![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
How I'm voting
Nov. 2nd, 2005 01:59 pmI usually do a post on how I intend to vote. This election would have occurred for us in any case because we have several local races, so I don't mind having propositions as well. The propaganda level of the advertising for these has been very high, with outright lies or garden-variety distortions more evident than usual.
I've read the voter information guide and newspaper stories about each proposition. With the exception of Prop 74, the teacher tenure changes, I agree with the Mercury News editorial page on all of them.
Prop 73: Parental notification. Superficially plausible (it's good for parents to know when their child needs an abortion!) but actually a stalking horse for the antiabortion types. Weasel-wording sets up precedent to define a fetus as a legal human being. Makes it likely children will seek black-market abortions. NO
Prop 74: Teacher tenure. Extends from 2 to 5 years period when public school teachers can be dismissed without complex procedural safeguards. Makes it slightly easier to dismiss a tenured teacher for cause. The Merc says no, but despite misgivings I've heard too may stories about bad teachers being impossible to fire. Tenure in a research university allows freedom of thought; tenure at the grade school level only makes the world safe for mediocrity or worse. Fails to address more serious public school problems (lack of accountability due to statewide funding schemes, lack of competition, political interference with curricula), but YES.
Prop 75: Requires public employee unions to get permission for political expenditures. Being fought by, among other things, an extra $60 assessment on all public school teachers, in an example of the abuse intended to be addressed. There is a special problem when public employees (and companies that supply state services) can interfere with the machinery of democracy by funding political campaigns to support candidates that will in turn feather their nests; the Governor says he will support a provision controlling campaign expenditures by corporations if this one passes, so with that proviso, YES.
Prop 76: Budget reform. Allows the executive to exert more authority over budget items when deficits get out of control; adds a rainy day fund for excess revenues during good times (as were spent instead during the boom years, leading to the current fiscal crisis.) The system is terribly broken now, and this is a bandaid that will help. A little. YES.
Prop 77: Establishes redistricting commission to end legislative gerrymandering. A good-government reform, long overdue, that will start to add competition to legislative races. YES.
Prop 78: Drug plan #2, financed by drug companies. This was put on the ballot to avert Prop 79, and sounds good while doing little and costing, perhaps, a lot. NO.
Prop 79: Drug plan that purports to provide discounted drugs to the poor at the drug companies' expense. If it works at all, it will have unintended negative consequences; and the drug price problem needs to be addressed on a nationwide basis. NO.
Prop 80: Wrongheaded utility re-regulation proposal that would entrench old-line utilities as the only providers of power. Would leave little incentive for investment in new power transmission lines or innovative plants. NO.
I've read the voter information guide and newspaper stories about each proposition. With the exception of Prop 74, the teacher tenure changes, I agree with the Mercury News editorial page on all of them.
Prop 73: Parental notification. Superficially plausible (it's good for parents to know when their child needs an abortion!) but actually a stalking horse for the antiabortion types. Weasel-wording sets up precedent to define a fetus as a legal human being. Makes it likely children will seek black-market abortions. NO
Prop 74: Teacher tenure. Extends from 2 to 5 years period when public school teachers can be dismissed without complex procedural safeguards. Makes it slightly easier to dismiss a tenured teacher for cause. The Merc says no, but despite misgivings I've heard too may stories about bad teachers being impossible to fire. Tenure in a research university allows freedom of thought; tenure at the grade school level only makes the world safe for mediocrity or worse. Fails to address more serious public school problems (lack of accountability due to statewide funding schemes, lack of competition, political interference with curricula), but YES.
Prop 75: Requires public employee unions to get permission for political expenditures. Being fought by, among other things, an extra $60 assessment on all public school teachers, in an example of the abuse intended to be addressed. There is a special problem when public employees (and companies that supply state services) can interfere with the machinery of democracy by funding political campaigns to support candidates that will in turn feather their nests; the Governor says he will support a provision controlling campaign expenditures by corporations if this one passes, so with that proviso, YES.
Prop 76: Budget reform. Allows the executive to exert more authority over budget items when deficits get out of control; adds a rainy day fund for excess revenues during good times (as were spent instead during the boom years, leading to the current fiscal crisis.) The system is terribly broken now, and this is a bandaid that will help. A little. YES.
Prop 77: Establishes redistricting commission to end legislative gerrymandering. A good-government reform, long overdue, that will start to add competition to legislative races. YES.
Prop 78: Drug plan #2, financed by drug companies. This was put on the ballot to avert Prop 79, and sounds good while doing little and costing, perhaps, a lot. NO.
Prop 79: Drug plan that purports to provide discounted drugs to the poor at the drug companies' expense. If it works at all, it will have unintended negative consequences; and the drug price problem needs to be addressed on a nationwide basis. NO.
Prop 80: Wrongheaded utility re-regulation proposal that would entrench old-line utilities as the only providers of power. Would leave little incentive for investment in new power transmission lines or innovative plants. NO.
