Propositions for CA elections – my vote

Proposition 19 - Yes -– The legalization of Marijuana. Marijuana essentially is legal in California anyway. The terminator just lowered the penalty for an ounce of marijuana to a mere 100 dollar fine. I have never been under the belief that pot will increase in usage or lead to other harder drugs. It will however lower incarcerations, and put competitive pressures on the Mexican cartels. It will be taxed and regulated, and therefore bring in money to the depleted tax coffers.

Proposition 20 -Yes - Redistricting of congressional districts, initiative constitutional amendment – When I look at some of these propositions, I look at who is against or for them. The Sierra Club is against it. That is enough for me to vote for it. Proposition 20 allows independent citizens to draw California redistricting lines instead of the politicians. Allowing the politicians to draw the lines allows entrenched politicians to remain in power. As Dr. Phil would say, "How is it working for you so far?" FAQs http://www.yes20no27.org/facts_yes20_QA.html

Proposition 21 - No – Establishes $18 Annual Vehicle License Surcharge to Help Fund State Parks and Wildlife Programs, Grants surcharged vehicles free admission to all state parks, Initiative Statute – You have got to love it, another tax on our vehicles in the guise of funding state parks. While State parks are important, why do you charge everyone a vehicle surcharge even if some may not use the parks. State parks should charge vehicles an entrance fee when they use the park. Not everyone should have to pay a vehicle fee, because not everyone uses the parks.

Proposition 22 –yes - Prohibits the state from borrowing or taking funds used for transportation, redevelopment, or local government projects and services. Initiative constitution amendment. This initiative is just common sense. If funds are dedicated for a specific purpose, that is where it should go. This initiative prevents the state from raiding certain funds into the general fund - similar to a "let's rob Peter to pay Paul."

Proposition 23 – yes - Suspends implementation of Air Pollution control law (AB 32) requiring major sources of emissions to report and reduce greenhouse gas emissions that cause global warming, until employment drops to 5.5% or less for full year. Initiative Statute. I agree with Meg Whitman and Carly Fiorina when they say the passage of AB32 will cause companies to leave California for more a more amicable business environment, and it will cost jobs. Brown is against suspending prop AB 32 – Why not? He was the one responsible for starting CARB, the California Air Resource Board which operates with impunity and no oversight. It has cost jobs, and responsible for the MTBE fiasco. California operates like a fiefdom which is part of the reason we are dropping into the abyss. We enact green policies that make it more difficult to operate in the once golden state, so businesses look elsewhere for greener pastures – not in California. Prop 23 suspends the implementation of AB32. The only problem is prop 23 did not go far enough, AB 32 should be repealed. At least, this is a start.

Proposition 24 – no – Repeals recent legislation that would allow businesses to lower their tax liability. Initiative Statute. You have to love the explanation on the ballot. It says it will increase tax revenues. Tax increases in this economy will cost jobs and cause companies to further emigrate to other states. Not sure how that will raise tax revenues. California is the highest taxed state in the union apart from New York. How has it worked for us so far? The California Teacher's association loves it hmmm.

Proposition 25 – no – Changes legislative vote requirement to pass budget and budget related legislation from two-thirds to a simple majority. Retains two-thirds vote requirement for taxes. Initiative Constitutional Amendment. Why would I want to make it easier for the legislature to increase taxes? I think not.

Proposition 26 – yes – Requires that certain state and local fees be approved by two-thirds vote. Fees include those that address adverse impacts on society or the environment caused by the fee-payer's business. – Currently, the legislature can pass fees instead of taxes (they just call them fees) by a simple majority. This will stop that. I am for anything that prevents this legislature taking us further into the abyss, and this is one step.

Proposition 27 – no – Eliminates State commission on redistricting. Consolidates Authority for redistricting with elected representatives. You might wonder why this proposition is backed by incumbents like Barbara Boxer because it keeps them in power. Need I say more. Here is a good article on why. http://www.theunion.com/article/20101006/OPINION/101009874

Alameda County Propositions

Proposition F –no - – Alameda County Transportation Improvement Measure – adds a $10 local registration fee to vehicles. Soon our vehicle registration fees will be as high as our property tax (hyperbole) suppose to raise money to repair and maintain local streets – hey what happened to the stimulus money?

Proposition G –no – Ohlone college Job training / Quality Education Fund $349,000 bond to improve and continue affordable college education. – okay who is paying for the bond again?

City of Newark –

Proposition U – yes – establishes a 3.5% utility tax user tax for five years. I thought long and hard about this one. Had to recently go to the city council to prevent closure of Newark's parks. Newark is in dire straits, and it cannot afford to get rid of the police at Newark's schools. It also says it will close the Silliman Center (a recreation place in Newark.) The Silliman center has only been open for about five years, and now they want to close it. Personally, I can care less. It is cheaper for me to go to 24 hour fitness than to use the facilities at the Silliman center and for inferior equipment. They charge an arm and a leg. They have a youth program that my children never went to. So, in a word, they can close it for all I care.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Special Election - California

"Arnold Schwarzenegger, the best governor the states contiguous to California have ever had" George Will

An incompetent governor + an incompetent legislature = A special election with six incomprehensible and inane propositions that will have the effect of helping California sink deeper into the abyss.

I have written about California's woes here and here

When Governor Davis was recalled, the terminator was elected on a platform of pro-business. California's business costs have grown 20% higher than the average business costs of any state in the union. How is that for business friendly? As the saying goes, "Be careful what you wish for, you just might get it."

Columnist George Will states the following:

If, since 1990, state spending increases had been held to the inflation rate plus population growth, the state would have a $15 billion surplus instead of a $42 billion budget deficit, which is larger than the budgets of all but 10 states. Since 1990, the number of state employees has increased by more than a third. In Schwarzenegger's less than six years as governor, per capita government spending, adjusted for inflation, has increased nearly 20 percent.

Liberal orthodoxy has made the state dependent on a volatile source of revenues -- high income tax rates on the wealthy. In 2006, the top 1 percent of earners paid 48 percent of the income taxes. California's income and sales taxes are among the nation's highest, its business conditions among the worst, as measured by 16 variables directly influenced by the Legislature. Unemployment, the nation's fourth highest, is 11.2 percent.

California should be a test case for Barack Obama. While government spending increases, there is a continuous brain drain from the once golden state. Those with means and those with the entrepreneurial skills to grow the state's economy are leaving in droves. California is left with Mexico's unskilled and poor. Obama in his last press conference stated he was unwilling to close the border. So now, it's off to the polls. Will Californian's vote themselves a 16 billion dollar tax increase? Or will they finally say enough is enough and vote no on these propositions?

May 19, 2009 – Californians head to the polls to vote on six propositions. Californians will do the job the California legislature seems to be incapable of doing. There is no need to put too much sweat in trying to decipher all of the nonsense that these incomprehensible propositions represent. Just take that number two pencil and vote no on each one of them.

These propositions are only stop-gap measures to temporarily fix California's budget crisis, but in reality they will fix nothing.

Of course, you have to love the names given to the propositions.

1A – "Rainy Day" Budget Stabilization Fund

1B - Education Funding. Payment Plan

1C – Lottery Modernization Act

1D – Children's Services Funding

1E – Mental Health Funding, Temporary Reallocation

1F – Elected Officials Salaries. Prevents pay increases during budget deficit years.

Proposition 1A keenly disguised as a "Rainy day" fund is nothing more than an extension of the huge tax increase that the California legislature already passed. It increases taxes by another 16 billion dollars. When the economy does come back, will California even be poised to benefit? This proposition continues the tax increase already passed by the legislature for another two years. The San José Mercury says this:

Proposition 1A is a convoluted combination of higher taxes and spending restraints. The effects are so uncertain that the legislative analyst's opinion concludes, "The fiscal effects of Proposition 1A are particularly difficult to assess. This is because the measure's effects would depend on a variety of factors that will change over time and cannot be accurately predicted." Why voters should approve a measure that even the legislative analyst cannot decipher is a mystery.

When the San Jose Mercury is against the propositions, then something must really be wrong.

The blurb in the ballot on Proposition 1C, the so-called lottery modernization act says it will allow the state to be modernized to improve its performance with increased payouts, improved marketing, and effective management. Are you convinced yet? What it really does is borrow on future lottery profits to help balance the 2009-2010 state budget. The California lottery was created in November 1984 by proposition 37. It passed because of the help it was suppose to provide to schools. It is currently mandated to provide at least 34% of its revenues to public education. With proposition 1C, schools will no longer receive funds from the lottery winnings, but lottery winnings will be diverted to the General Fund, and public education will be paid from that fund.

According to the ballot, Each Californian currently squanders about 83 dollars per year in the lottery but It is common knowledge that the poor and uneducated spend much more per capita on the lottery than the average Californian. There is even a graph on the ballot showing that California is the third from the bottom as to lottery sales per resident. And, that is a bad thing? How? The proposition states "Higher prize payouts can attract more spending for lottery tickets and increase lottery profits." Proposition 1C intends to increase lottery revenues by revamping the lottery and increasing marketing efforts. This means the poor will be induced to purchase even more lottery tickets. I thought liberals were for the indigent and the destitute.

Since the economic crisis, lottery winnings have actually fallen off 10% during the first four months of the current fiscal year. California put its hopes on imaginary growth, which caused its current budget crisis, and now it is putting its hopes on future lottery winnings that may or may not materialize, but that will assuredly be paid from the backs of the poor.

The San Jose Mercury states the following on propositions 1D through 1E:

    Propositions 1D and 1E would break open dedicated tax funds for use by the general fund. Proposition 1D would allow the state to grab tobacco tax money that is currently dedicated to children's services. Proposition 1E would allow the state to raid the so-called millionaire's tax that is dedicated to mental health services.

    These two propositions highlight the folly of dedicated spending accounts. Income tax rates and tobacco tax rates are so high that raising them further would be counterproductive. Yet, without a statewide vote, the money generated by these taxes cannot be used to ameliorate crisis level deficits.

 

These six propositions do nothing to alleviate the ills of California. California is like the typical highly-leveraged individual who borrows from Peter to pay Paul. He maxes out his credit cards, and when the MasterCard bill is due, he uses the American Express card to pay off the MasterCard. He takes out home equity loans, maintains a high amount of leverage and continues to play this shell game until everything implodes. He plays this game more if he is unemployed. This is California. California is engaged in a massive shell-game and wants voters to now approve the continuation of the shell game to see how long California can continue without bursting at the seams. Companies and individuals who earn the salaries leave. Tax revenues do not materialize, but California continues its spending spree, and uses one fund to pay another fund. The hope is that some time growth will begin again in California, and all this debt can be paid back.

There is an answer to California's woes. Vote the incumbent legislators out of office. Get rid of the terminator, and get someone who knows how to grow an economy. Become a business friendly environment. Go to the polls and vote "no" on every one of these incomprehensible and idiotic propositions.

California’s Foster Youth

There is much to dislike about the Foster Care system in California, but the proposal in front of California legislators, AB 12 will go a long way in alleviating one of the major pitfalls of the System . As a parent who has been involved with foster youth, and parents of foster youth, I have seen firsthand the downside of the system, but AB 12 could give foster kids a chance in life.

Imagine being on your own at the young age of 18. I came from a relatively stable home, and it was difficult for me. Foster kids tend to come from broken homes and go from foster home to foster home before the age of majority. At age 18, they are given the clothes on their back,left on their own to fend for themselves, and basically thrown to the wolves to see who can survive and who cannot survive. There are outside resources to help them through college, and there are programs such as The Independent Living Skills program which have proven to be beneficial, but still not good enough. These kids have no support group or no family to make sure they continue on the right path. As their 18^th year birthday approaches, instead of looking forward to college, many become anxious and worry about the future. Even though legal, an 18 year old is naïve and understands little of the world. It is no wonder that few foster care children ever graduate from college. In fact, statistically it is between 1% and 5%. Many end up poor or in prison. Things may be looking up.

The other day, a foster teenager came to the door selling newspapers trying to collect money for college. I bought the newspaper only because he was a foster kid. After the initial period runs out, I intend to cancel the paper because I get my news over the Internet. I do not read the newspaper much. But if it helps foster kids, I do not mind shelling out a few bucks.

Currently at age 18, Foster kids "age out" of the system. This means stipends from the government stop, and the kids are left to fend for themselves. AB 12 will change that and if it becomes law will allow foster youth to remain in the system until age 21. Some states like Wisconsin, Illinois, and Iowa already have extended the "aging out" for foster youth with much success. Foster youth are three times more likely to attend college "aging out at 21" than if they "aged out" at 18. California may finally get something right.

The San Jose Mercury stated the following:

Currently, most youth "aging out" of foster care are bounced off state support at 18, a tender age for a vulnerable population that often has nowhere to go and no one to rely on. But an assembly bill written by Speaker Karen Bass, D-Los Angeles, and Assemblyman Jim Beall, D-San Jose, would draw on newly available federal funds to support relative caregivers and transitional living programs through age 21.

Former foster youth who gathered in the state Capitol on Monday in support of the bill described their loneliness and desperation as they entered the adult world with no money, no job, nowhere to live and, in many cases, no family or stable adults to rely on.

Many, if not most, foster youth depart from group homes or foster families with only a list of referrals and a bag full of their stuff. A lucky few may find an apartment in a transitional housing program, or get help applying for welfare benefits.

California Commits Suicide

California is on its way to self-destruction. The Budget which was just passed by both houses means that a family of four will be paying approximately $1,500.00 more in taxes at time when California can least afford it and in an economy that Obama has repeatedly equated to a quasi-Great Depression.

Why doesn't California understand that when you raise taxes, the ones you want to stay, leave? The ones who leave are the job creators, and those with resources who are tired of California's confiscatory tax system. The ones who stay are the illegal immigrants or those who clamor for the social services California provides. California's unemployment rate is 9.3% and climbing. Its budget deficit is 42 billion dollars, and this tax increase will not solve the deficit – it will make it worse.

There is an exodus from California. Millionaires in California dropped from 44,000 in 2000 to 29,000 in 2002. They are leaving in droves. In addition 1.5 million people have left California more than entered in the past decade. People are leaving because of the onerous tax burden California imposes on its citizens.

Tax revenue is decreasing not because the state doesn't tax enough, but because people leave for greener pastures where they don't have to worry about the government confiscating their hard earned money to support a state that cannot manage its own affairs because of prolifigate spending by an out-of-control legislature. Retirees take their 401ks and IRAS with them depriving California of a source of tax revenue. Businesses relocate outside the state depriving California of even more tax revenue. Anyone would be crazy to retire in California with California's tax burden. I know several people who would not come to California for that reason. two-thirds of the economy is from consumer spending. This tax increase will only cause consumers to spend less. So, what is the answer to California's ills – Raise taxes.

Yesterday California passed its budget after a grueling 48 hour stand-off. California voted in a so-called "temporary" sales tax of one cent. Nothing is more permanent than a temporary tax. Vehicle registration fees will increase from the current level of .65% to 1.15%. How is that for destroying an automobile industry already on the brink? And then we have a .25% percent surcharge on personal income tax. Aw – but that would be cut in half if we receive more federal stimulus funding than expected. Here is the kicker - California will only allow annual expenditures to increase 5% annually. Why are they allowing expenditures to increase at all when tax revenue is failing to keep pace with expenditures? Any business would slash costs when it fails to meet its goals. Tax revenues do not materialize, but California continues to spend. When tax revenues fail to materialize, the state will try and raise taxes again.

The Wall Street Journal stated the following:

It's sad to watch. The Golden State -- which a decade ago was the booming technology capital of the world -- has been done in by two decades of chronic overspending, overregulating and a hyperprogressive tax code that exaggerates the impact on state revenues of economic boom and bust. Total state expenditures have grown to $145 billion in 2008 from $104 billion in 2003 and California now has the worst credit rating in the nation -- worse even than Louisiana's. It also has the nation's fourth highest unemployment rate of 9.3% (after Michigan, Rhode Island and South Carolina) and the second highest home foreclosure rate (after Nevada).

Political Vanguard reports that the California budget was a mere $50 billion in the early 1990s. It more than doubled since then and in the last five years, it increased over 40%. That constant growth matched against a fluctuating revenue stream is the anatomy of our current crisis.

Year	Revenue	Expenditures	Deficit
00	88,419,000,000	96,382,000,000	-7,000,000,000
01	89,780,000,000	99,220,000,000	-9,440,000,000
02	95,794,000,000	106,779,000,000	-10,985,000,000
03	96,365,000,000	104,223,000,000	-7,858,000,000
04	104,462,000,000	107,591,000,000	-3,129,000,000
05	118,347,000,000	119,612,000,000	-1,265,000,000
06	120,663,000,000	129,968,000,000	-9,305,000,000
07	126,030,000,000	145,227,000,000	-19,917,000,000
08	129,788,000,000	141,031,000,000	-11,251,000,000

Source Politicalvanguard.com

All Democrats and three Republicans from the Senate and three Republicans from the House voted for passage of the Budget. Republicans who voted for this should be voted out of office. The Republicans who should be voted out of office are: The Senate: Roy Ashburn of Bakersfield, Dave Cogdill of Fresno, and Abel Maldonado of San Luis Obispo. The three Republicans in the Assembly are Anthony Adams of Claremont, Roger Niello of Sacramento and Mike Villines of Fresno.

California is racing to be number one, number one in the highest state taxes in the country.

Who will be the last man standing in California?

The Dow is down another 172 points at 7,293, and there is no bottom in sight. Again, how does the market like Obama's stimulus package?

 
 

California – Paradise Lost

Santa Cruz is only about an hour's drive from where I live. I love to eat on the wharf with an ocean side view by the boardwalk. It is one of those many pristine places that beckons visitors who come from miles around to see what California has
to offer. I have posted several pictures. The first one is of the restaurant where

we ate, and the second one is of my daughter standing on the wharf. The others are various pictures taken from the wharf near the Santa Cruz beach boardwalk.

California is a beautiful place to visit, and for years it has been the "in" place to be. Of course, with the incompetence of the current governor and legislature, one has to think twice before settling in California. California is drowning in an ocean of debt. The current governor Arnold Schwarzenegger is a pompous, arrogant,
incompetent ass. Arnold's anti-business policies have caused an exodus of companies and the well-to-do in search of greener pastures. Millionaires in California dropped from 44,000 in 2000 to 29,000 in 2002. It's not because they are poorer – it's because they are leaving in droves. In addition, 1.5 million people have left California more than entered in the past decade. Liberals have said less people in California is a good thing, but then who provides the jobs and pays the bulk of the taxes. It's not the immigration from Mexico. In fact, it is this exodus that hurts the poor even more. I wonder how much tax California will collect once every productive citizen is gone.

If you look at the migration pattern from moving van companies, many more people leave California than enter. In fact, it is much more expensive to hire a moving van company to move out of the state than into the state. This is because of more people leaving than entering the state.

California has one half trillion dollars of outstanding bonds (voters keep voting in bonds even though the state is 40 billion dollars in debt, most recently a fast speed train to go from San Francisco to Los Angeles). California has the third highest income tax rate in the nation, 10.3% for its highest earners. The richest ten percent pay 75% of the income tax burden.

Recently on 60 minutes, Arnold blamed the recent California forest fires on man-made global warming. His ignorance on the subject is astounding. The massive fires in California were caused by environmentalists such as the Sierra Club preventing the cleaning of the forest floors and controlled burning. How can you fix something if you cannot even identify the problem? Schwarzenegger has begun a one man crusade against man-made global warming, a pseudo-science perpetuated by those with an agenda and the ill-informed. The terminator has in effect set up California as his own kingdom. He doesn't believe his anti-business actions will have any detrimental consequences to the state. Of course, the data shows that the converse is true. In 2007, California passed legislation to restrict carbon emissions on power plants, cement producers and oil refineries. Even if man-made global warming were true, you do not have to be a rocket scientist to figure out that California's legislation would have little impact on the world's greenhouse gases, and you don't need to be a hollywood actor to figure out how destructive it would be to business. Arnold campaigned on being pro-business, but he has been just the reverse.

Arnold campaigned to increase the minimum wage in California. California's minimum wage is already one of the highest in the nation. This further crimps business, and causes even more companies to shut down or leave.

One of Bill Clinton's successes was putting people on welfare back to work, but not California. California requires a five year time limit on welfare benefits. The cost to the state is 1 to 2 billion dollars per year. Because of this, California was one of the least successful states in reducing welfare in the late 1990s. Moreover, people have been drawn to the state for its welfare benefits.

Ten years ago the budget increased from 65 billion dollars to 130 billion dollars during the terminator's tenure and with less revenue. How is that for insanity? Of course, the time bomb is CALPERS, (The California Education Retirement System) with 26 billion dollars of unfunded liabilities, the teachers retirement system 20 billion dollars in the red, and health benefits another 48 billion dollars.

We are lucky that the terminator failed in his attempt to nationalize California's health care system. The cost of this program would have been 14 billion dollars a year. Employers that didn't provide health care to their employees would have been assessed a payroll tax – so take that businesses. Ronald Reagan once said when running against Jimmy Carter, "It is a recession when your neighbor is out of work, it is a depression when you are out of work and it is a recovery when Jimmy Carter is out of work." Will we have a recovery when the terminator is out of work? Can't he find employment in Austria? I can't wait to hear the words, I won't be back.

The electorate needs to revolt like it did with proposition 13 in 1978. California could become the place it once was, but the state has become so entrenched with inept politicians, one has to wonder when it will happen. This state is run by morons.

Source: "The End of Prosperity" by Arthur B. Laffer, Stephen Moore and Peter J. Zanous

What do Spain and California have in common?

Well California has joined the likes of countries like Spain by activist judges. Zapatero legalized gay marriage, and now Gays gain the full rights of Heterosexuals - Isn't that sweet? I guess what the people say no longer counts.

In a monumental victory for the gay rights movement, the California Supreme Court overturned a voter-approved ban on gay marriage Thursday in a ruling that would allow same-sex couples in the nation's biggest state to tie the knot.

Domestic partnerships are not a good enough substitute for marriage, the justices ruled 4-3 in striking down the ban.

Outside the courthouse, gay marriage supporters cried and cheered as the news spread.

It is the time to recall the judges. The judges have become black robe dictators, and they are violating the rule of law.

Understand this, four judges just gave the voters of California the finger.

California Propositions

I thought I would put California propisitions and my recommendations on how you should vote.

Proposition 92 - Community colleges Vote yes, keeps junior colleges inexpensive without increasing your taxes.

Propsition 93 Lenghtens Politicians Terms Vote No. A yes vote would lengthen the politician's terms, therefore vote no.

Propositions 94,95,96,97 - Indian Casinos - Vote no - benefits casinos at taxpayer's expense.