Sunday, October 28, 2012

Roger's Voter's Guide for Californians

As a Californian, your vote doesn't matter in this election. Don't vote.

If you insist, here's how you should vote:

U.S. Senate

Since Mickey Kaus isn't running, you don't need to vote against him this time.  No endorsement.

U.S. House

Vote for the Democrat, if there is one. Especially Barbara Lee, Henry Waxman and whoever is running against Darrell Issa, Dan Lundgren,  Duncan Hunter, Ricky Gill and Dana Rohrbacher. In the case of Berman v. Sherman, write in Uma Thurman.

Propositions

Proposition 30 -- Temporary Taxes to Fund Education. Guaranteed Local Public Safety Funding. Initiative Constitutional Amendment.

Yes.

Proposition 31 -- State Budget. State and Local Government. Initiative Constitutional Amendment and Statute.

No.

Proposition 32 -- Political Contributions by Payroll Deduction. Contributions to Candidates. Initiative Statute.

Hell no!  This is the Republicans' desparate bid to become relevant in California. Your employer takes the money for its political contributions away from you before it pays you; it doesn't have to "take it out of your paycheck."

Proposition 33 -- Auto Insurance Companies. Prices Based on Driver’s History of Insurance Coverage. Initiative Statute.

When in doubt, vote no. Any ballot intiative on insurance is a scam to line the pockets of insurance companies.

Proposition 34 -- Death Penalty. Initiative Statute

Yes.

Proposition 35 -- Human Trafficking. Penalties. Initiative Statute

Yes.

Proposition 36 -- Three Strikes Law. Repeat Felony Offenders. Penalties. Initiative Statute

Yes.

Proposition 37 -- Genetically Engineered Foods. Labeling. Initiative Statute.

I know I should care about this, but I don't.

Proposition 38 -- Tax to Fund Education and Early Childhood Programs. Initiative Statute.

No.

Proposition 39 -- Tax Treatment for Multistate Businesses. Clean Energy and Energy Efficiency Funding. Initiative Statute

Yes. But why is George Schulz supporting it, and does he know that he is?

Proposition 40 -- Redistricting. State Senate Districts. Referendum

Update: In comments, Tom Hilton points out that the Republicans who authored Prop. 40 were against Prop. 40 before they were for it. Or somesuch. I told you not to vote.

So I'm changing my endorsement to support whoever buys the most ad space on the blog, and praying that the courts toss the result.

Print out this handy guide and you won't have to think for yourself!  Do you really want to read this?

2 comments:

Tom said...

Whoa, are you sure about your recommendation on #40?

This is now a zombie-initiative that is not actively supported by anyone, not even by the GOPers who authored it as a sour-grapes hissy fit against the new Citizens Commission-drawn State Senate districts. But the yes/no choice is counterintuitive for most people.

Per CCTimes:

"The measure is what's known as a veto referendum, which allows voters to reject a law. But the wording is confusing. A no vote overturns the citizen-drawn districts, and a yes vote maintains them."

Roger said...

Fuck.

This is like fucking nine-dimensional chess.

http://articles.latimes.com/2012/oct/06/local/la-me-prop40-20121006

'The California Republican Party, which helped pay to put the referendum on the ballot, is also telling voters to disregard the organization's early position and vote to keep the new maps.

"We're telling people to vote yes," said party chairman Tom Del Beccaro. "Circumstances have changed."

'Wealthy GOP activist Charles Munger Jr., who helped finance ballot measures that created the citizen redistricting panel, apparently agrees — he has even put up $370,000 for a campaign to urge voters to say yes on 40.

'Democratic strategist Jason Kinney called the referendum "one of the great tragicomedies of the election season,'' criticizing Republican Party leaders for spending money "they didn't have on a ballot measure they couldn't win — and have since orphaned.''