Ballot Recommendations – Progressive Democrats of Los Angeles

pdla150.jpg

Here are the ballot recommendations from the Progressive Democrats of Los Angeles for 2008

Click here for the June 3, 2014 ballot recommendations from the LA Progressive

YES — PROP 1A — “Safe, Reliable High Speed Passenger Train Bond” BOND
State bond issue to build high-speed train linking Southern California, Sacramento , San Joaquin, and San Francisco . Requires federal matching funds.

YES — PROP 2 — “Standards for Confining Farm Animals” STATUTE
Impacts mostly the chickens in CA and requires that they be able to fully extend their wings and limbs…so, larger cages. A big “YES.”

NO — PROP 3 — ” Children’s Hospital Bond Act. Grand Program. Initiative Statute.” BOND
Much of the bond money on this initiative will go to PRIVATE hospitals. Key word is “eligible” of hospitals. Public money privatized. This is Public money supporting private entities. Funding is exclusively for capitol improvement projects: construction, e xpansion, remodel and for purchase of equipment and technology which will become private property of the facility. This does not fund access to care, treatment, services, salaries, programs or medicines. The US has the world’s most expensive technology and ranks 49th in access and quality of medical services with some of the worst healthcare outcomes among first world economies. Over $350 million from a very similar 2004 initiative remains unspent. The $64 million annual cost will total $2 billion.

NO — PROP 4 — “Waiting Period and Parental Notification Before Termination of Minor’s Pregnancy” CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT
This is the third try at this for the pro-lifers who want to control a woman’s right to choose. This must be defeated by a large margin.

YES — PROP 5 — “Nonviolent Drug Offenses. Sentencing, Parole, and Rehabilitation. STATUTE
With prisons overcrowded and taking up an ever-expanding amount of the budget, drug rehabilitation and treatment programs present a better alternative. Almost half of our approximately 175,000 prisoners in California are behind bars for non-violent, often drug-related, offenses.

NO — PROP 6 — “Police and Law Enforcement Funding. Criminal Penalties and Laws.” STATUTE
The ever expanding prison industrial complex wants tougher revisions in criminal laws. More prisons/more mon ey for them. The state legislative analyst estimates Prop 6 would cost Californians at least a half a billion a year, money that would be taken from the General Fund (from education, transportation, health care, and housing) to build more prisons to lock up our youth. Fourteen-year-olds convicted of certain felonies would be tried in adult court and face life in prison. Residents of public housing projects would be subjected to annual criminal background checks. Undocumented workers arrested for felonies would be denied bail. The backer of Prop 6 is State Senator Runner, Chair of the Republican Caucus. In California, one out of every four African American men in their 20s is incarcerated. California spends $48,000 per year to incarcerate, $8,000 per year to educate.

TIE — PROP 7 — “Renewable Energy Generation” STATUTE
After considerable discussion including speakers for/against, the vote was nearly evenly split. This is known as the “solar” initiative and has requirements for generation of renewable energy. Opponents say it’s flawed. Proponents say that the campaign against it is funded by the big utilities (it is–$27mil approx), and that the state legislature, under the influence of lobbyists, is unlikely to do anything about this issue. Many environmental groups are on the “no” side of this, however. Read it carefully and decide. Avoid tv ads.

NO — PROP 8 — “Eliminates Right of Same-Sex Couples to Marry” CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT
Attempt by the right-wing anti-civil rights evangelists to take away the rights recently affirmed by the CA Supreme Court. If passed, this would write DISCRIMINATION into California ‘s state constitution.

NO — PROP 9 — “Criminal Justice System. Victims’ Rights. Parole.” CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT & STATUTE
The title of this measure is misleading, as it’s really about cutting early release programs for prisoners with good credits. Prop 9 outlaws early release, which means we would need to build more prisons. The measure also extends the waiting time between parole hearings, forcing some prisoners to wait up to fifteen years for another parole hearing. The victims’ rights (notification of upcoming hearings) already exist under state law.

NO — PROP 10 — “Alternative Fuel Vehicles and Renewable Energy” BONDS, INITIATIVE STATUTE
On the surface, sounds good. This actually benefits mostly T. Boone Pickens, the Texan funding this initiative. Language within this is heavily weighted toward natural gas…and guess whose company would most reap the tax dollars from this passage!!!

NO — PROP 11 — “Redistricting” CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT & STATUTE
Changes the authority for redistricting from the state legislature to a citizens’ commission selecte d through a complex multilevel process that gives Republicans a bonus over their registration numbers. Democrats lose. Arnold ‘s “Voters’ First” PAC is heavily funding this along with all the major Republican fat cats and a sprinkling of Dems. We’re talking well over $7 million going to start turning CA red. Arguments in favor of this allude to “fairness” and “democracy.” REGISTRATION in our state is heavily Democratic. So, passing this takes it away. This must be defeated if we are to maintain our majority and protect our coastline.

Prop 12 – Under Reconsideration
Progressive Democrats of Los Angeles (PDLA) has endorsed the above propositions on the November 2008 ballot. The Endorsement Committee and the General Meeting vote was taken September 20th and did not take into consideration the present credit crisis. We recommend that you spend time studying each of these initiatives. Many have positive-sounding titles that obscure the real content. Surprise. Also, you cannot count on the blurb written under the proposition title to give enough information to make a knowledgeable decision.

Please note that BONDS ARE TAXES that are paid well into the future. General obligation bonds are paid from the state general fund and take priority in the budgeting for the state. State legislators then are not able to adjust budgets for changing conditions.

The difference between the statutes and constitutional amendments is that to CHANGE a constitutional amendment, the state legislature must have a two-thirds vote. Not likely. REALLY be careful with these.

Some helpful research links are:
Secretary of State Debra Bowen:
Gives the update of qualified initiatives. Secretary of State’s website. Read all of the text yourself.

Cal Access: Shows who is paying for each ballot measure

Linda Sutton
PDLA, Vice Chair and Co-Chair, Endorsements


Send Page To a Friend

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

Comments

  1. June Van Dusen says

    I am disappointed that there are no recommendations or commentary relating to the March 8, 2011 election!

  2. June Van Dusen says

    I am disappointed that there are no recommendations or commentary relating to the March 8, 2011 election!

  3. Richard Goodwell says

    Regarding: No on Prop 11 — Redistricting

    I am a “Liberal” Progressive Democrat. I am also a strong believer in a representative democracy. I want everyone (even those with whom I disagree) to have a fair chance to participate in our democracy. I have a real problem with ANY party in power engineering districts in a manner that denies voters a real choice and allows our representatives take our votes for granted.

    In my lifetime, it has always been Republicans try to win elections by disenfranchising voters in one way or another. Not my Democratic Party. The “arguments (alluding) to “fairness” and “democracy.”” are legitimate arguments and should not be simply dismissed by a Progressive Democratic Party that usually stands head and shoulders above the Republican Party where these ideals are at issue.

    CONSIDER THESE 3 POINTS:

    (1) I believe the current system is unfair and undemocratic. If it is not, I need hear an argument to that effect.

    (2) If the current system is unfair and undemocratic, but we can’t afford to make it fair and democratic because our political opponents my gain ground, then we are as unconcerned with a real democracy as the Republicans are. Shame on us! Maybe we should spend a bit more time converting citizens to our way of thiniking. Or maybe we should be pushing for a better alternative.

    (3) If Prop. 11 is just as unfair and undemocratic as the current system, and it simply switches the advantage from the majority party in the legislature to the party of the governor, THAN MAKE THE ARGUMENT!

    I am not naive, but sometimes the “moral high ground” is a stand one has to take. And to top it all off, I’m still not sure how to vote on this important issue.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *