We've been propositioned

There are 13 propositions on the November 3, California ballot.  108 years have passed since the first CA ballot proposition.  The number of citizen initiatives per decade has declined slightly since the 2000s when there were 70.  In the 2010s, there were 51.

Here is my review of the props on the November ballot.

Proposition 14 - Stem Cell Research Institute Bond Initiative

This doesn't require a separate blog entry.  I am voting no.  California has over $80 billion in general obligation bonds on which we are paying interest.  There is nearly $40 billion more in approved bonds that have not been sold.  The California Legislative Analyst's Office  (LAO) says that the percentage of the General Fund revenues and transfers that is spent servicing bonds is running around 4% right now.  Without adding any new bonds, the LAO projects that it will cost $6.4 billion to pay the interest on currently outstanding bonds in FY 2023/24.  

Proposition 15 - Tax on Commercial and Industrial Properties for Education and Local Government Funding Initiative (2020)  Read why I am voting yes here.

Proposition 16 - California Proposition 16, the Repeal Proposition 209 Affirmative Action Amendment

This does not require a separate blog entry.  I voted against Prop 209.  I will vote for Prop 16.  The Mercury News &  East Bay Times editorial says it better than I can:

"The events of this year have highlighted the level of racial injustice that exists across the nation, including California. The disparity between Black and Latino residents and their White counterparts is readily apparent when it comes to income, health, education and the criminal justice system. Reducing those disparities will require a major effort on multiple fronts. Proposition 16 would give the state’s universities and government a valuable tool they need to fight existing structural inequalities."

Proposition 17 - California Proposition 17, the Voting Rights Restoration for Persons on Parole Amendment

This does not require a separate blog entry.  Ideally, the purpose of imprisonment and subsequent release is rehabilitation and re-entry into society.   While I'm fine with violent felons losing their right to own guns, I don't get the rationale for denying them the right to vote.  I will vote yes

Proposition 18 - California Proposition 18, the Primary Voting for 17-Year-Olds Amendment

This does not require a separate blog entry.  The pretzel logic of the opposition that someone who is 17 is not mature enough to vote in the primary that will set their choices for the general election, at which point they will be 18 is obvious.  Why shouldn't someone who can vote in that general election not have a voice in determining who will be on that general election ballot?

Proposition 19 - California Proposition 19, the Property Tax Transfers, Exemptions, and Revenue for Wildfire Agencies and Counties Amendment

This also does not require a separate blog entry.  I have friends who are real estate agents.  I have clients who are real estate agents.  But the real estate industry is behind this measure in an effort to increase the number of houses being sold in CA.  Perhaps this proposition should have been titled the Realtor Revenue Initiative.  If you'd like more details on why this is a bad idea I recommend the L.A. Times editorial on it.

Proposition 20 - California Proposition 20, the Criminal Sentencing, Parole, and DNA Collection Initiative

We are living in an era where our society wants and needs to reduce the prison population.  To engage in reform and rehabilitation.  This is a proposition created by police unions who did not like the passage of Propositions 47, 57 and 109.  It would add more crimes to the list of felonies that would prevent early release on parole.  

The fact that Prop 20 is supported by Devin Nunes is reason enough to reject it.  But when the editorials from two CA newspapers as far apart politically as the San Francisco Chronicle and the Orange County Register agree that a ballot proposition is a bad idea, it probably is.

I'm voting no.

Proposition 21 - California Proposition 21, the Local Rent Control Initiative

Read why I am voting yes here.

Proposition 22 - California Proposition 22, the App-Based Drivers as Contractors and Labor Policies Initiative

Read why I am voting no here.

Proposition 23 - California Proposition 23, the Dialysis Clinic Requirements Initiative

This proposition does not require a separate blog entry.  Like 2018's Proposition 8, this is nothing more than another attempt by the Service Employees International Union-United Healthcare West to unionize the workers who provide dialysis services at the clinics across California.  The fact that there isn't a single large newspaper editorial board in the state that has come out in favor of this proposition speaks volumes.  There is no evidence that this proposition would improve the quality of care for these patients.  I am voting no.

Proposition 24 - California Proposition 24, the Consumer Personal Information Law and Agency Initiative

This proposition does not require a separate blog entry.  Online privacy is the issue.  The editorial in the San Diego Union-Tribune says quite well why I am voting no.  "We are open to strengthening online privacy, but the lack of support from groups that should back this — from the Electronic Frontier Foundation to the ACLU to the Consumer Federation of California — gives us great pause. We recommend a no vote on Proposition 24."

Proposition 25 - the Replace Cash Bail with Risk Assessments Referendum

This proposition does not require a separate blog entry.  This is a simple proposition (pun intended). Businesses who profited from posting bail for people who have been arrested want Senate Bill 10 to be repealed.  That would put cash bail back into effect.  The fact that this referendum was filed the day after Governor Brown signed SB 10 into law says a lot.  So does the fact that the top ten contributors to the PAC that supports Prop 25 are bail bond businesses.  I am voting yes.