California Politics: Madame Senator, this is a morgue

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > California Politics: Madame Senator, this is a morgue

«‹›957 »

Roland Jones: Aug 18, 2011; by Nyc_Tattoo

Instant Sunrise posted:

Basically 60 would make it very easy for anyone to request from the state the legal name and address of a porn actress.

Which would be a huge enabler for stalkers.

Yeah, that's what I thought. Definitely voting no then, and kind of wondering why the LWV isn't against it (CPVG had several people against but not enough for an explicit "no" conclusion). It sounds like a disaster.

# ? Oct 15, 2016 01:48

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 15, 2024 08:41

Dead Reckoning: Sep 13, 2011

I would say that if you don't understand something, or you're voting for it out of spite or because it "sounds good," you probably shouldn't vote for it.

# ? Oct 15, 2016 02:14

Ragnar34: Oct 10, 2007; Lipstick Apathy

For the cigarette one, I've been thinking "no" because it disproportionately affects the poor.

# ? Oct 15, 2016 02:25

Roland Jones: Aug 18, 2011; by Nyc_Tattoo

Dead Reckoning posted:

I would say that if you don't understand something, or you're voting for it out of spite or because it "sounds good," you probably shouldn't vote for it.

Well, that list I made summarized stuff and was deliberately flippant; I do understand (most) of those things in more depth than I said there, but, again, I want to make sure there's not some hidden nastiness I'm missing or something I didn't consider (like why the cigarette tax is racist, according to that one guy's redtext). But writing a paragraph or two on each of those things seems like it wouldn't have been worth it when I basically want to know if there are some major red flags I missed, so instead, I wrote that.

Ragnar34 posted:

For the cigarette one, I've been thinking "no" because it disproportionately affects the poor.

Okay, that's what I was figuring. CPVG was for it but they admittedly seem like they could fail to consider consumption taxes being regressive. That's definitely a negative there.

# ? Oct 15, 2016 02:30

Dead Reckoning: Sep 13, 2011

Roland Jones posted:

I do understand (most) of those things in more depth than I said there... But writing a paragraph or two on each of those things seems like it wouldn't have been worth it when I basically want to know if there are some major red flags I missed, so instead, I wrote that.

Frankly, it's hard to tell. A flat sin tax (Prop 56) disproportionally will be felt by the poor, and you're still in favor of 61 and 63 despite the fact that they're at best useless and at worst harmful while making no attempt to address the root causes of the issues they claim to be about. You ought to be voting no on all three. 56 also raises my hackles because it's budgeting by initiative, which is almost never a good idea, and it isn't clear who exactly would be benefiting from the money.

Dead Reckoning fucked around with this message at 03:16 on Oct 15, 2016

# ? Oct 15, 2016 02:46

ComradeCosmobot: Dec 4, 2004; USPOL July

Roland Jones posted:

Prop 51: School bill, does something important but might favor the wrong people or something? Leaning yes.

The main downside is that the bill has no protections to ensure that the money doesn't go primarily to the districts that need the most help. It's nominally needs-blind, which may give wealthy districts a head start on getting even more school funding.

Roland Jones posted:

Prop 54: LWV is for, while the CPVG is 2-3 for-against, which seems odd to me. (and is the only thing on the latter where the votes aren't all unanimous or neutral). Transparency seems great to me, so what's the downside here? Something about attack ads?

Mostly attack ads, yeah. Since it also opens public hearings to private recordings, the concern is that it may help to stifle the compromises that would otherwise allow our already dysfunctional government to somehow manage to not poo poo itself every year.

Roland Jones posted:

Prop 56: Cigarette tax. CPVG is in favor here but the LWV is neutral, and someone here has redtext calling them racist for supporting it. What's up?

Others have already said, but the main concern is that it's a regressive sales tax, and those most likely to still be addicted are among the poorer members of society to boot.

Roland Jones posted:

Prop 60: A bunch of stuff relating to porn. Mandates condom usage in porn, makes the guy who wrote the initiative a state employee who monitors all the porn, and makes the identities of porn actors public. That last one seems like reason to oppose this in and of itself because it sounds like a big violation of privacy; is that the case, or...?

It's basically a backdoor to killing the porn industry in the state. Unfortunately, it is very likely to pass, so porn performers are pretty much hosed (figuratively, since there won't be so much of the literally after the prop passes)

Roland Jones posted:

Prop 62: No more death penalty. Yes.

Prop 66: Fasttrack the death penalty. No.

Unfortunately, polls seem to suggest that the state as a whole will be voting the exact opposite on these two props. This state is unfortunately quite death penalty friendly for all its progressiveness.

# ? Oct 15, 2016 03:06

Roland Jones: Aug 18, 2011; by Nyc_Tattoo

ComradeCosmobot posted:

The main downside is that the bill has no protections to ensure that the money doesn't go primarily to the districts that need the most help. It's nominally needs-blind, which may give wealthy districts a head start on getting even more school funding.

Mostly attack ads, yeah. Since it also opens public hearings to private recordings, the concern is that it may help to stifle the compromises that would otherwise allow our already dysfunctional government to somehow manage to not poo poo itself every year.

Others have already said, but the main concern is that it's a regressive sales tax, and those most likely to still be addicted are among the poorer members of society to boot.

It's basically a backdoor to killing the porn industry in the state. Unfortunately, it is very likely to pass, so porn performers are pretty much hosed (figuratively, since there won't be so much of the literally after the prop passes)

Unfortunately, polls seem to suggest that the state as a whole will be voting the exact opposite on these two props. This state is unfortunately quite death penalty friendly for all its progressiveness.

Alright, thanks for elaborating on all those things. It's very helpful. And those last bits are disappointing; I knew about the death penalty stuff, but the porn prop probably passing (that was unintentionally alliterative) is bad news too.

# ? Oct 15, 2016 03:24

Keyser_Soze: May 5, 2009; Pillbug

The porn thing is just probably a troll to force the industry to Las Vegas 100%. The Prop 61 thing will probably backfire and the gun/ammo restrictions all sound dumb even though weapons hoarders, flippers and new suburban shop owners are loud, annoying shitheads.

Sanchez will provide more comedy trolling and horrible gaffes than Harris, so that's a win.

# ? Oct 15, 2016 03:30

ComradeCosmobot: Dec 4, 2004; USPOL July

Roland Jones posted:

Alright, thanks for elaborating on all those things. It's very helpful. And those last bits are disappointing; I knew about the death penalty stuff, but the porn prop probably passing (that was unintentionally alliterative) is bad news too.

It's insanely popular. If you thought the fig leaf of women's health was an obnoxious tool for the pro-life movement, you don't have any idea how popular a concept it is for anti-porn lobbyists. Everyone wants to be seen protecting women from STDs (for an understandable reason)

I think it's regularly polled upwards of 65%.

# ? Oct 15, 2016 03:30

Roland Jones: Aug 18, 2011; by Nyc_Tattoo

ComradeCosmobot posted:

It's insanely popular. If you thought the fig leaf of women's health was an obnoxious tool for the pro-life movement, you don't have any idea how popular a concept it is for anti-porn lobbyists. Everyone wants to be seen protecting women from STDs (for an understandable reason)

I think it's regularly polled upwards of 65%.

I can see that, but jeez, you'd think a bill that names its author and demands that he be a taxpayer-funded state employee so he can be morality inspector of all porn would get more scrutiny. Though, looking at the ballot itself, none of that is mentioned, just all the nice-sounding bits. Convenient that they leave that out on the only thing so many voters will actually read.

Also huh, looking at it on Ballotpedia, the Republicans, Democrats, and Libertarians are all officially united in opposition to it apparently. Wow. And yet it's still going to pass. What the hell.

# ? Oct 15, 2016 03:42

Dead Reckoning: Sep 13, 2011

Roland Jones posted:

Also huh, looking at it on Ballotpedia, the Republicans, Democrats, and Libertarians are all officially united in opposition to it apparently. Wow. And yet it's still going to pass. What the hell.

It's almost as if direct democracy is a terrible idea, because the overlap between "things which are practical and a good idea to do, but cannot be achieved via the normal legislative process" and "things the average voter can be convinced sound like a good idea" is thin indeed.

# ? Oct 15, 2016 04:03

ComradeCosmobot: Dec 4, 2004; USPOL July

I'm actually reading the text of the law now:

You can digitally remove the condom, but then the burden is on you to prove that a condom was used during filming.
While any given violation can only be penalized once, a producer can still be sued repeatedly for the same violation (because a civil action is available to the individual once the state says it won't go after them, such as when the state claims a judgment was already made). The producer has no right to seek attorney's fees if there were any legitimate grounds to file a motion (i.e. a producer needs to pay to keep an attorney on retainer at all times in order to get repeated filings for, say, any digitally edited films they might have made dismissed)
The proponent isn't explicitly named in the law. However, they do have the right to defend the law on behalf of the state should it get challenged in court and the state not be willing to take up the defense. It's basically there to prevent the law from being punted on a technicality like Hollingsworth v. Perry was.

ComradeCosmobot fucked around with this message at 04:18 on Oct 15, 2016

# ? Oct 15, 2016 04:16

Kobayashi: Aug 13, 2004; by Nyc_Tattoo

Someday the death penalty will be repealed. I'm looking forward to that day.

And gently caress me between my state and city ballot guides, I literally have over 500 pages of material to look through. This is insane.

# ? Oct 15, 2016 04:52

GenderSelectScreen: Mar 7, 2010; I DON'T KNOW EITHER DON'T ASK ME; College Slice

What would happen if both ~~60 and 62~~ passed?

EDIT: I meant 62 and 66. :downs:

GenderSelectScreen fucked around with this message at 17:41 on Oct 15, 2016

# ? Oct 15, 2016 09:46

Roland Jones: Aug 18, 2011; by Nyc_Tattoo

Ahahahaha, oh man. Yesterday, when I brought up the ballots, my dad told me to check out "the Fresno Lincoln Club, the Heritage Foundation, and the NRA" voter guides. Out of curiosity, I actually decided to do so, just to see. The latter two so far don't seem to actually have CA voter guides (NRA does have a site where it rates candidates, and is obviously against Prop 63, but that's it), but the first one has a full voter guide, and I actually laughed at some parts of it.

quote:

Proposition 65 � Carryout Bags - Vote NO.
When we saw that there was an initiative to resolve a carryout bag issue, we stopped reading. Vote NO.
[...]
Proposition 67 � Ban on Single Use Plastic Bags - Vote NO.
See our rationale under Proposition 65. Vote NO.

Also, they're against Prop 60. And... 66, but possibly because they misunderstand it? I'm not sure; they use the same rationale to oppose it as they do 62, so.

Though this does remind me that I need to learn more about Measures T and U; the ballot's language on them seems deliberately opaque.

# ? Oct 15, 2016 16:14

Proust Malone: Apr 4, 2008

Does anyone know if the ratio allocated by 51 matches the current budget? It says of 9b, 3 goes to new construction, 3 for modernization, 1 for charter, and 2 for CCs.

Does this jive with how much money currently goes out? And is it weird that CCs are lumped in with k-12 funding? Though higher ed funding was separate.

# ? Oct 15, 2016 18:07

ComradeCosmobot: Dec 4, 2004; USPOL July

Hitlers Gay Secret posted:

What would happen if both ~~60 and 62~~ passed?

EDIT: I meant 62 and 66.

The one with more votes wins.

# ? Oct 15, 2016 18:58

GenderSelectScreen: Mar 7, 2010; I DON'T KNOW EITHER DON'T ASK ME; College Slice

ComradeCosmobot posted:

The one with more votes wins.

So repealing the death penalty wouldn't negate the speeding up of it?

# ? Oct 15, 2016 19:24

Instant Sunrise: Apr 12, 2007; The manger babies don't have feelings. You said it yourself.

62 and 66 have poison pill clauses in them that invalidate the other measure.

If both pass and 62 has more votes, it's nature invalidates 66.

If both pass and 66 has more votes, it has a poison pill clause that invalidates prop 62

# ? Oct 15, 2016 19:33

Sundae: Dec 1, 2005

Does anyone have a decent write-up about Prop 52? The bill text is absolutely useless.

Edit: Never mind -- VotersEdge had a bunch of newspaper articles explaining the system. http://votersedge.org/en/ca/ballot/election/area/42/measures/measure/2015?id=statewide-42-ca#measure-opinion

Sundae fucked around with this message at 19:55 on Oct 15, 2016

# ? Oct 15, 2016 19:44

Combed Thunderclap: Jan 4, 2011

Disregard, wrong thread.

Combed Thunderclap fucked around with this message at 01:58 on Oct 16, 2016

# ? Oct 16, 2016 01:29

FCKGW: May 21, 2006

Sundae posted:

Does anyone have a decent write-up about Prop 52? The bill text is absolutely useless.

Edit: Never mind -- VotersEdge had a bunch of newspaper articles explaining the system. http://votersedge.org/en/ca/ballot/election/area/42/measures/measure/2015?id=statewide-42-ca#measure-opinion

Thanks for posting a link to votersedge, I was trying to remember the name of that and was drawing a blank.

# ? Oct 16, 2016 05:42

Sydin: Oct 29, 2011; Another spring commute

Finally got my voter information guide yesterday and I'd just like to tentatively suggest that if we really needed 222 pages to describe the propositions this year, we're probably doing something wrong :downs:

# ? Oct 16, 2016 19:00

ShutteredIn: Mar 24, 2005; El Campeon Mundial del Acordeon

Sydin posted:

Finally got my voter information guide yesterday and I'd just like to tentatively suggest that if we really needed 222 pages to describe the propositions this year, we're probably doing something wrong

Laws are complicated, friend. Also everyone waits until a presidential election to get more votes on progressive things.

# ? Oct 16, 2016 22:39

Instant Sunrise: Apr 12, 2007; The manger babies don't have feelings. You said it yourself.

also we passed a law a little while ago that requires all ballot propositions going forward to be on the general election ballots and not the primary

# ? Oct 16, 2016 22:45

Leperflesh: May 17, 2007

Also the guide is packed with other pointless poo poo.

# ? Oct 17, 2016 01:40

Kobayashi: Aug 13, 2004; by Nyc_Tattoo

Leperflesh posted:

Also the guide is packed with other pointless poo poo.

Not really, unless you count the full text of the laws as "pointless poo poo."

# ? Oct 17, 2016 02:37

FCKGW: May 21, 2006

voter guide should just be youtube urls imo

# ? Oct 17, 2016 03:37

Sundae: Dec 1, 2005

I love that your state even has a voter guide, so there. :colbert:

# ? Oct 17, 2016 04:01

Trabisnikof: Dec 24, 2005

Kobayashi posted:

Not really, unless you count the full text of the laws as "pointless poo poo."

My city voter guide has a lot of wasted space where the candidate has their picture and basically repeats their name and the election three times. Then it lists 20 people's names that support them so you known who to vote for based on what fancy names support them.

# ? Oct 17, 2016 04:21

WAR CRIME GIGOLO: Oct 3, 2012; The Hague
tryna get me
for these glutes

My monthly ballot box(10.99) contained a Build the Wall T-Shirt & Hat combo pack.

# ? Oct 17, 2016 04:37

mazzi Chart Czar: Sep 24, 2005

FCKGW posted:

voter guide should just be youtube urls imo

Nooooo, if they put up a typical stoner to argue for legalization that would make vote against it so hard and so fast my punch hole pen would set fire to my ballet.

# ? Oct 17, 2016 04:44

Leperflesh: May 17, 2007

Kobayashi posted:

Not really, unless you count the full text of the laws as "pointless poo poo."

about the cover photo
letter from the county registrar
party endorsements
most arguments in favor/against pages are at least 50% blank
The full text of measure X (contra costa) is stuffed with promotional crap, charts, etc... it's way more than just the text of a law. In all it's 24 pages long
advertisement begging for poll workers
page about alternate language assistance randomly near the end of the english half of the book
a bunch of stuff on provisional and early voting taking 4+ pages instead of one

and then the whole thing again in spanish. Which yes, absolutely, but why not a separate spanish book?

I think you could cut the size by a third without losing any content. And measure x is at least half of my book, because it's a complete financial plan/report, not just an explanation of a bill.

# ? Oct 17, 2016 05:05

GenderSelectScreen: Mar 7, 2010; I DON'T KNOW EITHER DON'T ASK ME; College Slice

Leperflesh posted:

Which yes, absolutely, but why not a separate spanish book?

By lumping all the languages in one book, you eliminate the risk of running out of one language's book.

# ? Oct 17, 2016 16:41

Kobayashi: Aug 13, 2004; by Nyc_Tattoo

Leperflesh posted:

I think you could cut the size by a third without losing any content. And measure x is at least half of my book, because it's a complete financial plan/report, not just an explanation of a bill.

Tell me more about your "common sense" redesign of the voter guide.

# ? Oct 17, 2016 16:57

Sydin: Oct 29, 2011; Another spring commute

Trabisnikof posted:

My city voter guide has a lot of wasted space where the candidate has their picture and basically repeats their name and the election three times. Then it lists 20 people's names that support them so you known who to vote for based on what fancy names support them.

Wait you got a city voter guide too? Dammit, I could actually use that! :mad:

The propositions have been beat to death at this point so I know where to vote there, but I would have appreciated the full text of all the various local measures.

# ? Oct 17, 2016 17:28

Sundae: Dec 1, 2005

Or we could leave it the way it is and be happy that this state even lets us know what's being voted on in the first place instead of hiding everything in a locked basement office that is only open every third phase of the moon, provided it's a Tuesday between 1-3PM.

Why yes, I've lived in the south and the midwest. Why do you ask? :v:

# ? Oct 17, 2016 17:29

Instant Sunrise: Apr 12, 2007; The manger babies don't have feelings. You said it yourself.

Sydin posted:

Wait you got a city voter guide too? Dammit, I could actually use that! The propositions have been beat to death at this point so I know where to vote there, but I would have appreciated the full text of all the various local measures.

those usually come with the sample ballots fwiw

# ? Oct 17, 2016 17:37

Leperflesh: May 17, 2007

Kobayashi posted:

Tell me more about your "common sense" redesign of the voter guide.

Argument from authority is a fallacy but I'm gonna do it anyway:

In real life I'm a technical writer. It's clear to me that this book is designed by a committee and not by someone with UI/UX training. The order of the content is nonsensical, it lacks any sort of TOC or index for guideposting, even the page numbers are unnecessarily complicated and dumb. It's not that big a deal but yeah, it's bigger than it needs to be and yes, a book that is thicker than it needs to be discourages people from reading it at all and possibly follows on to discourage people from voting at all. "I don't have time to read this poo poo, gently caress it" has to be a common refrain. It certainly is in the domain of other technical documentation.

It's very good to give people full access to the laws they're voting on, and clear instructions on how to vote. That should and could be done better.

# ? Oct 17, 2016 17:57

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 15, 2024 08:41

Sundae: Dec 1, 2005

I actually do agree with you that the books are poorly structured, by the way. I'm just happy to finally live somewhere that at least pretends to give a poo poo what voters think.

# ? Oct 17, 2016 19:31

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > California Politics: Madame Senator, this is a morgue

«‹›957 »