We welcome your input on these:
1 NO – Tax Funded High-Speed Passenger Train
2 NO – More Standards for Confining Farm Animals
3 NO – Tax Funding of Children’s Hospital Bond Act.
4 YES – Waiting Period and Parental Notification Before Abortion of Minor’s Unborn Child
5 NO – Nonviolent Drug Offenses, Sentencing, Parole and Rehabilitation
6 NO – More Taxes to fund Police and Law Enforcement. Criminal Penalties and Laws
7 NO – More Taxes for Renewable Energy Generation
8 YES – Eliminates Right of Same-Sex Couples to “Marry”
9 YES – Criminal Justice System. Victims' Rights. Parole
10 NO – Alternative Fuel Vehicles and Renewable Energy. Bonds
11 YES – Redistricting
4 comments:
Four and eight are no-brainers. Don't know the specifics of nine, so won't comment. Most states have bogus districting policies which "gerrymander" the lines to assure the party in power stays there, and are no relation to reality. Guessing this law will try and correct this, its probably a good one. All the rest seem to be about taking tax money from those who have it (or don't, but it takes anyway) and spending it on things that should already be covered, or that the government has no place meddling. High speed rail? Not in the government's purview, should not be involved. Let private enterprise step forward and make the investment and reap the reward. If there isn't any reward, then no one will do it. If no enterprise will step into the perceived gap and reap the reward, then there is no gap. Same with "alternative fuel vehicles". If some Yank outfit won't come up with an option, maybe the Koreans will.... and they'll deserve the resultant reward. Maybe the present spate of reaping what we've sown for too long will awaken people to the reality that government cannot continue to be our saviour, and vote down the ridiculous spending initiatives.
On Prop 4-- Let me just put up here what Roy Hanson said in a letter to us- he's the head of the Child and family Protection Association. " We appreciate the goal of Prop 4 and we appreciate that much effort has been made to write Prop 4 in such a way to survive Constitutional challenges in fed court. Regardless of whether it might pass US constitutional muster, it is not a good idea to place the judicial procedures of prop4 in to the state constitution. These judicial procedures which provide for circumventing parental involvement, can result in bad case law that in context other than abortion, will be a great danger to CA families, parents, and children." to read more go to www.robynnordell.com
Vote no because it can create a danger to CA families and parents.
On Prop 2-- i thought you should vote YES on it because it protects amimals. Some people actually, such as in the case of veal, raise animals in such a confined space that the animal cannot turn around, walk,lay down, or really do anything. This prop would just make sure that animals have enough space to move so that they are not tortured. I just think that that is being merciful. i was suspicious of it at first but when i read it it only seemed 'humane' if you can use that term.
Mell, the problem with your thinking on Prop 2 is much like the point you raise with Prop 4..... perhaps it is a "good idea" but should the details of how animals are cared for on the farm be enshrined into law? I can imagine the "principles" of such a law bringing about all manner of abuses, requirements, documentation, inspections, costly repercussions in farmers across the state. Besides, I wonder on what REAL basis the whole business of how veal is raised rests? To form the product sold as veal, that's about what it takes. And how does that differ from puppy mills, "rock cornish game hens", fish farming, commercial egg production, thanksgiving turkeys... To be sure, you and I would never accept living in such conditions, yet that does not make it "torture" for calves, game hens, penned salmon or catfish, laying hens. Not under the purview of what civil government is meant to do.
Post a Comment