State Propositions Finally [1 Attachment]

Hi All! Better late than never, here is my short write-up on the state propositions that I would like to include on our website to make it one-stop shopping for any voters that go to our website (and we hope that many are going now with all the election activity and canvassing). Please review and make any comments or corrections as necessary. I think Prop 40 is basically a NO RECOMMENDATION to Libertarians, but as individual voters we still have to decide yea or nay, so I voted YES for the reason stated. I will copy and paste it here and also attach the document to make sure everything is readable. Starchild will write up the NO on Prop 35 and post it, since he knows it better than myself.

Prop 30-Temporary Taxes to Fund Education-NO. California is already the sixth highest state in taxes. By taxing everyone with a ¼ cent sales tax increase and also the wealthy with higher personal income tax rates, California will encourage consumers and companies to move to other lower-tax states. Instead, the state should balance its budget by enacting pension reform and reducing bureaucracy.

Prop 31-State Budget/State & Local Government-NO. This measure has several good features like requiring performance reviews of all state programs and performance goals in state and local budgets. However, Section 2 (3e) encourages “local governments to collaborate to achieve goals more effectively addressed at a regional scale.” This will not “move government closer to the people,” as the measure says, but rather the opposite. Elected local government officials can be voted out of office, but appointed regional bureaucrats from organizations like ABAG (Association of Bay Area Governments) and the MTC (Metropolitan Transportation Commission) are not accountable to the voters and can impose their “visions” on the people without fear of retaliation by the voters.

Prop 32-Political Contributions by Payroll Deduction-YES. As long as big government continues, vested interest groups will continue to fight for a share of favored treatment and taxpayer money. This ballot measure won’t stop that practice, but it will be a step in the right direction by limiting the current practice of unions automatically deducting pay from employee paychecks for political purposes. Such deductions will have to be voluntary and authorized yearly in writing by the employees—and as Libertarians we favor voluntary actions over coerced takings.

Prop 33-Auto Insurance Companies/Prices Based on Driver’s History of Insurance Coverage-YES. Libertarians favor voluntary transactions between consumers and the companies that serve them. While car insurance will continue to be heavily regulated—something we disagree with—this ballot measure is also a step in the right direction by removing regulations on discounts/surcharges based on past insurance coverage. This will encourage more competition in the industry and ultimately lower rates for most consumers.

Prop 34-Death Penalty-YES. Few things can be worse than the state executing an innocent person for a crime he/she didn’t commit. Especially in recent years DNA testing has exonerated a significant number of condemned prisoners for crimes they never committed. Passage of this measure will ensure that no innocent person is ever executed again by the state in the ultimate miscarriage of justice.

Prop 36-Three Strikes Law/Repeat Felony Offenders-YES. When the voters passed the Three Strikes Law, the intention was to get violent criminals off the streets. But as often happens with new laws, unintended consequences occur, and in this case offenders received much longer prison terms when their third offense was not violent. This is a miscarriage of justice—the violent criminals deserve the really long sentences, not the nonviolent ones. Under this measure, the nonviolent offenders may have their terms reduced to more reasonably match their crimes, but the violent offenders (for murder, rape, and child molestation) will not benefit from this correction of the law.

Prop 37-Genetically Engineered Foods/Labeling-NO. While Libertarians value transparency and honesty in all trading transactions between consumers and businesses, this ballot measure will only result in larger government through increased rules and regulations of food labeling laws. The burden will be put on retailers, which is bound to increase food prices. Passage of this measure will be great for ambulance chasers since consumers will be able “to sue without needing to demonstrate that any specific damage occurred as a result of the alleged violation.”

Prop 38-Tax to Fund Education & Early Childhood Programs-NO. Taxes are already ridiculously high in California and the educational results of its government schools are correspondingly low. Increasing state income tax rates will not solve the problem of low performing schools. Only competition and innovation in education can improve the results. New Orleans, for example, switched mostly to charter schools after Katrina with remarkable improvements in scores and literacy.

Prop 39-Tax Treatment for Multistate Businesses/Clean Energy & Energy Efficiency Funding-NO. This is another tax increase, except this one is directed at multistate companies, rather than the taxpayers directly. It will create yet another bureaucracy to oversee the confiscated taxes go to favored alternative energy projects. (Remember Solyndra?) It will hurt consumers through increased prices for the companies that stay in California and will hurt job seekers when other companies relocate to lower tax states.

Prop 40-Redistricting/State Senate Districts-YES. This measure will not likely have an impact on freedom in California since it is only about choosing between how the State Senate districts will be divided up—either by the Citizens Redistricting Commission or “special masters” (yes, it actually says that in the Voter Information Guide on page 75) appointed by the California Supreme Court. Since the commission appears to be more impartial than “special masters,” a slight edge goes to the Citizens Redistricting Commission, which would tend to be less politically motivated.


Nice job Aubrey…


Great, Aubrey!! How about deadline of 10:00 pm tonight (Thursday 26th) for anyone to weigh in, after that..written in granite and I post on the LPSF website. It is less than two weeks to Election Day, so it would be good to post as soon as possible for the information to be useful.



Not bad…could be better but not bad.



  Here's some language for Prop. 35:

Prop 35-Harsher Penalties for Sex Work Under Guise of "Human Trafficking"-NO. This measure purports to go after human trafficking and prostitution involving minors, but will potentially ensnare innocent friends, family, and associates of sex workers as "human traffickers", with draconian penalties of up to twelve years in prison, $500,000 in fines (as much as $1.5 million in some cases), and registering as a "sex offender" for life, in addition to having to turn over all Internet profiles and passwords used by the person to the authorities, letting government get another toehold toward regulating and controlling Internet use. The measure further relies on previously debunked statistics such as the claim that "upwards of 300,000 American children are at risk of commercial sexual exploitation."

  I'm still not sure about Prop. 31, am thinking maybe we should take no position. Does the measure actually empower "regional government" in concrete ways with powers in which use they will be unaccountable to local voters, or is that just fuzzy language without real teeth? Can you say more about your thinking on the measure?

Love & Liberty,
                                ((( starchild )))

P.S. - Alan Grunberg and I are about to head down to Stanford for the Judge Jim Gray rally, may be able to fit another person in the Gary Johnson van if anyone wants to go and needs a ride.

Not only that, Debbie is a fighter against One Bay Area (Agenda 21).


Exactly…and a RKBA supporter.


Proposition 31 is difficult. A friend of mine asked me what I thought, and this is what I told her.


"Hi Ann,

Yep, this one is a toughie. When I first heard a discussion of it on NPR, I said, Oh great, a libertarian's dream come true. Then I actually read the text.

I had to agree with 1) Los Angeles Times: "1/3 of voters don't know what to think of the measure"; and 2) S.F. Examiner: "A jumbled wish list." The jumbled mess of ideas is not acceptable to me.

Interestingly, the main supporter behind Prop 31 is Nicolas Berggruen, an eccentric billionaire nicknamed "The homeless billionaire." His Berggruen Institute is a think tank that generates experimental ideas on economic development etc. Prop 31 would be great were it an experimental paper, not a proposition.

Within the text itself, what caught my attention, and that of some Tea Party activists that expressed their thoughts on blogs and other media, was,

1) Local entities can petition the state for exemption of state regulations (like what!?!)

2) Mandates for regional "cooperation." (Well, if state money is allocated to regions not to individual cities, sounds like forced cohabitation might be in the offing. Good luck Marin County in working with Berkeley.)

So, hope this helps, and it has not resulted in a jumbled mess of my own making! "

Hi Starchild! Thanks for the Prop 35 write-up. I reread Prop 31 yet again (this time the text at the back), and fell asleep reading it. It's way too long and complicated. I like it even less after reading the text at the back of the book. It sounds a lot more like Plan Bay Area after reading the text, especially when it comes to the section about Community Strategic Action Plans. In several spots it talks about "community equity," which sounds suspiciously like the redistribution of taxes that Plan Bay Area is all about. On page 89 in Section 2, 1(E), it says, "considers disparities within communities served by the Action Plan." Also on page 90 Section 5, it mentions "progress toward reducing community disparities" again. Tax money would go into Performance & Accountability Trust Fund that can go to counties that develop these Action Plans proposed in this measure and follow all the rules. In other words money is dangled in front of
county governments' eyes if they go regional and "cooperate" with each other. Such "cooperation" will, in my eyes, be for the benefit of larger government and less choice for individuals. I am even more strongly opposed to this bond measure now. We should definitely oppose it. Let's vote and then wrap up these propositions and post them all on our website by tonight 10 PM Friday October 26. We will set in super granite for Marcy by 10 PM tonight!


Hi Marcy! I didn't see any more discussion on the state measures, so please post them on the website as is. If you see any typos or any little thing that needs fixing, please just go ahead and change it. I trust your judgment and good horse sense. Done.


Great! Will do.