Proposition Roundup
Another election, another set of
propositions, and another roundup of commentary on each one - stay tuned for
updates
Last
year
I got a good deal of traffic, and even met a few blog friends, via my roundup of
the California ballot propositions. I also find that its a nice public service
for my friends and family - if they haven't yet had a chance to evaluate what we
are voting on this election, they can come here and at least get a starting
point from which to judge the props. This year, I will not only be blogging the
props, but actually arguing them with my good friend Steve on our new podcast -
Journey
To The Center Of...
I'll keep updating this post with links to each of my takes on each prop. The full scorecard is at the bottom of this post. So let's review the ground rules from last year:
The Groundrules:
Here are a few of the basic assumptions I'll use to come to a conclusion on each proposition. These guidelines work to break ties and provide a framework to analyze out some of the complexity of the propositions.
1. Default position is No. Whenever we make a new law, it restricts some aspect of our liberty, or at the very least, makes it more complicated for us to live freely. This means that the best way to avoid problems is to approach the propositions with a default of no position. It also works to break ties, by setting up the standard that the Yes position has the burden of winning the argument.
2. Bond measures are held very suspect until proven absolutely necessary. Bonds are like credit cards for the state - when the state doesn't have enough money to live within its means, it figures it will just charge it. This means we end up paying way too much for something we should have budgeted in the first place. My belief is that our elected representatives should be able to squeeze every essential program into our budget, so if something comes along that we absolutely have to do but don't have the money for, it starts off at a strong No. The other thing that this rule fights against is a clever tactic that politicians do to hide government bloat and corruption - they hide all their pet projects that they know they don't have any support for somewhere in the budget, and then cry publicly about things like education and more cops that they know have tons of support. By doing this, they give the impression that something essential is underfunded, even though it is only underfunded by design. Another reason this rule is in here is because voters often unbalance our state budget with bond measure debt service - people vote for some huge bond, and don't realize that just paying the interest on that bond adds a few million more to the annual budget payout. When you pass several bond measures, they start to really add up to a deficit.
3. If any measure is similar to one that was passed in other elections, it is highly suspect. In the past, we've passed a "clean air and water" bond measure something like the last three times it has come on the ballot. This is obviously ridiculous. If we don't have the clean air that the last bill promised, then we know that we are simply throwing money away to pass it again.
4. No on anything that raises money for causes everyone agrees on, or vital services. (New for this year!)Politicians love the chance to raise taxes to generate money for police or fire or any other vital service that everyone agrees we need. Why? Because it makes it so much easier to hide wasteful spending, cronyism, and lobbyist kickbacks. Here's the shell game - first, you raise taxes for fire and police, then you move the money currently you are spending on fire and police out of the budget and use the tax money to pay for the loss. Now that you have all that money the tax generated, you don't change any spending on police or fire, and instead have a bunch of money in the budget that no one is tracking any longer that you can give to your buddies as political kickback.
The Scorecard:
Proposition 73: Yes
Proposition 74: Yes
Proposition 75: Yes
Proposition 76: Yes
Proposition 77: Yes
Proposition 78: No
Proposition 79: No
Proposition 80: No
Orange County Measures:
Measure B: No
Measure C: No
Measure D: No
Measure E: No
I'll keep updating this post with links to each of my takes on each prop. The full scorecard is at the bottom of this post. So let's review the ground rules from last year:
The Groundrules:
Here are a few of the basic assumptions I'll use to come to a conclusion on each proposition. These guidelines work to break ties and provide a framework to analyze out some of the complexity of the propositions.
1. Default position is No. Whenever we make a new law, it restricts some aspect of our liberty, or at the very least, makes it more complicated for us to live freely. This means that the best way to avoid problems is to approach the propositions with a default of no position. It also works to break ties, by setting up the standard that the Yes position has the burden of winning the argument.
2. Bond measures are held very suspect until proven absolutely necessary. Bonds are like credit cards for the state - when the state doesn't have enough money to live within its means, it figures it will just charge it. This means we end up paying way too much for something we should have budgeted in the first place. My belief is that our elected representatives should be able to squeeze every essential program into our budget, so if something comes along that we absolutely have to do but don't have the money for, it starts off at a strong No. The other thing that this rule fights against is a clever tactic that politicians do to hide government bloat and corruption - they hide all their pet projects that they know they don't have any support for somewhere in the budget, and then cry publicly about things like education and more cops that they know have tons of support. By doing this, they give the impression that something essential is underfunded, even though it is only underfunded by design. Another reason this rule is in here is because voters often unbalance our state budget with bond measure debt service - people vote for some huge bond, and don't realize that just paying the interest on that bond adds a few million more to the annual budget payout. When you pass several bond measures, they start to really add up to a deficit.
3. If any measure is similar to one that was passed in other elections, it is highly suspect. In the past, we've passed a "clean air and water" bond measure something like the last three times it has come on the ballot. This is obviously ridiculous. If we don't have the clean air that the last bill promised, then we know that we are simply throwing money away to pass it again.
4. No on anything that raises money for causes everyone agrees on, or vital services. (New for this year!)Politicians love the chance to raise taxes to generate money for police or fire or any other vital service that everyone agrees we need. Why? Because it makes it so much easier to hide wasteful spending, cronyism, and lobbyist kickbacks. Here's the shell game - first, you raise taxes for fire and police, then you move the money currently you are spending on fire and police out of the budget and use the tax money to pay for the loss. Now that you have all that money the tax generated, you don't change any spending on police or fire, and instead have a bunch of money in the budget that no one is tracking any longer that you can give to your buddies as political kickback.
The Scorecard:
Proposition 73: Yes
Proposition 74: Yes
Proposition 75: Yes
Proposition 76: Yes
Proposition 77: Yes
Proposition 78: No
Proposition 79: No
Proposition 80: No
Orange County Measures:
Measure B: No
Measure C: No
Measure D: No
Measure E: No
Posted: Fri - October 28, 2005 at 09:35 AM | | | | | | |
Quick Links
Calendar
| Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat |
Categories
Archives
XML/RSS Feed
Highlighted posts
Statistics
Total entries in this blog:
Total entries in this category:
Published On: Nov 07, 2005 06:36 PM
Total entries in this category:
Published On: Nov 07, 2005 06:36 PM
Search
The Tip Jar
Counter provided by
Brought to you by
