Friday, October 5, 2012

My Tea Party California Proposition Recommendations - Part 1

With voting by mail starting soon, I offer my opinions on California ballot propositions.  As I have stated repeatedly, the tea party is not an official organization, so my recommendations are my own but consonant with tea party principles of limited government, lower taxes, liberty and rule of law.  I also include a consensus among fellow San Diego tea party bloggers (SLOBs) in my recommendations.  More recommendations to follow, this is taking some time to research.

Proposition 30. Jerry Brown's Tax Increase. NO
The California Teacher's Association is by far the biggest donor to this initiative, which is all we need to know to vote against it, as they are the nexus of evil, the very nadir to all that is good in politics in this state (and their ain't much good.)  Brown is hinting at horrible outcomes, like closing schools, if this initiative doesn't pass.  Since it won't, I hope he makes good.  One argument in favor is a bald face lie, that only the rich will pay, because this increases sales taxes that the poor pay.  California's schools are terrible, and not for lack of funding. SLOB consensus is also NO.

Proposition 31. Two Year Budget Cycle. YES
This is not a perfect proposition, but it's not all bad.  It reforms some of the state budget processes and shifts some revenue to local government while taking it away from Sacramento and gives local government some tools to fight unfunded mandates.  I don't like the two year cycle, which will be used by the legislature to cook the books, even worse.  The question is how much worse could it get?   That's a judgement call and call me a cock-eyed optimist, but I don't think the legislature and the governor could screw things up any more than they have done to date. SLOB consensus is mixed.

Proposition 32. Paycheck Protection Initiative. YES
I am not a fan of banning contributions to political campaigns by classes of organizations, but restrictions on corporations are already in place.  This proposition prohibits corporations and unions from donating directly to political campaigns with money collected from employee payroll deductions.  In general, this is a good idea, but the unions hate it.  Once again, the CTA is the biggest donor fighting this proposition.  This has a chance of becoming somewhat of a Wisconsin style reform that turns the tide against union control of state government.  SLOB consensus is YES.

Proposition 33. Some Technical Changes to Auto Insurance. YES
I can barely bring myself to care, since insurance companies shouldn't be subject to this kind of micro-management of their policies in the first place.  The changes make sense because they give the insurers some more options to reward good behavior and give military a chance to retain favored treatment if their coverage lapses due to deployment.  SLOB consensus is YES.

Proposition 34. Death Penalty Repeal. YES
I will state upfront that I am out of synch with many tea partyers on this one.  I feel deeply and passionately that the death penalty should be repealed.  Even though some crimes are so heinous as to deserve death, it is not good for our society to suffer that any should die with the acquiescence or action of the government.  I oppose abortion, euthanasia and the ACA on the same basis.  Some quotes from a previous post on the subject:
The tea party is nothing if not skeptical of government. Yet through the death penalty, we entrust to government the ultimate power of deciding the life or death of American citizens. I do not trust that our institutions of justice can apply the penalty fairly or without error. The thought of a man (and it is usually men) who would be wrongfully put to death is too horrible to contemplate. Yet, we have any number of cases where those on death row have been exonerated. My skepticism of government leads me to conclude that it cannot be trusted with a task such as deciding life and death, even of criminals.
SLOBs consensus is NO.

Proposition 35. Human Trafficking. NO
Human traffickers are the scum of the earth, but there are plenty of laws that already provide punishment.  I oppose any law that subverts the rule of law enshrined in the constitution.  This law limits defendants rights to cross-examination and could taint those not connected to the crime of trafficking.  Temple of Mut points out that the costs of enforcement are probably wildly underestimated.  SLOB consensus is mixed.


  1. is too fine a line between the King saying 'off with his head'..and 12 people agented and empowered by the King to say..'off with his head'.
    The death penalty is allowed by the Constitution, but not mandated. It is then a state issue, and while I am not 'passionate' about this issue, put me in the 'yes' column also.

  2. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.