|
California never has a shortage of initiatives. We have another 12 propositions on the Nov. 4 ballot, some we feel as if we’ve seen before (parental notification under Proposition 4). Thankfully, there are no Indian gaming measures on the 2008 ballot.
Here are our takes on some of these propositions:
No on Propositions 1A, 3, 5, 6, 10 and 12. By our math, these propositions, if passed, amount to more than $20 billion in additional costs to taxpayers. Prop. 1A alone, proposing high-speed trains linking the state’s major population centers, is asking for nearly $10 billion.
We allow that there is some merit to each of these initiatives. We want to improve children’s hospitals (Proposition 3), get treatment for drug users (Proposition 5), help law enforcement (Proposition 6), push for vehicles using alternative fuel sources (Proposition 10) and help our veterans (Proposition 12).
Still, we’re reminded of that 1992 presidential campaign phrase, “It’s the economy, stupid,” as the primary reason we have to pass on all of these.
With so many residents struggling to make ends meet in these bad economic times, it makes no sense to commit billions of dollars Nov. 4. Last week, we managed a “yes” endorsement on one spending item, the one-eighth-cent sales tax increase to bring BART to San Jose and Santa Clara (Measure B). We’re not going beyond that.
No on Proposition 7. On the surface, this proposal for “renewable energy generation (calling for government-owned utilities to generate 20 percent of their electricity by 2010, for starters) sounds like the environmentally friendly thing to do. It may be well intended, but it is economically irresponsible in the final analysis. Opponents, including the League of Women Voters, note that Proposition 7’s passage would trigger rising electricity costs, creating market conditions that could lead to another energy crisis. It could also shut out small, competing companies specializing in solar and wind power.
Yes on Proposition 8. We think it is time to stop the courts from making our laws. That’s why we elect a representative government. The ripple effect of letting the current court ruling legalizing gay marriage stand will be endless lawsuits, especially regarding tax-exempt status for churches and educational institutions.
Yes on Proposition 11. This proposal would shift state office redistricting responsibilities onto a nonelected commission comprising a balance of Democrats, Republicans and other parties. We agree with supporters’ arguments that a yes vote ends the conflict of interest possible when politicians draw their own election districts. In addition, the impartial legislative analyst refutes opponents’ claims of a costly bureaucracy by declaring, “any increase in costs probably would not be significant.” Proposition 11 establishes a fair and balanced approach to redistricting.
10 Comments
1Comment
at Thursday, 23 October 2008 09:47
Los Altos Town Crier
Just so your readers have the full picture, CalVet Bonds (Proposition 12) have been totally self supported by the veterans who receive the loans since 1922. Through their monthly loan payments, the veterans pay for the annual debt service on the bonds and the entire costs of program administration. These bonds will not result in additional cost to taxpayers as you say. According to the state’s non-partisan Legislative Analyst, when the State of California’s Debt Ratio is calculated, CalVet bonds are not included. There is no reason to expect that the bonds will ever need general fund support.
Jerry R. Jones, Chief of Legislation and Public Affairs
California Department of Veterans Affairs
2"Re: Proposition 8"
at Saturday, 25 October 2008 20:32
I find it saddening that the Town Crier values the equal rights of our fellow human beings less than the trouble that a few lawsuits would create.
3Comment
at Wednesday, 29 October 2008 10:16
It saddens me greatly to live in a town where discrimination is so easily embraced. Prop 8 is nothing but hate and bigotry and the town crier has endorsed it.
I feel that using marriage as a tool of discrimination cheapens the marriages of all the people of California. Whatever happened to "Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness". I guess that only applies to the "right" people.
4"title?"
at Thursday, 30 October 2008 08:29
The Town Crier has joined the Paradise Post as the only two newspapers in the state to endorse Prop 8. This certainly says something about the Editorial staff... and not something nice.
5Comment
at Thursday, 30 October 2008 08:29
It saddens me that the Los Altos Town Crier doesn\\\'t bother to check its facts before making voter recommendations. Churches already have the right to refuse to marry anyone they wish, and Prop 8 will do nothing to change that. Catholic churches refuse to marry non Catholics every day, and no one\\\'s threatening their tax exempt status. Whomever your fact-checker is, you\\\'re paying him too much.
6Comment
at Thursday, 30 October 2008 08:27
Activist judges disagree with the idea that only some people are equal. Brown vs. Board of Education was a landmark case dealing with racial prejudice and decided by activist judges. The country is better off. If it were left to a popular vote, segregation would still be the norm. It took court decisions and political leadership to move this country toward doing the right thing. Defeating Prop. 8 is also about doing the right thing and making our country better for all citizens
7Comment
at Thursday, 30 October 2008 08:28
It would be much easier on everyone if you guys would just admit you don\\\'t like gay people.
8Comment
at Thursday, 30 October 2008 15:54
We are all taught prejudice for minorities from early childhood and throughout our adult years. It is hard to overcome even once you realize your actions, based on your beliefs, cause real harm and suffering to real people who only want to live their lives free from persecution and with equal rights. Equal protection under the law is a fundamental constitutional guarantee and is the foundation of our society. Our constitution should guarantee the same freedoms and rights to everyone. You don't have to overcome your prejudice, just don't write it into law. Please help America live up to the promise of liberty and justice for all by saying NO to prejudice and discrimination instead of making it the law of the land. Vote NO on 8.
9Comment
at Friday, 07 November 2008 11:18
Now that we know the aftermath of people who think the same way as your recommendation. You have taken away rights that a court ruled were constitutionally guaranteed, and you have dealt serious damage to thousands of peoples life for the sake of religiously based legislated morality. No one is fooled by your claims that you defended representative government. You simply are unwilling to admit you are actually defending irrational hatred and prejudice. At least the rest of Los Altos disagreed.
10Comment
at Monday, 22 June 2009 12:52
I am disgusted by the stance of the Town Crier with Proposition 8. Our town is now listed as hosting the largest paper in the state to editorialize in support of Proposition 8 - that and the majority of the city\\\'s citizens voted NO on the proposition.
And as if you need reminding, our elected officials did indeed pass same-sex marriage legislation TWICE. Compound that to the fact that nearly all of our elected officials opposed Proposition 8.
Post Comment
We reserve the right to use comments submitted on our site in whole or in part. We will not publish comments that contain inappropriate content, advertising or website links to inappropriate content.
|
