Whole Life Times: Take Initiative!

October 2004

Take Initiative!

by Danila Oder

On November 2, your ballot will show at least 14 state-level initiatives, plus local measures. WLT bases the following limited recommendations on our vision of a progressive, holistic, economically just society. We hope our shorthand guide encourages you to vote on these key issues. To see more complete nonpartisan explanations of state-level initiatives, tap into www.lao.ca.gov/ballot_source/propositions.aspx. A second voter resource providing in depth analysis of the issues and links to further research can be found at www.igs.berkeley.edu/library/htPropsIndex.html

Prop. 1A, Protection of Local Government Revenues. Passed by state legislature. Prohibits the state from taking property and sales tax from local (city and county) governments (raiding local governments at budget time allows state legislators to balance the state budget without raising taxes). Also requires the state to fund required local programs, or suspend their operation. WLT position: YES. State legislators should not fix the tax shortfall created by Prop. 13 by raids on local governments’ treasuries, but should raise taxes on high incomes and commercial property.

Prop. 59, Access to Government Information. Allows public access to state and local public information, such as government meeting agendas and transcripts. Puts a basic right-to-know in the state constitution. Exemptions for medical testing and law enforcement records. WLT position: YES.

Prop. 60, Statutes of 2004. Primary Elections. Prop. 60, put on the ballot by the legislature, is a response to Proposition 62. Prop. 60 requires that candidates for general elections continue to be selected, by party, in primary elections. WLT position: YES. Prop. 60 does not change the current party-primary election system.

Prop. 62, Elections, Primaries. Requires all primaries to be ‘open’—any voter can vote for the candidates of any party regardless of party affiliation. Prop. 62 applies to state offices, members of the Legislature and members of Congress (not to the U.S. president or party committees). WLT position: NO. Democrats have more to lose from Prop. 62 than Republicans. California leads the nation in progressive legislation because the California legislature has a Democratic majority including many progressives. Prop. 62 would result in fewer progressives.

Prop. 64, Unfair Business Competition. Funded by Microsoft, Bank of America, British Petroleum and General Motors, among others, Prop. 64 would prevent public-interest groups from suing to enforce environmental laws in the public interest unless they represented the primary victim. Opposed by Sierra Club. WLT position: NO. Businesses have a legitimate interest in preventing shakedown lawsuits, but Prop. 64’s scope is too broad.

Prop. 65, Local Government Revenues. Prop. 65 would prevent the state from raiding local treasuries, provided local governments give the state $2.6 billion in the next two years. But the initiative encourages local governments to seek more sales tax revenue, promoting urban sprawl. WLT position: NO. Proposition 1A, a better initiative, protects local government revenues without the negative side effects.

Prop. 66, Limitations on Three Strikes. Under this measure, only third time offenders convicted for the most serious felonies would be subject to Three Strikes Law’s extended sentences (at present, the law applies to all third time offender felonies). WLT cannot advise yes or no. The current law is too harsh, but Prop. 66 narrows the definition of serious felonies excessively, excluding crimes like attempted burglary, conspiracy to commit assault and participation in gang crimes. This one should go back for revisions.

Prop. 68, Tribal Gaming. Prop. 68 would increase slot machines in the state while opening up the gaming industry to non-tribal businesses. Indian tribes are ensured exemption from future state/local tax increases in exchange for a flat 25 percent of all slot/gaming device revenues. Opposed by Sierra Club because of environmental impact. WLT position: NO. This proposition threatens both the environment and the economy of the tribal gambling industry. Governor Schwarzenegger has already renegotiated tribal gambling contracts to satisfy the best interests of all parties.

Prop. 69, DNA Samples. Prop. 69 requires those convicted of any felony, sex or arson offense, and those arrested for felony sex offenses, murder or voluntary manslaughter, to provide DNA samples to law enforcement. However, beginning in 2009, this prop. would require DNA samples from those arrested for or charged with any felony offense. WLT position: NO. Prop. 69 threatens even the innocent with the invasive prospect of losing proprietary rights over their DNA to a government database.

Prop. 70, Tribal Gaming Compacts. Prop. 70 allows tribes to have an unlimited number of Nevada-style casinos on their land. Environmental reviews would be decreased. In return, tribes would pay a state tax of 8.84 percent of net profit. The compacts would last for 99 years (unlike the current 25-30 years). WLT position: NO. This measure will increase gambling and decrease environmental protections. Governor Schwarzenegger has already renegotiated tribal gambling contracts to satisfy the best interests of all parties.

Prop. 71, Stem Cell Research. The state would sell $3 billion in bonds. Proceeds would be dispensed by a new state agency to research the health applications of embryonic stem cells. State legislative analysts estimate total project cost at $6 billion including interest. Supporters say new revenues and royalties from patents could offset cost to the state. Opponents caution against such an expenditure on so young a science. WLT position: NO. In the 2002 fiscal year, the federal government dedicated less than $200 million in funding for national stem cell research. Prop. 71 commits California to spending 30 times as much, with no assurance of returns. Let’s leave this job to the Feds.

Prop. 72, Health Care Coverage. Requires employers with full time staffs of 200+ to shoulder at least 80 percent of the cost of employee and dependent health care benefits. Firms with 50-199 workers have to cover staff only (no dependents) and firms with 20-49 employees only if the state gave them a tax credit. WLT position: YES. Under this prop., over one million uninsured employees and dependents would receive health coverage.

LA City Measure O. $500 million bond to clean up water in municipal rivers and lakes and keep pollution from Santa Monica Bay. It would add $77 annually to the property tax bill of a home valued at $350,000. WLT position: YES. Property owners should have a vested interest in keeping L.A. clean.

Danila Oder is a freelance writer and environmental activist in Los Angeles. She began researching this story in 2003.

Recommend this page to a friend

Top Ten pages recommended to friends: