Here are my second set of ballot recommendations for California's November election. I will put them all together in a single post later. I reviewed recommendations from Temple of Mut, LeftCoastRebel, Richard Rider and Ballotpedia as part of research for these recommendations.
Proposition 36. Limits on Three Strikes Law. YES
I was never a big fan of the three strikes law, but I was more angry at career criminals being returned to the streets, so I supported that effort. This is a reasonable attempt to reign in some of the absurd outcomes that have come out of that law. It imposes the third strike life sentence only when the offense is violent or involved sex, drug or weapons related charges. That seems sensible to me; the prisons are already overcrowded, I would only like to ensure that violent felons are in prison for life. This is a management trade-off, given limited resources. SLOB consensus is mixed, but leaning no.
Proposition 37. Mandatory Labeling - Genetic Engineered Food. NO
I don't need to do much research to know that this is more busybody legislation that will only drive up the price of food with compliance costs for agriculture and business. Man has been genetically altering food since we planted the first crops millenia ago, all that has changed are the specific methods. LeftCoastRebel points out that some genetic engineering reduces the need for pesticides, so shouldn't the greenies be for that? Of course not, they only want to appear to help the environment as they tighten their grubby little socialist paws in a stranglehold on the economy. SLOB consensus is a resounding NO.
Proposition 38. Molly Munger's Even Worser Tax Increase. NO
Since Governor Brown isn't really left wing enough to appease the California left, we actually need higher taxes than he is proposing in Proposition 30, according to the authors of this little gem. Not content to raise taxes on "the rich," this proposition would raise taxes on most everyone. SLOB consensus is NO. By the way, I am happy to see two tax hikes on the ballot. Conventional wisdom, supported by research says this makes it more likely that both will be defeated, see Ballotpedia.
Proposition 39. Complicating the CA Tax Code Further to Drive More Business Away. NO
I only had to read this line to know I would be opposing this measure: "Initially, this extra revenue would fund green energy projects, construction projects, public schools, and boost the state’s general fund." Our very own Solyndra, funded by making life hell for businesses that have a partial presence in California. How special.
Proposition 40. Confusing Measure Regarding State Senate Districts. NO
Here is a case where yes appears to mean no. Voting for this measure would affirm the State Senate districts and No would overturn them. Chris Reed documented the underhanded way in which these districts were drawn. The question is whether overturning and letting the legislature or some other body redraw them is worth the effort. Also, weighing on this vote is the fact that the State Supreme Court has already affirmed the redistricting process. I am recommending NO simply as a protest against the way the process worked. SLOB consensus is YES.