Discussion of California Ballot Initiatives
 

Rather than fill up the Sooo thread, I thought we'd take the discussion here.

All I've really heard much about are the propositions regarding term limits and Indian Gaming agreements. Does anybody have any opinions or serious info about either of these or any other propositions on the ballots?

From what I understand (and I could be wrong), the money that comes in from the increased revenue will go to the state AND the poorer tribes. The only people with the big issue are some Vegas Casino owners.

The one I need to do more research on is the community college fees. Gray Davis doubled them, and they have gone up and down since. I need to see how they can lower the costs without raising taxes (and hitting other programs since the state subsidizes the fees).

Ever since I drove out to Palm Springs and past the Morongo Resort (is that the one?) with GIANT ROOFTOP DISPLAYS BEGGING FOR PASSAGE OF THOSE INITIATIVES, I've been suspicous of them.

Who knows the deal?* Because unless I find out something concretely positive about them, I'm voting against them. Claims that they will send millions into the state coffers sound like pure spin to me.





*(Not intended as a casino pun)

Agreed. And if they're going to willingly (claim to) toss millions of dollars into State coffers, then what are they getting in return? Makes me terribly suspicious.

91 - Voted no. I don't support sequestering revenues into lockboxed uses. For good or ill we should rely on the legislature to disburse incomes as they see fit. Inidivual lockboxes always sound like a grand idea but ultimately the mass of them end up creating problems.

92 - Voted no. Again tries to create mandatory spending and lockboxes. Also, this is a setting of priorities that should be handled legislatively.

93 - Voted no. I don't support term limits. If the people want to elect the same person to an office for 203 years, even if that person lives out of the jurisdiction and is 12 years old and hates all ethnic minorities, then they should be allowed to do so. Protecting an electorate from a pre-conceived notion of "stupidity" isn't a good idea in my opinion. So, this initiative tweaks with the specifics of term limits and ultimately might be preferable but the only reason it is happening is to reset the terms clock that would otherwise turn Don Perata and Fabio Nunez (those currently in office have their term count reset to zero). So, since it is really just a bald power play I vote no again.

Indian gaming proposals - Talked about those in the So thread but I voted yes on all four. I'd be amused though if two fail and two succeed: further evidence of why initiative process is stupid.

They're willing to toss millions of dollars at the State because, clearly, they're making a lot more than that. I don't know what their revenues are, etc, but I'd be willing to guess millions might not be all that much.

That's getting a big, fat No from me. It isn't resolving the issue that caused community college tuition to be raised in the first place. There was also a proposition passed several years ago for maintenance and upkeep of the community college campus (this prop said it would allocate funds for that).

I have a standing policy against any ballot initiative that involves spending my money.

Hmmm - I voted the same way Alex did

I actually have quite a problem with Indian Gaming. I tend to vote exactly opposite of the way the casinos want me to.