[Mb-civic] Let's make sure Arnold loses on Tuesday!

[Jef Bek]

Hey there my left wing wacko bleeding heart liberal buddies!
Let¹s get out and vote Tuesday!
Let¹s show Arnold who the ³girlie man² is now!


Proposition 73-NO
Proposition 74-NO  
Proposition 75-NO
Proposition 76-NO
Proposition 77-NO
Proposition 78-NO
Proposition 79-YES
Proposition 80-YES

This is printed from The LA Weekly:

http://www.laweekly.com/ink/printme.php?eid=69706

State ballot measures.

Proposition 73: Abortion notification. NO
 If your teenage daughter gets pregnant and is about to have an abortion,
don¹t you want her to tell you? Don¹t you want the physician who is going to
perform the procedure to tell you, at least 48 hours before it takes place?
Of course you do. But let¹s take it further. You don¹t want her to get
pregnant in the first place. You don¹t want her having sex. You and she talk
about this kind of thing, and that¹s great. So shouldn¹t you vote for the
³Parent¹s Right to Know and Child Protection Initiative²? No, because you
and your daughter don¹t need it. But girls who can¹t talk to their parents,
for whatever reason, still need to be able to talk to their doctors about
their bodies without worrying that their family will find out and pressure
them into bearing a child against their will. Good parent-child
communication is essential, but it can¹t be legislated.

 Proposition 74: Teacher probationary period, also known as tenure. NO
 A probationary period for a new hire might not be a bad idea, just to make
sure the employee didn¹t forget to include something important on the
résumé, like ³raving lunatic.² Thirty days sounds about right. Unless you¹re
a teacher, in which case we¹ll make it ‹ whoa! Two years! Okay, they¹re with
kids every day, so let¹s play it safe. But to encourage more good people to
become teachers, maybe we should change it to ‹ yikes! Five years of job
insecurity? That¹s what Proposition 74 would do, because Governor
Schwarzenegger knows that when schools are underfunded and overcrowded, it¹s
got to be because we just make it too easy for people to become underpaid
teachers. He¹s wrong on this one, just like he is with the other ballot
initiatives he¹s pushing.

 Proposition 75: Public worker union dues restrictions. NO
 In 1998 Californians rejected a ballot measure that would have blocked
unions from spending an employee¹s dues money to campaign for candidates or
lobby for legislation that labor leaders believe is important. Now we have
this one, which is pretty much the same except that it applies only to
public employees. These workers currently can opt out of paying their union
to do political lobbying and campaigning. Under Proposition 75, they would
have to opt in ‹ giving the edge to corporations that do not, after all,
give their shareholders the power to opt out of having their investment used
for anti-labor lobbying.

 Proposition 76: State budget reform. NO
 The state budget is a mess. Proposition 76 would make it messier, by giving
the governor extraordinary executive powers to cut spending, even under a
budget that is already approved and signed into law. And the Legislature
would be unable to stop him. It would also permit the governor to roll back
Proposition 98, a 1988 voter-approved constitutional amendment that
guarantees a spending floor for public schools. This isn¹t the way to go.

 Proposition 77: Redistricting. NO
 The Democrats and the Republicans divvy legislative and congressional seats
between them to guarantee each other safe territory at election time. Only a
handful of districts are ever really up for grabs, meaning the real
decisions are made not by the full electorate in the general election, but
by primary voters when they choose their nominee. Or even earlier, when
party bosses anoint their candidates. In addition to the lack of choice,
voters get districts drawn in the shapes of various circus animals. So why
not break up this insiders¹ game by giving line-drawing duties to a panel of
nonpartisan, pure-as-the-driven-snow superheroes, also known as retired
judges? Several reasons. Under this plan, the district boundaries would be
set only after national parties spend millions, perhaps billions, to
persuade voters to adopt (or reject) a proposal for district lines. Then the
court hearings. Then back to the judges to try again, even though they
already submitted their best effort. Some repair work is needed on
districting, but this isn¹t it. Back to the drawing board.

Proposition 78: Prescription drug discounts, pharmaceutical industry
version. NO
 Hey! This would allow drug companies to give some people discounts on
costly prescription drugs, if they felt like it! That would be so very nice
of them! The only purpose of this proposition is to cancel more generous
Proposition 79.

Proposition 79: Prescription drug discounts, consumer version. YES
 Like 78, this one gives California the clout to negotiate deep drug
discounts with the big pharmaceutical companies. The difference is that this
one reaches far more low-income people who need prescription drugs. It also
carries an enforcement stick that in effect locks drug companies out of the
discount program if they don¹t come through with the best prices.

Proposition 80: Electricity re-regulation. YES
 This would finally throw in the towel on the disaster that was the state
Legislature¹s 1996 energy deregulation program. You know ‹ rolling
blackouts, a sudden scarcity of power. There would be some negative
consequences, like limiting the options that many institutional electricity
purchasers still have when deciding when to buy and how much to pay. But
consumers would once again be protected from wild market fluctuations. The
measure also requires major steps forward on renewable energy programs. 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.islandlists.com/pipermail/mb-civic/attachments/20051106/740c4243/attachment.htm