2010 Ballot: The Supremes

Judges!

My dear friend Brandon pointed out that I left out the Judicial Election part of the ballot in my last post. Why did I do that? Because I knew next to nothing about these people, so I had made a note to go back and learn about them, which I promptly forgot to do. That oversight has now been rectified, and so… here come da judges!

Chief Justice of the Supreme Court –

Tani Cantil-Sakauye is nominated to be Chief Justice, and we get to vote on whether or not that’ll happen. It’s a 12-year term, and it’s one of the things on the ballot with the most far-reaching consequences. Cantil-Sakauye is considered a “moderate” who is notable for her “exceptional objectivity” on the bench. The only arguments against her that I could find were that she has supported “child custody and family law rules” that some claim “favored women,” which I don’t see as the worst thing in the world in a state with an absurdly broken family law system. I’m going to be voting yes.

Associate Justice of the Supreme Court –

Ming Chin is up to be a possible associate justice on the court. Since he’s been on the bench, he’s ruled on a number of different cases including those involving same-sex marriage and parental-consent laws. While I don’t like how he’s ruled on same-sex marriage, I can understand the arguments (legally) behind it. However, he’s ruled to overturn parental-consent laws which can end up getting people killed. I’m torn on this guy, and would prefer someone else, but I think I’m probably going to vote yes.

Associate Justice of the Supreme Court –

Carlos Moreno is currently an associate justice on the court. He has ruled that there is “no reason why both parents of a child cannot be women” and that California’s anti-discrimination laws prevented businesses from treating registered domestic partners any differently than married couples. Additionally he was the sole dissenting opinion in the case which upheld the legitimacy of Prop. 8 under the CA constitution. He’s smart and savvy, and I’m all for him. Voting yes.

2010 Ballot: Statewide

I love voting. Even more than other favorite things: Arrested Development, Mean Girls, and “Kittens Inspired by Kittens.” Because of this, I spend a lot of time thinking about candidates, ballot measures and the like. This is my way of explaining away the fact that I’ve wrote up a whole thing about what’s on the ballot this time around. There’s a summary at the bottom of all this if you scroll past the reasoning I’ve laid out.

So, without further ado, the races!

Statewide Offices

Governor –

We’ve got a governor’s race on the ballot, folks! This time around, it’s Jerry Brown vs. Meg Whitman, and for me, that’s a no-brainer. I’m for Jerry. Why? Because the state government is absolutely totally a mess, and I don’t think that Meg Whitman’s ideas have a chance in hell of fixing the mess in Sacramento. Even if she could get the legislature to work, she’d be cutting important programs while not facing the reality of our budget/deficit problems. Go Jerry!

Lieutenant Governor –

Gavin Newsom all the way! Sure, the Lt. Gov’s office doesn’t exactly wield the power that Mayor Newsom would like, but I’d much rather have eco-smart, education-and-healthcare-friendly, business savvy Gavin in that job rather than Mr. Maldonado.

Attorney General –

There are far too many reasons than I can list here as to why I’ll be voting for Kamala Harris, but let me just point out she’s great on environmental crime, she’s great on LGBT issues, and she’s great on education issues. She’s great, I’m a fan.

Secretary of State –

Debra Bowen. Ms. Bowen has a history of standing up for those in California who need it the most. She is the current Secretary of State. While looking for interesting things to mention I learned that despite the issues ACORN has been through (for instance, no longer existing), she allegedly still has their 2006 endorsement of her on her office wall, which seems to speak to her pluck.

United States Senator –

This isn’t even a remotely difficult decision. Barbara Boxer is awesome. I’m just going to hit my favorites because otherwise there are too many things to list. She’s been a supporter of making more money available for Pell grants for college students, and introduced legislation to reform student loans. Boxer sponsored a bill that protected an additional 275,000 acres of federal land. She voted against the Defense of Marriage Act and the Federal Marriage Amendment. Boxer has been given high ratings from the HRC, ACLU, NARAL, and NOW.

If you need another reason, come on: she made a cameo appearance on Gilmore Girls.

Statewide Ballot Measures

Proposition 19 –

Spending tons of money each year locking people up for smoking dope is idiotic, especially considering that the state has no money. Legalizing pot just makes sense. Now, technically, it would still be illegal since it’s illegal on a federal level, too, but this is clearly a step in the right direction. California should be locking up people who are a threat to society, not a threat to the Ben & Jerry’s in the freezer.

Prop. 20 –

I like the idea of having congressional redistricting being impartial and apolitical. Prop. 20 gives the authority to redraw congressional districts to a 14-member panel. Who is on the panel, you ask? Unless I have lost the ability to find answers using the internet, that process isn’t complete yet. Yes, it’s going to be “multi-partisan” but… still. The whole “the devil you know” saying comes to mind. So I’m voting no. This just isn’t for me.

Prop. 21 –

Absolutely! This would institute an $18/year additional fee when you re-register your car, so while I can understand why you might be inclined to vote against it, that additional $250 million goes to state parks and wildlife. PLUS: Under Prop. 21, any car with CA plates would get to use state parks for free! Considering the cost of parking at state parks (which includes a lot of beaches) if you go once or twice you end up saving money!

Prop. 22 –

I read and re-read this one so many times trying to make up my mind that I had to move on to something else before I could make sense of how jumbled it all seems. Prop. 22 is the “stop state raids on local funds” measure. Boy, that sounds great. I’m all in favor of the state government not stealing for local government. This really doesn’t seem like the way to do that, though. I know that local government needs to be able to hang onto this money, but without an actual budget fix in the makings the state takes this money and pays for crazy things like teachers. We need a budget process that works, not measures like this that tie the hands of the legislature right now. So… No on 22.

Prop. 23 –

No way, José! This little guy would suspend California’s “landmark legislation” [in quotes because while it’s true, I feel like an asshat talking that way] which mandates greenhouse gas emission levels be cut to 1990 levels by 2020. Just… no. Prop. 23 would suspend implementation of the greenhouse-gas rollback until California unemployment levels are at 5.5% or lower for four consecutive quarters. That sounds lovely, but that just doesn’t happen. It’s one of the flaws of our system, but whatever. It has happened only three times since 1980, so in all likelihood 23 would be suspending the rollback for quite some time.

Prop. 24 –

Yes. This measure ends a number of tax breaks that were approved by Governor Schwarzenegger, and would bring in an estimated $1.3 billion annually by 2013. The tax breaks that 24 ends have yet to go into effect.

Prop. 25 –

Yes, whole heartedly. This makes it so that the state legislature would only need a vote of 50% +1 to pass a budget. Currently the system calls for a two-thirds majority. Fun facts: this year’s budget was 100 days late. If Prop. 25 passes a two-thirds majority would still be required for tax increases.

Prop. 26 –

No, no, no. Remember how, in the above section I mentioned that the budget was 100 days late due to the absurd two-thirds rule? Well, this two-thirds business is a mess. So let’s bring it to other areas of government! That’s what 26 would do, anyway. 26 makes it so that “certain state and local fees” would need to be approved by a two-thirds vote, meaning nothing would ever get done. No thank you!

Prop. 27 –

I may have mentioned this, but I’m not a supporter of the way the “independent commission” to redraw congressional districts selects its members. It’s an oddly confusing process for something that’s supposed to be bringing light into the political process. Prop. 27 gets rid of that, and saves the state an estimated $1 million.

Plus it’s backed by the guy who’s responsible for the Power Rangers.

Summary

Governor: Jerry Brown

Lt. Governor: Gavin Newsom

Attorney General: Kamala Harris

Secretary of State: Debra Bowen

U.S. Senator: Barbara Boxer

19: Yes

20: No

21: Yes

22: No

23: NO

24: Yes

25: Yes

26: No

27: Yes

Next Up: San Francisco races, and judges!