California general election

Again, probably of direct interest only to California residents, and apologies to everyone else since my hand-rolled blog sofwtare still doesn't do cut tags.

Propositions

No explanations, just vote justification, to try to keep this from getting too long. For those who aren't in California and want to follow along, see the voter guide.

Proposition 1: YES. I'm not a huge fan of this sort of half-assed attempt to address the housing shortage, but every little bit helps. The veterans programs are nice; the emergency housing for homeless families is even better. Also, the opposition is from someone ranting about the horrors of highrises, which couldn't be more opposite to my position on housing if they were actively trying.

Proposition 2: YES. Personally, I'd rather they just raise my taxes more and build more shelters and emergency housing rather than redirecting money from one pot or another, but I'll take what I can get.

Proposition 3: YES. It will be hard to find a public infrastructure project I would vote against right now, since this continues to be a great time to borrow money for such things (despite recent upticks in interest rates). Also, the opponents are loons who are apparently opposed to all water projects that aren't dams. That's not a good reason to vote for a proposition by itself, but it makes me feel better about doing so.

Proposition 4: YES but I'm not happy about it. Our health care system is such a joke. I'm wholly in favor of the state building more children's hospitals, and hospitals of all sort, if the state owned them. But instead we get this bullshit where the state gives away money to private companies to run a health care system. If it would have included grants to for-profit health care companies, I would have voted no. I'm right on the edge of voting no anyway, but I suspect this is as good as we're going to get right now. Meh.

Proposition 5: NO. No to more schemes to limit property tax. No to more propositions designed to make rich people richer. No to any expansion of Proposition 13, which was the biggest mistake in the history of California. Just no.

Proposition 6: NO. Not that I'm a huge fan of gas taxes, which are regressive, but since the people opposed to gas taxes are also opposed to raising the income tax, no. We need to shift away from individual personal cars, and while a gas tax isn't the best way to encourage that, I'll take the only way that seems to be political feasible.

Proposition 7: YES. Starting the long process of getting rid of the daylight saving time abomination.

Proposition 8: YES. All dialysis clinics, and all medical clinics of any kind, should be mandatory not-for-profit and be required to reinvest all profits back into better facilities or lower costs. Or, better yet, should just all be owned by the state. This doesn't do that, but it's a step in the right direction. Also, our health care system is still bullshit.

Proposition 10: YES. I'm not a big fan of rent control (just build more housing!), but I think it's a valid local issue and local governments should get to decide, not be blocked by the state. This is not one of the issues that I think benefits from state-wide policy.

Proposition 11: NO. How about we don't gut labor law protections for paramedics? Also, our health care system is still bullshit.

Proposition 12: YES. I'm tempted to vote no on this just because I don't think this sort of law should be written by initiative, but I otherwise agree with it, so I'm holding my nose.

Federal and State Offices

I'm mostly voting for the same people I voted for in the primary, or for the Democrat in partisan races where a Democrat is running against a Republican, so listing a bunch of these without comment.

US Senator: Diane Feinstein: I went back and forth on this for a long time. I'm not a huge Feinstein fan, and I suspect de León and I agree on more politics. But I think Feinstein did a good job with the Kavanaugh hearings given the impossible situation she was in, she's been pulled substantially to the left over the past few years, and now seems like the wrong time in history to vote a powerful woman out of the Senate.

Insurance Commissioner: Ricardo Lara. I voted the other way in the primary, and I'm still tempted to vote for Poizner, who seems professional and competent. But I had not done enough research last time to notice that Lara is gay and was a member of the LGBT caucus, and that's just enough of a concrete issue for California medical insurance that it pushes me towards him over my vague dislike of his campaign approach and my respect for Poizner's professionalism.

Governor: Gavin Newsom
Lieutenant Governor: Eleni Kounalakis
Secretary of State: Alex Padilla
Controller: Betty T. Yee
Treasurer: Fiona Ma
Attorney General: Xavier Becerra
State Board of Equalization (2nd): Malia Cohen
US Congress (14th): Jackie Speier
State Assembly (22nd): Kevin Mullin
Superintendent of Public Instruction: Tony Thurmond

For judges, I don't even remotely have enough time to do sufficient research to be an informed voter, since it requires researching their decisions. Instead, I'm going to magnify the opinions of a voting guide from someone who has done the research and who generally votes the same direction as I do on the other things I care about. I'm following the Broke-Ass Stuart voting guide for this one.

Posted: 2018-10-29 21:14 — Why no comments?

Last modified and spun 2018-10-30