On November 6, California will be voting on a wide variety of measures.
Every one of them has the ability to affect our daily lives- the food that we eat, the education our child receives, the safety of our drive there and every other part of the day, even how unions spend paycheck deductions.
Here is a quick rundown of the propositions and how they affect us after November.
Propositions 30 and 38, which both offer solutions to the public school budget crisis, have already been discussed at length by MomsLA contributor Jeanne Fratello at http://momsla.com/2012/09/know-your-props-california-propositions-30-and-38-explained/
California currently has a $16 million budget deficit.
Proposition 31 would create a two-year state budget and offer transparency by allowing public notice days before the state senate votes on a bill. It also allows the governor to make state budget cuts in case of fiscal emergencies. Local government would be allowed to take funding from state programs and create own procedures for implementing them. Performance reviews would be required of all state and local programs and budgets.
Supporters argue that it would keep the state from making decisions from closed doors and help the state budget by making the government report the results before more spending can be done.
Opponents say it opens the door for lawsuits and confusion and conflicts with the Constitution. They also argue it would prevent future increases to the budget for items like public safety, education, and public health.
In 2010, Public- and private-sector unions gave a total of $74.7 million to state campaigns in California. (FollowTheMoney.Org)
Proposition 32 would prevent unions, corporations and government contractors from using money deducted from employee paychecks to finance political purposes.
The state would be responsible for monitoring.
Supporters argue it would ‘clean up Sacramento’ and cut the money between special interested and politicians.
Opponents say it exempts big businesses while adding more pressure to small business, unions and their workers.
In 2007, 18% of Californian drivers were uninsured, and the tough economic times means that the number has grown even more. (Insurance Research Council)
Proposition 33 would allow car insurance companies to offer a discount for new customers if they had previously carried insurance before starting with the new company.
Supporters say it will help create more insured drivers by allowing them to keep discounted rates and make insurance companies be competitive.
Opponents says it will punish those who have not driven for a length of time for legitimate reasons and will only be a benefit for those who decide to switch companies.
The estimated cost of confining and inmate to death row in California is $90,000 a year. (CA Commission for Fair Administration of Justice)
Proposition 34 would repeal the death penalty and would change current death sentences to life in prison without parole. It would also grant law enforcement agencies $100 million toward investigating homicide and rape cases.
Supporters say that the state would save money and would make convicted killers work to pay restitution for crimes. It would also save wasted tax money by directing it to the law enforcement for solving those rape and murder cases.
Opponents say it would cost taxpayers more to pay for the grants, spread out over four years, and to house and feed the convicts.
The national average of a victim first trafficked for sex in the U.S. is between 12 and 14 years old. (The National Report on Domestic minor sex trafficking)
Proposition 35 increases fines and jail time for convicted human traffickers and requires them to register as sex offenders. It also requires sex offenders to disclose internet activities and identities. It would also increase jail time for labor trafficking violations. Increased cost to the state for taking care of sex trafficking offenses while potentially making revenue of a similar amount in fines.
Supporters argue that traffickers force women and children to sell their bodies on the streets and say the legislation would protect them.
Opponents say that the plan does not attack the problem of trafficking, it just raises the penalties for doing it.
In California, each charge is counted as a strike, so a case with multiple charges means multiple strikes against a defendant, and those sentences would run consecutively. Proposition 36 would revise state law to change sentences to shorter terms if their third conviction is not serious or is non-violent. It would allow current convicts jailed under third strike law to have revised sentences. offering a state savings of around 70 million annually.
Supporters state it would restore the original intent of the three strikes law to focus on violent offenders, keep rapists and murderers jailed and would save the state money.
Opponents argue that dangerous convicts with long histories would be freed, some without monitoring.
Genetically-modified ingredients currently fall under the ‘Generally Recognized As Safe” by the FDA because of their long history as additions to food.
Proposition 37 would required food made with genetically modified ingredients would be labeled as containing GMO’s and prohibits those products from being marketed as ‘natural.’Would cost the state up to a million dollars to regulate the changes.
Supporters argue that consumers have a right to know if ingredients in products were produced by genetic engineering so they can decide if they want to use that product or not.
Opponents say it would cost the state millions as well as families in food costs and would authorize lawsuits against small businesses and farmers.
California’s corporate income tax revenue declined 18% from July 1, 2007 through June 30, 2010. (Council on tax Citation)
Proposition 39 Would require multi-state businesses to pay income taxes based on the percentage of sales in California. Half of the income (about $1 billion annually) from those taxes would go into clean or efficient energy projects for the next 5 years.
Supporters say that is would end out-of-state businesses avoiding taxes and provide more jobs for California and more revenue.
Opponents argue that it is a tax increase on job creators and would allow the state to spend without accountability.
The CA state legislature drew district lines until 2008, when a law was passed creating a new commission for redistricting.(Voters FIRST Act)
Proposition 40 would draw new district lines as proposed by the Citizens Redistricting Commission. If it fails, the new lines will be drawn by officials overseen by the state Supreme Court.
Supporters state that it will keep the redistricting fair by keeping politicians out of the process.
The Opponents on this proposition have backed down because the State Supreme Court voted to uphold district lines.
Remember- October 22, 2012 is the last day to register to vote, and the deadline to request a vote-by-mail ballot is October 30th.
Don’t forget to vote!
You can find Megan writing about music and life at Sunshine Wonderland