SB 51: the California politics thread

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 Think what would be this year’s prop 22, ie a well resourced group buying a law that cannot be repealed other than by a group with more money.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

we could have a system where grassroots organizations can do this too? The ballot measure system allows for this.

in a legalistic sense yes, and i think i agree that ballot measuress would be good in an ideal world. but in a practical sense, no it doesn't allow for this. it costs an average of $5m to gather signatures and for anything remotely contentious it costs several times (5, 10, 20?) more than that to actually get the votes to pass. see https://ballotpedia.org/Ballot_measure_signature_costs,_2020 and the tweet upthread about how much is being spent on each measure and where the money is coming from.

e.g. the only reason rent control is on the ballot (again, after failing in 2018) is a single incredibly wealthy person in LA (michael weinstein). there's thousands of organizations advocating for rent control, but they do not have access to the ballot measure system as a practical matter.

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

i agree with this. my point is that the nature of the ballot measure system (huge up front costs, and if they pass they are impossible for the legislature to undo, and almost impossible for another ballot measure to undo) make the problem of money worse in ballot measures in 2020 than it is in representative democracy.

also it's not checks and balances if the legislature can't undo a ballot measure. it's just a system by which people with enough money can override the legislature.

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

i ignored it because as harbl said it would get refused by the state attorney. it's not a law. it's like something on https://twitter.com/rejectpetitions.

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.

this is an argument for passing good laws at the state or federal level by any method, or for amending the state or federal constitution. i don't understand how it's an argument for ballot measures in particular.

do they even allow criminal laws to be enacted by ballot measure?

there's a ballot measure this year to recategorize a bunch of misdemeanors as felonies. cool system.

As long as special interests have their undue influence in politics, every one of these rotten ballot measures is antidemocratic. Fuck em all and fuck prop 22 especially.

Tsk.

Coming down to the wire: New poll on Prop 22 in California, 46% yes, 42% no.

It’s the most expensive ballot measure campaign in California history, with 90% of the funding comes by from gig companies trying to rewrite labor law. https://t.co/JZHtydpSE3

— Matt Pearce 🦅 (@mattdpearce) October 26, 2020

haha

really feel like we haven’t talked enough about this absolutely hilarious Realtors flyer pic.twitter.com/gPcHRTxgU6

— fry votes yes on 15 & 21, no 22 (@anniefryman) October 23, 2020

there is apparently another in this series with a white man in a fancy suit holding up two bags of "money" standing in front of a large house. It's partly hilarious because "bags of money" and also because he is holding them in the way you see people holding fish they caught, with the same triumphant expression

That one is on the back of the mailer.

https://i.ibb.co/54d2CLV/079-FA6-AF-7-C93-4035-AC46-AF76-E90-ED8-FE.jpg

Ha!

doesn't that look like a "person holding fish" pose??

w..ow

.@GavinNewsom also DECLINED to take a #Prop22 position today, signaling his continued desire for an #AB5 deal w gig tech companies:

"I want to position ourselves as it relates to this issue in a position where we can accommodate if there is a need and desire to see compromise"

— Jeremy B. White (@JeremyBWhite) October 29, 2020

hahahah oh Gavin, you are still the same person who all the good leftists loathed when you first ran for Mayor of SF against the dreamy Matt Gonzales ...

w..ow

― 𝔠𝔞𝔢𝔨 (caek), Thursday, October 29, 2020

OTM

informal poll... am I a weirdo outlier in really disliking both #AB5 and #prop22?

uhhh in your opinion, what should be the "employment" relationship of gig workers and other freelancers that more and more have been mis-characterized as independent contractors?

what is the polling on 22? is it likely to lose?

last I saw, it was close?

Ab5’s heart is in the right place but I think the consensus is it’s a badly written law with a lot of unintended consequences (most of which have been fixed?)

Prop 22 sucks.

yeah - a bunch of things in AB5 got fixed re the arts and cultural workers ...

Prop 22 is 46% for and 42% against, and undecideds have been breaking evenly from earlier polls, so it'll likely pass.

Maybe. Ballot measures are very hard to poll.

still hoping it fails

why are they hard to poll?

Oh, Gavin. Voice so gravelly, hair so slick. Slick with enough excess grease to keep the gears of the accomodation and compromise engine propelling him forward to the 2028 (2024?) dem primary. The debate with him & AOC squarin off is gonna be delightful

I'm glad I engaged with this thread last month and learned me some info-facts on prop 22. I pragmatized my new knowledge and got into a text convo with my mom about it where I am proud to say I successfully persuaded her to change her (easily persuaded) mind from a no I think they should be able to stay independent to a hmm yes I understand now.

Slick with enough excess grease to keep the gears of the accomodation and compromise engine propelling him forward to the 2028 (2024?) dem primary. The debate with him & AOC squarin off is gonna be delightful

hahahaha for sure, and also we will all be reminded of the classic bearskin rug pic with him and Kim Guilfoyle ... still, he has actually been a less bad governor than I had expected.

Fun story -- almost half of SF's reigstered voters have already voted, Alameda County at 46%.

https://www.sfchronicle.com/politics/article/Bay-Area-s-early-votes-are-pouring-in-15682880.php

Ab5’s heart is in the right place but I think the consensus is it’s a badly written law with a lot of unintended consequences (most of which have been fixed?)

Prop 22 sucks.

did you see how they changed it this year? https://news.bloomberglaw.com/daily-labor-report/california-assembly-moves-to-loosen-gig-worker-law-for-some

I like the succinctness of Ned’s linked tweet regarding 22: “…gig companies trying to rewrite labor law”

why are they hard to poll?