There’s a lot on the line this election. There is always a lot on the line when elections take place. For those who are uncertain of what to do in the polling booth tomorrow, here’s my ballot and why I chose to vote the way I did.
President: Obama. There isn’t enough room here to make the point without pushing everything else aside. In short, Obama’s plans help the middle class while Romney’s evasive tactics hide the truth, which are plans to help the wealthy at the expense of the working class.
Senator: Feinstein. She’s a mainstay in DC for a reason. I see no reason to replace her.
Proposition 30: Yes. Governor Brown has worked hard on a plan to help our schools and balance our budget. Prop 30 is the best way to do this. Our schools are suffering most from the Republican-lead state senate’s Starve the Beast strategy and this is an opportunity to turn that around.
Proposition 31: No. The senate wants to control the budget long term even as the economy recovers. As more tax dollars become available, the services we deserve in California should be reinstated. Don’t let them intact cuts in times of lean times that cost us down the road.
Proposition 32: No. This is a scam perpetrated by big business hoping to eliminate the main political voice of the working Californian. The only groups affected by this law are labor unions. Otherwise special interests will still dominate Sacramento, but only rich individuals will be able to afford influence.
Proposition 33: No. We already shot this down in a previous election. Insurance companies will tell you they want to give a discount for continuous coverage not limited to their own company but in reality they want to charge more for those who lack continuous coverage. Trade your car for a bike? Get penalized. Give up a car in exchange for carpools and public transportation? Get penalized. We don’t need to be held under the boot of car insurance and the threat of higher rates.
Proposition 34: Yes. I have no faith in our prison system as currently constructed. Criminals are neither deterred nor rehabilitated. Stricter punishments only reinforce a broken system and what is more strict than a Death Penalty that has proven to lack and deterrent affect on crime. We need to think of a different way. Ending the Death Penalty is what California needs.
Proposition 35: No. The stricter punishments also include many more people added to the sex offender registry. Already, we see people have their lives ruined by this list due to plea bargains and unexpected consequences. Expanding the reach of this damning list isn’t the solution. This isn’t support for sex trafficking but a condemnation for the existing system. Elect judges tough on sex crimes, don’t support a law that only strengthens a broken system.
Proposition 36: Yes. Three-Strikes was meant to keep violent criminals off the streets. This fixes the wording of the law to represent the spirit of the law. Sending someone to prison for life over a minor offense is costly to the state and counter-productive when trying to rehabilitate prisoners. Let’s fix the law.
Proposition 37: Yes. Look at the labels on packaged food today. Would adding a GMO label be so difficult? The ads are deceitful. This doesn’t hurt small producers, this annoys the major food producers. The content of their food will now be known. Look at the money behind the yes and no campaigns. If this were so costly to the small guys why would they be universally for Prop 37?
Proposition 38: Yes. Schools need funding. If both 30 and 38 pass, then the proposition with the higher vote wins out. While this may make me want to vote no, we can’t afford to underfund our schools for two years due to political bickering at the ballot.
Proposition 39: Yes. Close the loophole that allows CA jobs and tax dollars to leave for other states. Its as simple as that.
Proposition 40: Yes. There is no opposition to this proposition, still a Yes vote is needed to uphold distracting policies we as Californians established in previous elections.