For the November 4, 2014 California State General Election
Proposition Recommendations from various conservative sources.
ROBYN’S PROPOSITION RECOMEMNDATIONS
Proposition 1: NO
Proposition 2: YES
Proposition 45: NO
Proposition 46: NO
Proposition 47: NO
Proposition 48: NO
Conservative Orange County Supervisor John Moorlach’s Recommendations
SaveCalifornia.com-Election Central’s Recommendations
Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association’s Recommendations
Frank Kacer / Christian Citizenship Council’s Recommendations
Election Forum Voter Guide’s Recommendations
California Republican Party’s Recommendations
Nancy Sandoval’s Propositions & Candidate Recommendations
Nancy is a knowledgeable conservative in Orange County.
I (Robyn) check out Nancy’s picks in every election.
Official State of California Voting Info for the Nov 4, 2014 California General Election
Text of Propositions and Official Arguments For/Against
“Editorial: Water bond could leave state awash in new debt. Bipartisan wave of legislators want to borrow $7.5 billion for water projects,” OC Register, 8/14/14
“Prop 45: CA Doubles Down On Obamacare With New 'Health Care Czar,'” by Jon Fleischman, 8/14/14, Breitart.com/Breitbart-California
“Prop. 47 is anything but ‘safe’ for neighborhoods and schools,” by U-T San Diego Editorial Board, Sept. 7, 2014
CONSERVATIVE ORANGE COUNTY SUPERVISOR JOHN MOORLACH’S PROPOSITION RECOMMENDATIONS
For the November 4, 2014 California General Election
Proposition 1 - Water Bond - NO
General Obligation – Paid out of State Budget
Proposition 2 - Rainy Day Fund - YES
State Reserve Policy – No Brainer & Over Due
Proposition 45 - Healthcare Insurance Rates - NO
Managed Care Nightmare
Proposition 46 - Medical Negligence Law Suits - NO
Increases Limits – Will raise insurance costs
Proposition 47 - Criminal Sentence Reductions - NO
Sets Aside Imaginary Savings – Accounting Bunk
Proposition 48 - Indian Gaming Compacts - NO
Keep Indian Casinos on the Reservations
SaveCalifornia.com-Election Central - State Proposition Recommendations for the Nov 4, 2014 CA General Election
“SaveCalifornia.com's position on ballot measures are based on our pro-family values, which are founded on Biblical principles for the benefit of people everywhere. “
“PROP 1 NO
What the California Attorney General calls it: “Water Bond. Funding for Water Quality, Supply, Treatment, and Storage Projects.”
What SaveCalifornia.com says:
This deceptive measure doesn’t guarantee new water storage, spends the bulk of the $7.5 BILLION fund on “environmental” projects, makes people statewide pay for something most won’t benefit from, wastes money that you already pay in taxes, actually costs $14.4 BILLION, and is window-dressing for politicians interested in reelection. Vote No on Prop. 1 and send Jerry Brown and the Legislature back to the drawing board.” Read more here on Prop 1.
“PROP 2 YES
What the California Attorney General calls it: “State Budget. Budget Stabilization Account. Legislative Constitutional Amendment.”
What SaveCalifornia.com says:
Proposition 2 is a baby step in the right direction, immediately saving more taxpayer dollars in a special coffer, purportedly to avoid future state budget deficits. Not great, because it's still too easy to drain this “Rainy Day” fund, but vote Yes on Prop. 2 because it sends a fiscally conservative message and the new “budget stabilization account” would be stronger than the current, meaningless current fund, which is full of holes.”
“SaveCalifornia.com: PROP 45 NO
What the California Attorney General calls it: “Healthcare Insurance. Rate Changes. Initiative Statute.”
What SaveCalifornia.com says:
Proposition 45 would dramatically increase government control of private health care (as if you thought Obamacare didn't already do that). Under Prop. 45, government -- not the private sector -- would be in charge of prices and treatments. By adding not merely big-government regulation, but big-government control, California families will be allowed fewer treatments, suffer unjustified delays, experience worse hospital-type healthcare, and more witness more lawsuits that will cost more time and more money. If you don’t want another layer of government bureaucracy – and a thick layer at that – which takes away even more of your health-care freedom, vote No on Prop. 45.”
“SaveCalifornia.com: PROP 46 NO
What the California Attorney General calls it: “Drug and Alcohol Testing Of Doctors. Medical Negligence Lawsuits. Initiative Statute.”
What SaveCalifornia.com says:
Proposition 46 is a dream for lawyers who like to sue doctors unjustly, which raise the costs for all of us. Quadrupling the cash awards the State permits for medical malpractice lawsuits? Approving Prop. 46 will definitely increase malpractice insurance rates, which will increase health insurance costs for California families. We believe in honest, competent medical practices, but not in unjustly feathering the pockets of lawyers who love to sue for money. Prop. 46 is unnecessary because there are already enough penalties for malpractice and physicians' fears of malpractice lawsuits. Vote No on Prop. 46.”
“SaveCalifornia.com: PROP 47 NO
What the California Attorney General calls it: "Criminal Sentences. Misdemeanor Penalties. Initiative Statute."
What SaveCalifornia.com says:
Proposition 47 would release even more criminals onto the streets – approximately 40,000 every year, according to the Legislative Analyst’s office. By turning many felonies into misdemeanors, criminals now convicted for grand theft, receiving stolen property, forging checks, shoplifting, and drug possession would be conceivably let go. And there’s a possibility that “violent” or “serious” criminals could be let go too, if Prop. 47 redefines one of their convictions. This initiative is written by people who believe humans are basically good, but this philosophy neither reflects reality nor the word of God. Children and families need more protection, not less. If this passes, your community will see more thefts and more drug abuse – because the fear factor will be decreased. Vote No on Prop. 47.”
“SaveCalifornia.com: PROP 48 NO
What the California Attorney General calls it: “Indian Gaming Compacts. Referendum.”
What SaveCalifornia.com says:
Vote NO on Proposition 48 in order to prevent a huge gambling casino from being built in the Central Valley right next to the 99 freeway, under the auspices of "Indian land." Gambling hurts families, and more families will be harmed unless 48 is defeated. This referendum achieving the ballot is your chance to reverse a bad law that was passed by the Legislature and signed by the Governor, even if only temporarily. If Prop. 48 isn’t defeated, you can expect to see highly-addicted slot-machine casinos popping up in major urban areas and next to major freeways, on what corrupt federal bureaucrats and California’s governor deceptively call “Indian land” that has been “newly obtained." Vote No on Prop. 48.
A principle to remember on local taxes, bonds, fees, and assessments:
SaveCalifornia.com knows that big government often robs people of personal responsibility and saddles working families, property owners, and small business owners with greater financial burdens. It's all because big government refuses to investigate and slash its own waste. Because of the influence of government unions and bureaucracy, independent, tough audits are simply not seen. Therefore, we encourage you to vote No on any and all tax increases, bonds (which is borrowing money, and always more expensive than a direct tax because you must also pay back interest), fees, and assessments. It's pro-family to keep more of your hard-earned money, so it's pro-family to oppose wasteful government taking more money from your family. They like to take it incrementally, so you must consistently oppose even the smallest tax/bond/fee/assessment increases in order to inhibit the government from taking more and more and more from your family.”
HOWARD JARVIS TAXPAYERS ASSOCIATION - State Proposition Recommendations for the Nov 4, 2014 CA General Election
Prop 1 – No Position on the Water Bond (as of 10/5/14)
Prop 2 – YES! -Rainy Day Fund
Prop 46 – NO! – Medical Lawsuits
FRANK KACER / CHRISTIAN CITIZENSHIP COUNCIL - State Proposition Recommendations for the Nov 4, 2014 CA General Election
Robyn’s Note: Frank does a great job on proposition recommendations.
Kacer’s General Guidelines - How I try to approach Propositions:
- Do: First read the Summary, Analysis, Actual Text, then the Arguments for and against
- Do: Ask yourself if this is a proper role of government
- Do: Ask yourself if this is the right thing to do, who benefits, and what consequences will result
- Do: Determine what principles apply (Biblical, conservative, practical)
- Do: Apply common sense; come to a tentative conclusion – compare to positions of those you trust
- Do: Concentrate on the major implications and not on trivial aspects to decide upon
- Don’t: Rely on organizations by name only (many sound good but can be deceptive)
- Don’t: Wait until the last day to do your research (spread it out over time)
- Don’t: Support government going into future debt (some very rare exceptions)
- Don’t: Allow rare circumstances or emotional arguments to overly influence you (“rare cases make bad law”)
- Don’t: Support anything that’s too complex to completely understand (beware obfuscation)
- Don’t: Accept a lot of bad legislation for the sake of a little good legislation
Kacer: Prop 1 (Bond): Water Quality, Supply, and Infrastructure Improvement Act of 2014 – Recommend Voting NO
$7.12B bond for water supply and infrastructure (water storage; increase water supplies; protect and restore watersheds; improve water quality; increase flood protection). Also uses $425M unsold general obligation bonds from other Propositions. To be repaid out of general fund over 40 years (principle and interest: ~ $14.5B).
Infrastructure a valid role of government (common good): requiring routine, long term attention with existing revenues (Rom 13:4; James 4:17; Prov 6:6-8). Bonds wrongly presume upon the future (James 4:13-14; Prov 22:3); Prop allows continued irresponsible leadership and indebtedness of tax payers (Prov 26:11; 22:7; Ps 37:21a); and stealing from future revenues without regard to consequences (1 Tim 6:10a; Prov 30:15a)
Kacer: Prop 2 (C): State Budget. Budget Stabilization Account – Recommend Voting YES
Changes existing State rainy day fund rules. Makes fund transfer to Budget Stabilization Account (BSA) mandatory not discretionary. Increases BSA cap of 5% of General Fund to 10%. Requires extra spending over 15 yrs to pay down State debt faster ($300B current debt) - decreases total debt cost but reduces current funds available. School reserve Helps level school funding over good/bad fiscal years. Companion legislation limits local school reserves to 3% - 10% of annual budgets. Warning: very confusing Proposition; difficult to understand.
State must meet debt obligations, even unwise ones (Psalm 15:2-4; Eccl 5:4-6). Setting aside little by little for future uncertainties is proper (Prov 6:6-8; 13:11). Forces more discipline in saving and paying off debt for next 15 years (Prov 25:28). No additional funding for schools, only opportunity to level between years (Prov 22:6; Eph 6:4).
Kacer: Prop 45 (S): Health Insurance. Rate Changes – Recommend Voting NO
Subjects health insurance rates to Insurance Commissioner (elective office) approval semi-independent of benefits. Applies only to small businesses and individuals. Prohibits eligibility being based on prior coverage or credit history.
Removes “in and of itself” criteria (Prop 103; 1988) for auto & home insurance – creates litigation issues. Not role of government to artificially set rates (Rom 13:4). Unjust; removes market based competition (Prov 16:2). No objective criteria to evaluate rates (“affordable, available, competitive, fair”)(Prov 3:7). Will impact healthcare quality as rate control restricts doctor- patient best care decisions. Only affects small businesses & individuals – discriminatory (Lev19:15). Commissioner decisions subject to politics & lobbyists. Auto & homeowners rate control affects property; healthcare quality affects life – who would you trust for health care decisions?
Kacer: Prop 46 (S): Drug and Alcohol Testing of Doctors. Medical Negligence Lawsuits – Recommend Voting NO
Requires random drug & alcohol testing and reporting of doctors. Requires doctors to report doctors suspected of drug or alcohol impairment/negligence. Requires health care practitioners to consult on-line drug history database. Increases pain and suffering damage limits for negligence lawsuits ($250K to $1.1 M)
Appropriate to winnow out the dangerous and incompetent (Prov 20:26). However: Informing on each other creates hostile environment (Prov 29:12) and culpability nightmare. Attorney created measure is conflict of interest:: personal gain. Appears as a bait and switch measure – using desirable safeguards to justify financial gain (Prov 20:14; 10:9). Medical community licensing board should verify doctors accountable to their vows (Num 30:2) or be sued.
Kacer: Prop 47 (S): Criminal Sentences. Misdemeanor Penalties – Recommend Voting NO
Re-defines nonviolent/non-serious felonies (shoplifting; forgery; grand theft (< $950); receiving stolen property; small amounts of controlled substances; handgun theft) as misdemeanors unless prior serious/violent convictions. Allows resentencing if prior felony conviction now classified as misdemeanor & no risk to public safety (no new violent felony). Annual savings to support K-12 prevention & support programs; victim services; mental health & drug treatment.
Allows felons with prior serious felonies to potentially be released: weakens 3-Strike law (Eccl 8:11). Only risk of future violent felonies a resentencing criteria (James 4:14-16). Date rape drug use a misdemeanor only. Bait & switch tactic: promises correction of felony “injustice” with intent to supplement schools and take another step to decriminalize drug use (Prov 20:14). Lowers standard of justice (Prov 6:30). Restitution not considered (Num 5:5-7).
Kacer: Prop 48 (R): Indian Gaming Compacts – Recommend Voting NO
Compact language is not made available to the voter, only the Legislative Analyst summary. Approves State compacts with North Fork Rancheria of Mono Indians (near Madera) and Wiyot Tribe (near Eureka) for 20 years. North Fork casino 38 miles from reservation (near CA 99); local governments and 73 other tribes benefit by percentage share; local regional casinos also paid more. Any environmental regulations suspended for construction of roads, etc.
Is gambling promotion a valid role of government (Rom 13:1-6)? Societal impact negative (vice; criminal activity; impact on families/lives; addictive). Encourages greed not contentment/responsibility (1 Tim 6:6; Prov 13:4). Promotes chasing of fantasies (Prov 12:11). Doesn’t promote responsible Indian self-sufficiency (Prov 28:6), only dependence on destructive means; nothing of value produced; used by other interests as conduits (Jer 17:11). Very bad precedent for casinos to be located virtually anywhere
Provided by email@example.com, also available at www.christiancitizenshipcouncil.org
ELECTION FORUM VOTER GUIDE - State Proposition Recommendations for the Nov 4, 2014 CA General Election
Election Forum: Proposition 1. Water Quality, Supply, and Infrastructure Improvement Act of 2014 — State of California (Bond Measure – Majority Approval Required) Should the state sell $7.1 billion in additional general obligation bonds–as well as redirect $425 million in unsold general obligation bonds that were previously approved by voters for resource-related uses–to fund various water-related programs? – NO
Election Forum: Proposition 2. State Budget. Budget Stabilization Account — State of California (Legislative Constitutional Amendment – Majority Approval Required) Should the State Constitution be amended to change how the state pays down debt and saves money in reserves? – YES
Election Forum: Proposition 45. Healthcare Insurance. Rate Changes — State of California (Initiative Statute – Majority Approval Required) Should changes in some health insurance rates require the Insurance Commissioner’s approval before going into effect? – NO
Election Forum: Proposition 46. Drug and Alcohol Testing of Doctors. Medical Negligence Lawsuits — State of California (Initiative Statute – Majority Approval Required) Should California require random drug testing of doctors, require doctors to check a statewide database before prescribing certain drugs, and raise the cap on noneconomic damages in medical negligence lawsuits? – NO
Election Forum: Proposition 47. Criminal Sentences. Misdemeanor Penalties — State of California (Initiative Statute – Majority Approval Required) Should the penalties for certain offenders convicted of nonserious, nonviolent crimes be reduced from felonies to misdemeanors? – YES
Election Forum: Proposition 48. Indian Gaming Compacts — State of California (Referendum – Majority Approval Required) Should the tribal gaming compacts negotiated by Governor Brown with the North Fork and Wiyot Tribes and ratified by legislative statute be allowed to go into effect? – NO
(Robyn’s Note: I’m voting NO on Proposition 47)
CALIFORNIA REPUBLICAN PARTY - State Proposition Recommendations for the Nov 4, 2014 CA General Election
CAGOP - Proposition 1 – YES
Water Quality, Supply, and Infrastructure Improvement Act of 2014
(Robyn Note on Proposition 1: I and four other conservative sources on this page are recommending a NO vote.)
CAGOP - Proposition 2 – YES
State Budget. Budget Stabilization Account. Legislative Constitutional Amendment
CAGOP - Proposition 45 – NO
Healthcare Insurance. Rate Changes. Initiative Statute
CAGOP - Proposition 46 – NO
Drug and Alcohol Testing of Doctors. Medical Negligence Lawsuits. Initiative Statute
CAGOP - Proposition 47 – NO
Criminal Sentences. Misdemeanor Penalties. Initiative Statute