California Special Statewide Election. Your thoughts on the issues... 5 replies

Please wait...

Red Menace

SCHOFIELD DID 4/30

415,758 XP

10th August 2004

0 Uploads

40,364 Posts

1 Threads

#1 13 years ago

It's October and that means our sample ballots for the special statewide election in November, the following measures have been submitted to the voters and quoted word for word (to the best of my ability) from the sample ballot I received from my county and seems to be pretty fair, just the facts. Proposition 73: Waiting period and parental notification before termination of minor’s pregnancy. Initiative constitutional amendment. Amends California Constitution, defining and prohibiting abortion for unemancipated minor until 48 hours after physician notifies minor’s parent/guardian, except in medical emergency or with parental waiver. Mandates reporting requirements. Authorizes monetary damages against physicians for violation. Fiscal Impact: Potential unknown net state cost of several million dollars annually for health and social services programs, the courts, and state administration combined. Proposition 74: Public School Teachers. Waiting period for permanent status. Dismissal. Initiative statue. Increases probationary period for public school teachers from two to five years. Modifies the process by which school boards can dismiss a teaching employee who receives two consecutive unsatisfactory performance evaluations. Fiscal Impact: Unknown net effect on school districts’ cost for teacher compensation, performance evaluations, and other activities. Impact would vary significantly by district and depend largely on further district personnel actions. Proposition 75: Public Employee Union dues. Restriction on political contributions. Employee consent requirement. Initiative statue. Prohibits using public employee union dues for political contributions without individual employees’ prior consent. Excludes contributions benefiting charities or employees. Requires unions to maintain and, upon request, report member political contributions to Fair Political Practices Commission. Fiscal Impact: Probably minor state and local government implementation costs, potentially offset in part of revenues from fines and/or fees. Proposition 76: State spending and school funding limits. Initiative Constitutional Amendment. Limits state spending to prior years average revenue growth. Changes minimum school funding requirements (Proposition 98). Permits Governor, under specified circumstances, to reduce budget appropriations of Governor’s choosing. Fiscal Impact: State spending likely reduced relative to current law, due to additional spending limit and new powers granted to Governor. Reductions could apply to schools and shift costs to other local governments. Proposition 77: Redistricting. Initiative Constitutional Amendment. Amends state Constitution’s process for redistricting California’s Senate, Assembly, Congressional and Board of Equalization districts. Requires three-member panel of retired judges selected by legislative leaders. Fiscal Impact: One-time state redistricting costs totaling no more than $1.5 million and county costs in the range of $1 million. Potential reduction in future costs, but net impact would depend on decisions by voters. Proposition 78: Discounts on Prescription Drugs. Initiative statute. Establishes discount prescription drug program for certain low and moderate income Californians. Authorizes Department of Health Services to contact with participating pharmacies for discounts and with participating drug manufacturers for rebates. Fiscal Impact: State costs for administration and outreach in the millions to low tens of millions of dollars annually. State costs for advance funding for rebates. Unknown potentially significant savings for state and county health programs. Proposition 79: Prescription Drug Discounts. State-Negotiated Rebates. Initiative statue. Provides drug discounts to Californians with qualifying incomes. Funded by state-negotiated drug manufacturer rebates. Prohibits Medi-Cal contracts with manufacturers not providing Medicaid best price. Fiscal Impact: State costs for administration and outreach in low tens of millions of dollars annually. State costs for advance funding for rebates. Unknown potentially significant: (1) net costs for saving for Medi-Cal and (2) saving for state and county health programs. Proposition 80: Electric Service Providers. Regulation. Initiative statue. Subjects electric service providers to regulation by California Public Utilities Commission. Restricts electricity customers’ ability to switch from private utilities to other providers. Requires all retail electric sellers to increase renewable energy resource procurement by 2010. Fiscal Impact: Potential annual administrative costs ranging from negligible to $4 million, paid by fees. Unknown net impact on state and local costs and revenues from uncertain impact on electricity rates. Now before I post my thoughts and opinions on the measures I would like to hear the uninfluenced thoughts and opinions of other California voters, people to young to vote and just the general GF opinion. I know it’s a lot of reading but it is important, especially the people of California. We are getting the power back from the bureaucrats in Sacramento.


sigpic82523_3.gif</div></body></html>



-Ghost-

Phantom of the Forums

50 XP

19th August 2003

0 Uploads

19,146 Posts

0 Threads

#2 13 years ago

Well, I'm too young to vote, but I live in California... The first Propisition is one I agree with, parents should be told if their children, who are minors, are trying to get an abortion. If they don't know anyway, then the kids are probably trying to hide it, in which means the parents should definelty know.




NiteStryker

Biggest F-ing A-hole 2010

215,560 XP

24th April 2003

0 Uploads

18,771 Posts

0 Threads

#3 13 years ago
Red Menace [SIZE=2] Proposition 73: Waiting period and parental notification before termination of minor’s pregnancy. [/QUOTE] Good thing. If it's a minor, she is under full custody of the parents. Everything she does falls onto the parents. An abortion can be a life threatening procedure, and the child usually has devestating phsychological effects years after.
Red Menace Proposition 74: [B]Public School Teachers. Waiting period for permanent status. [/QUOTE] I think this is good. Make a teacher prove they are worth the tenure.
Red Menace Proposition 75: [B]Public Employee Union dues. Restriction on political contributions. Employee consent requirement. [/QUOTE] Also good. Its the peoples money, so you should find out how they want it spend. Proposition 76: [B]State spending and school funding limits.[/QUOTE] Eh this one is sketchy but I think overall its good.
Red Menace Proposition 77: [B]Redistricting. Initiative Constitutional Amendment.
Amends state Constitution’s process for redistricting California’s Senate, Assembly, Congressional and Board of Equalization districts.

No opinion really, I dont understand it. [QUOTE=Red Menace] Proposition 78: Discounts on Prescription Drugs. Initiative statute. Establishes discount prescription drug program for certain low and moderate income Californians. Help the people? Yea I like this one. [QUOTE=Red Menace] Proposition 79: Prescription Drug Discounts. State-Negotiated Rebates. As long as it doesnt have me paying for someone elses care Im ok with it. [QUOTE=Red Menace] Proposition 80: [B]Electric Service Providers. Regulation. Initiative statue. Subjects electric service providers to regulation by California Public Utilities Commission. Good. Mabey we wont have another rolling blackout summer. I think I'll be voting yes for all except 77 because I dont understand that one.




Blood n Guts

Wolverine Starting 9/6/2006

50 XP

22nd March 2005

0 Uploads

758 Posts

0 Threads

#4 13 years ago

73. I agree with it. If minors need to have parental consent for a tattoo or I piercing, I don't see why something as serious as an abortion should be any different. The fact that their child got pregnant in the first place should be a concern to the parents and known. :thumbsup: 74. More money required, and it would make the generally overworked and underpaid job of teaching even worse. :thumbsdown: 75. Makes sense, being part of a Union does not make you affiliated with a political party, although I think this act would be better if it went beyond just public employees. :thumbsup: 76. I don't know enough about the current conditions and needs of the education system in California to judge this. 77. If it will save money in the future, go for it. :thumbsup: 80. More government regulation, less consumer choice. :thumbsdown:




Red Menace

SCHOFIELD DID 4/30

415,758 XP

10th August 2004

0 Uploads

40,364 Posts

1 Threads

#5 13 years ago

Prop 73: Yes, because it's minor's where talking about here and the parents need to know. Prop 74: Yes, I'm a product of this school system and I saw many teachers that should not have been teachers and this will hopefully prevent or at least make it easier to remove bad teachers. Prop 75: Yes, It gives workers the choice in how their money is spent and stops public employee unions from automatically deducting money from workers paychecks Prop 76: Maybe? I still have to think about this one, I really don’t totally get it but the Republicans tell me to vote yes, so unless I get some sort of enlightenment otherwise I guess I will vote yes. Prop 77: Yes, my county elected Elton Gallegly to represent our district and now I got some bitch named Lois Capps? What the hell is that? It’s time to take the powers of redistricting out of the hands of politicians. Prop 78: Maybe? They claim it would use market forces to provide prescription drugs and drive down the cost of health care. But whose market? My market! I will probably vote yes though. Prop 79: No, first of all it’s a labor union sponsored bill (never good) and secondly "state-negotiated" means to me that the state agrees to take it in the pocketbook (which trickles down to me) and pay a portion of the drugs cost. Prop 80: No, the state got us into our energy mess and now they want more power (no pun intended) to regulate private energy providers? I don’t know if any of you remember the recent blackout in Los Angeles, it wasn’t terrorism as the news had hoped, it was because a city electrician cut a power line (in half). I would prefer not to have that same outstanding service in my county.


sigpic82523_3.gif</div></body></html>



Guest

I didn't make it!

0 XP

 
#6 13 years ago

My thoughts?

No to 73. I think the right to privacy extends to minors. A parent should not decide whether or not their child gets an abortion unless the parent plans on taking full responsibility of the child. With that said, if a parent should not have the right to decide that crucial choice, then why should a parent need to know in the first place? It doesn't make any sense to me. Most of the people getting abortions live in lower class slums anyway, I am pretty sure the parents of these kids aren't the nicest parents around and don't mind giving their daughters black eyes.

74. I don't see why it should take the government 5 years to decide if a teacher is fit enough for a school but regardless of that fact I agree with it. It is our education and we want the best.

75. Ban allowing corporations to give money to candidates altogether. It would make the elections in our country much more legit, and expose fraud among the leading companies who try to donate anyway. Money should be donated. I don't care to see 20 attack ads a night, from both sides. Elections in our country have become a pathetic spectacle to witness.