SB 51: the California politics thread

I voted for 15 too, but honestly I'm not comfortable with any of these propositions, or any of the ones in the past in CA

they are putting complicated proposals into the hands of voters who are really not all that interested. don't see how that is good

I sealed and signed my ballot and am ready to deliver it

I'm going to remain positive

correct opinion, the proposition system is bad

how did people vote on cash bail vs probably racist algorithms?

yes yes to end money bail

I agree with this guy (vice mayor of culver city and a good poster actually?!)

I’m voting YES on #Prop25 because Californians aren’t going to get another shot at removing bail bond industry money from politics for a generation. I’m aware of the problems with SB 10, but we won’t see anything better for years without eliminating the industry’s power.

— Alex “Yes on Measure RE, No on B” Fisch (@AlexFischCC) October 16, 2020

A yes on Prop 25 means we will almost certainly see frequent reform to bail as we stumble toward a better tomorrow. A no outcome probably means at least a generation of the status quo.

— Alex “Yes on Measure RE, No on B” Fisch (@AlexFischCC) October 16, 2020

not sure where to post this:

Just took an Uber for the first time in forever. The app said my driver was yes on prop 22. I asked him and he explained; NO, but the msg comes up with every ride and he decided to just click yes to make it go away.
Thats infuriating, misleading and probably illegal.#NoOnProp22

— Tonje Ettesvoll (@Unicorn__Voice) October 17, 2020

He made an independent contract with the devil, no big deal.

https://www.taxfairnessproject.org/map

congratulations to palo alto, menlo park, marin, berkeley, etc.

What in the world is going on with the dialysis proposition? Y’all have to do so much research to vote.

California state ballot initiatives are worded like “Vote no if don’t not want thing to do not happen, or will” and if you fuck it up you legalize babies working for Instacart

— Mark Agee (@MarkAgee) October 15, 2020

lol otm

I decided to vote in DC one last time because I didn’t feel like I could deal with figuring out CA props whilst in the midst of moving. Next time, CA, next time.

dialysis is one of those weird things where it's like, every election there is some proposition related to it on the ballot, and the majority of voters are like "idk and/or idgaf" ... it just seems a potentially bad thing to let the general population decide.

My guess is that a bunch of shady unlicensed dialysis centers popped up due to some new insurance code and have been getting away with shoddy practices (see: drug treatment centers in Florida). This bill adds a little regulation to them (requires having a doctor on-site, which doesn't seem wildly overbearing), so of course they hate it. I voted yes.

the fact that you have to guess is an indictment of the system

iow, sarahell otm

Everything decided by ballot measure is a bad thing to let the population decide, and it’s particularly bad when you remember decisions made by ballot measure can only be overturned by another ballot measure. But yeah, triple negatives in wording and insanely technical issues very few people have direct experience of are the worse offenders.

the population shouldn't get to decide anything??? ... like that logic seems suspect and what lead to things like the electoral college and the fact that we have the same number of Senators as North Dakota.

Ballot measures are a nice idea in theory but the past 100 years have shown that they are an unbelievably bad way of running a government, and they are getting worse.

yeah I don't think the fact that the founders wanted to entrench a slave-owning minority discredits the whole idea of representative democracy

Yeah the US senate is not the alternative. Getting rid of ballot measures s the alternative.

Ballot measures are a nice idea in theory but the past 100 years have shown that they are an unbelievably bad way of running a government, and they are getting worse.

I could argue that our federal government, sans ballot measures, is also run quite badly, and has definitely gotten worse! ... Like "worse than what" is my question to you.

there are/have been ballot measures that have been effective in terms of pressuring legislators to actually respond to what people want ... idk ... remind me how long you've lived in California, caek?

Just get rid of ballot measures! Keep everything else the in the CA constitution same. It works all over the world.

(and stop forgetting the rest of the world exists and has things to teach us. why are the only options the status quo or the ... federal constitution?!?)

the rest of the world works so so so so well. geez ... you have this unrealistic view of "the rest of the world"

Apparently not long enough because my first thought isn’t “we can keep doing what we’re doing or we can ... South Dakota”

Looking by forward to tons of prop 22s, ie tech companies paying for laws that literally cannot be overturned.

I don't understand your problem with ballot measures. It appears that you want elected officials to have to decide everything through the legislative process, which you know, concentrates power more in the hands of the elected officials ... the direct democracy of ballot measures, if done well, is actually a nice form of checks & balances to that. But maybe, we both are coming from this place of idealism, where we are being a bit too hand-wavey about the fact the reality of the systems we are advocating for, is actually mediocre.

xp as opposed to tech companies buying candidates?

Yes because a law passed by a corrupt politician can be overturned but a ballot measure cannot unless you have more money than the people that passed it!!!!!

I’m not saying representative democracy is perfect. I’m saying ballot measures are a greater concentration of power among the very rich than no ballot measures.

I’ll do some googling another time for details but I just want to say for now that the view that ballot measures result in bad government wherever they’re tried is an extremely conventional and mainstream idea that is empirically pretty obviously true.

it’s also very easy to see how the problems with ballot measures (kakistocracy) are worse in states that suffer from extreme concentration of wealth, which is e.g. California. And that concentration is getting worse here very fast. We need to get rid of them ASAP.

i disagree -- i think having a mix of representative and direct democracy is good -- and maybe some of this is my age + remembered history of CA politics that I've lived through and my parents and grandparents and great-grandparents lived through, but I don't see how it's more difficult for the very rich to buy politicians as opposed to buying individual voters. They have been very successful at this in the past! I feel like things are less grotesquely corrupt in Sacramento than they were in the 80s and 90s ... and maybe that's a big difference in our perception here. But, you do strike me as way more authoritarian than I am.

Thought experiment to prove ballot measures are bad: imagine we had them at the federal level. Think what would be this year’s prop 22, ie a well resourced group buying a law that cannot be repealed other than by a group with more money.

removing Trump from office?

Prosecuting cops that kill black people?

Thought experiment to prove ballot measures are good: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proposition_103

(only it wasn't a thought experiment, 103 saved folks a lot of money and at least somewhat deflected the insurance industry's power in the state)

That’s a good law that happens to have been passed by a ballot measure. We have some good laws that were not passed by ballot measure too.

removing Trump from office?

I can see the argument for ballot measures in a state where the government is hugely corrupt and no party is interested in doing the boring governance bit well, which I suppose is one reason they are more popular in the US than elsewhere haha.

But if that’s the problem, and extremely wealthy people/corporations having the sole power to submit ideas directly to the people is the solution, then why even have a representative legislature at all. Since representative legislatures are “authoritarian” apparently.

Somewhat related: for a long time, California government had a two-thirds supermajority rule which effectively gridlocked the state from doing much of anything except fund-raise and create fiefdoms among themselves. Ballot measures were the last resort for a lot of folks.

Ironically they passed a ballot measure to require a supermajority in the legislature to raise revenue ten years ago

https://ballotpedia.org/California_Proposition_26,_Supermajority_Vote_to_Pass_New_Taxes_and_Fees_(2010)

That link again

feels like that dialysis proposition is an example of what is bad about california state propositions. how are we supposed to figure out what it is about and vote accordingly? I voted no because I couldn't understand it

And then there are abominations like Prop 8

on the other hand, there are propositions that I can easily vote for, including most local bonds to improve infrastructure/schools/parks (that are always placed first on the ballot)

But if that’s the problem, and extremely wealthy people/corporations having the sole power to submit ideas directly to the people is the solution,

we could have a system where grassroots organizations can do this too? The ballot measure system allows for this. Just like, the representative democracy allows for elected officials to conscientiously consider the needs of their constituents and legislate accordingly. Neither of these things are impossible. I see, in my idealistic mind, a system, where these work as checks and balances of one another -- the ballot measure as safety valve for when elected officials don't serve the public. ... Where I live, wealthy corporations are funding opponents to progressive candidates for local office (I doubt our city is unique in this) ... it isn't that ballot measures are the evil thing here, it's wealthy people/corporations' influence

Like, in my example of a federal ballot measure about prosecution for racist cops that murder black people -- which I noticed you just conveniently ignored. Black Lives Matter (and related orgs) could sponsor a ballot measure on this subject. This could affect more equal change statewide, as opposed to just acting at the local level, where the results depend on the politics of elected officials in those localities, as well as the varying structures related to oversight of law enforcement. In other words, you will likely get more justice in Berkeley than in Bakersfield. ... which sucks for black people (and those who care about them) who happen to end up at the wrong end of a cop's gun in Bakersfield.

how do you have a ballot measure to (1) prosecute crimes (2) murder is already illegal (3) prosecute crimes against one race
sorry i don't know why i clicked this thread, i've never even been to CA, but ballot measures are the worst and putting any criminal law on the ballot is a recipe for disaster. anti-minority by definition. do they even allow criminal laws to be enacted by ballot measure?

ballot measures lead to vibrant civic engagement, as this crucial text proved

https://i.imgur.com/7h2Ie1O.jpg