California November 2022 - Ballot Propositions

There are 7 propositions on the November 2022 California Ballot. Six of them are citizen-initiated propositions, meaning that petitions were signed by enough state residents to make the ballot. One is an LCRA, an acronym for Legisatively Referred Constitutional Amendment. Below are links to separate blog entries analyzing each of these 7 ballot propositions:

Proposition 1 does not need a separate blog. A woman's right to choose must be preserved. I will vote yes to do just that.
Propositions 26 and 27 blog

Proposition 28 blog

Proposition 29 blog

Proposition 30 blog

Proposiiton 31 is so straightforward and clearly protective of the state's children, it did not need a separate blog. I will vote yes to keep the ban on sale of flavored tobacco products in place.

California November 2022 Ballot - Prop 28

Proposition 28 is a proposal that does not institute any new taxes. It designates a portion of the budget for education to classes in arts and music education. As someone who attended public school in California before Proposition 13 was passed, I was fortunate to have been part of those programs at every level of my education. I imagine that a good portion of who I am was fostered in those classes, especially learning to play an instrument (or three). I fully support the idea of providing music and arts eduation in the public school.

That being written, I am voting no on Proposition 28. Why? A simple reason. My support for these types of courses in the public school is not as strong as my opposition to unfunded mandates. That is exactly what Prop 28 is. An unfunded mandate.

Congress does this to states all the time. Requires them to institute programs without providing the funds to pay for those programs.

Without increasing the budget for education, one wonders what programs will be slashed to pay for the $800 million to $1 billion being earmarked for arts and music classes? Sports programs? Those have their place as well. Sciences, math, English, history?

Write a proposition that earmarks funds for arts and music education that does not require cutting funding for other programss. Propositions that fund the programs/earmarks they propose.

I am voting No on Proposition 28.

California November 2022 Ballot - Props 26 and 27

It makes much more sense to analyze these two propositions together rather than separately. The people behind/opposing each are intertwined as are the propositions themselves.

Prop 26 and Prop 27 both legalize sports betting in California.

Prop 26 would legalize sports betting with bets being made at Indian casinos and licenses racetracks in California. It does not permit online wagering. Ten percent of the profits from wagers placed at racetracks. It is backed by Indian tribes that operate successfulcasinos in California.

Prop 27 allows online sports betting and is backed by Fan Duel, Draft Kings and Bet MGM.

There is a lot of money at stake here. In the second quarter of 2022, sports-wagering revenue was more than $1.4 billion. That was a year-over-year increase of 58.7%. There would be a substantial profit for Indian casinos if Prop 26 passed and for the sponsors of Prop 27 if that passes.

There is an important fact in the paragraph below that is not getting any attention in the battle for and against Prop 26.

A "yes" vote supports this ballot initiative to (i) legalize sports betting at American Indian gaming casinos and licensed racetracks in California; (ii) tax profits derived from sports betting at racetracks at 10%; and (iii) legalize roulette and dice games, such as craps, at tribal casinos."

Indian casinos do not pay state income tax.

That makes the claims that only 10% of the profits earned through online better if Prop 27 passes irrelevent. 10% of the profits of something is better than 0% of Indian casino sports-wagering.

Help for the homeless is a red herring added to these propositions.

I am voting no on both.

California November 2022 Ballot - Prop 29

Proposition 29 is the third time this type of measure has been put on the ballot. It ostensibly will promote added levels of safety at dialysis centers throughout California. Ostensibly. It would mandate that a physician, physician assistant or nurse-practitioner be on-site at dialysis centers. If it sounds familiar, that is because voters rejected the same idea in 2018 and 2020. So why is on the ballot for a third time? Becase SEIU-UHW is behind it.

Who is SEIU-UHW? A union of healthcare workers. This ballot initiative would increase the cost of patients with kidney problems receiving life-saving dialysis. The aforementioned healthcare professionals would not be providing patient-care at these centers. This is all about providing more jobs for members of this union. The union has spent nearly $8 million in support of this iniative that will do NOTHING to improve patient safety at dialysis centers.

The Los Angeles Times editorial board is very liberal. The Wall Street Journal editorial board is very conservative. Both boards wrote editorials opposing this proposition. The fact that both of these "newspapers" are against Prop 29 speaks volumes about how bad it is.

I am voting no on Prop 29.

California November 2022 Ballot - Prop 30

Let's make this simple. The ride-share service Lyft has poured $45 million into the campaign in favor of this ballot initiative is telling. Why are they doing this? Because Prop 30 calls for 90% of ride-share miles driven be provided in no-emission vehicles. Prop 30 would impose an addiitional 1.75% income tax on Californians on their income in excess of $2 million.

This is a wealth-grab by Lyft to try to pass on the expense of complying with the no-emission vehicle requirement to taxpayers. Plain and simple. It is also an idea that would increase the personal income tax obligation of California's highest income earners, for no good reason. In 2016, George Skelton of the Los Angeles Times wrote about the fact CA was already too reliant on personal income tax to fund the state's budget. This is from that blog entry:


The top 1% in CA pay 48% of the income taxes
The top 10% in CA pay 79% of the income taxes
The bottom 60% in CA pay only 2% of the income taxes
To be in that top 1% you have to have an adjusted gross income (AGI) of $556,638
To be in that top 10% you have to have an AGI of around $149,000
In the upcoming CA fiscal year income taxes will be around 70% of the total revenue.
In CA in 1950 income taxes provided only 10% of the total revenue.
In that upcoming CA fiscal year, sales taxes will provide 22% of the total revenue.
In CA in 1950, sales taxes provided 60% of the total revenue.


This is a solution in search of a problem. Ride share companies and their drivers need to pay for more no-emission vehicles on their own. Taxpayers should not foot this bill. I am voting now on Prop 30

California November 2022 Ballot- Los Angeles Mayoral Race

A leopard cannot change its spots


That is one of those old adages that I do not always agree with. Some people are indeed capable of instituting change within themselves. One of the best examples of this is my late father. In 1968 he was part of the campaign 'machine' of Robert Kennedy. He was at the Ambassador Hotel the night Sirhan Sirhan shot and killed RFK. 16 years later, he was living in Dallas. He was a very staunch Republican now. Why? His attitudes changed because he'd become a millionaire. He lent his stretch limousine to the RNC for their convention in Dallas. I have always been a fiscal conservative who is very liberal socially. I was a Republican. Now I'm not.

But my dad and I are the exceptions to that adage. Because it is true in the case of Rick Caruso, one of the two candidates running to become the next Mayor of Los Angeles. He is running commercials touting the fact he changed his registratiob from Republican to Democrat. He claims to be pro-choice. I don't buy that claim. He is a staunch Catholic. His private foundation contributes to multiple Catholic entities. He was anti-choice until after he launched his campaign to become Mayor. In my humble opinion, he is the same person he was a year before he threw his platinum-lined hat into the ring.

Speaking of his private foundation, it is seriously delinquent in filing the required tax returns. The last year filed was the 2019 return. The 2020 return for his foundation was due no later than 10/15/2021. The 2021 return was due on 10/17/2022. I get that he did not want scrutiny of his personal income tax returns (just like Donald Trump). Why would such a successful business owner fail to file required returns with the IRS. He will incur five-figure-size fines for late filing.

Caruso is accusing his opponent Karen Bass of corruption over a $95,000 scholarship she received from USC. Did she accept a scholarship? Yes. Was it corruption? No, if we are willing to accept that the House Ethics Committee reviewed the situation and granted her a waiver of the "no-gift" rules. There is a 2011 letter proving this.

Rick Caruso was the Chair of the Board of Trustees at the University of Southern California from 2018 until he announced he was running for Mayor in February of 2022. Multiple scandals took place under his stewardship of the university. The "pay for play" admissions scandal known as "Varsity Blues." There was the George Tyndal sexual abuse and harassment scandal, which happened before he became Board Chair. But he was involved in the attempted cover-up of this scandal. Details of his 9 hours of testimony in a deposition regarding the scandal. Caruso had promised to release the questions to the public in 2019 but never did it.

Then there's the boat thing. You can read the details here.

I do not know Karen Bass personally. But I live in the district she represents in the House of Representatives. I think she would do a far better job as Mayor of Los Angeles. Of the two choices in this race, she is by far the better one. She is not making promises she will be unable to keep once elected. Caruso has promised to build 30,000 interim housing "interventions" in 300 days. A bit too ambitious it would seem.

The bottom line is that the last thing L.A. needs right now is someone who makes big promises that they cannot deliver on.

Vote for Karen Bass for Mayor of Los Angeles.

Yet Again, the VA screws up my healthcare

There are many variations on the theme of Prior Planning Prevents Poor Performance. I like this modification though: Proper Prior Planning Prevents Piss Poor Performance. This adage was demonstrated yet again by the West Los Angeles VA Medical Center. For those who did not see the prior misadventures I suffered there, you can see them here and here. I wound up writing to the Secretary of Veteran Affairs. That letter is here. The VA's response is here.

Now you have the backstory leading up to today. To be fair, I did cancel an appointment for cardioversion in September as I could not get away from the office. I worked with the Cardiology Clinic Case Manager to schedule the procedure for this morning. I was told it would be an outpatient procedure as it was before. No problem. Arranged a ride, since they are more insistent than ever that you cannot drive yourself home after being sedated.

Late yesterday afternoon I got a call from a Cardiology Clinic fellow telling me that I would have to stay in the hospital overnight because I am taking Dofetilide. I asked why that hadn't been communicated to me earlier. He apologized, told me no one on the team had caught it and we'd deal with it in the morning.

Got there right on time. Went through the preparation process (having an IV put in, shaving off the chest hairs where they glue the pads on, etc). Then I was told that because the cardiology clinic hadn't bothered to request a bed in advance, they were unable to do the cardioversion. The head of the clinic came to where I was to apologize and explain what had happened. He said the problem was there were too many patients in the ER for there to be an available bed. I know that isn't the real problem. Had the case manager been informed I would have to stay overnight, a bed would have been reserved for me. In that case, once the procedure was underway I couldn't be "bumped" from the bed that had been set aside.

What do I do now? Allow the VA Cardio clinic another chance to schedule my cardioversion? Navigate the Veteran Choice program and find a cardiologist outside the VA system that the VA will pay for?

I am angry, frustrated, disappointed and sad; all at the same time.