is willing to give.

Prop 8: If you don't know what this one is, you must live under a rock

Adds a section to the California Constitution that reads, "Only a marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California."

No.

This is not about protecting the family. Parents - not schools - teach what constitutes a family. This is not about equal rights. Many institutions recognize domestic partners as spouses, so much so that I can add my roommate as my partner without question. This is about the separation of church and state.

I sometimes think that marriages should be notorized instead of licensed. The idea that a secular government recognizes the ususally sacred institution of marriage is a fairly new idea. When I really think about it, it appalls me that it is now the government, not God, that tells me what I have is a sacred union. Why should it not tell who to marry? Oh, wait, it's done that before, too. Please, don't leave it up to the government to decide, leave it up to God.

OK, sorry, I must go now. Hopefully I'll be able to do the rest a little later tonite.