Ballot Measures - The Easy Ones: 32, 34, 37 and 40

The last post was about the propositions with budget impacts.  This one is about the ones that are just so clear (okay, clear to me) that it is easy for me to figure out how to vote.

Proposition 32
This is a particularly shameless power grab by the 1%, trying to neutralize the only really organized opposition to them that exists: labor unions.

It pretends to be neutral, by prohibiting both corporations and unions from funding political contributions from paycheck deductions.  But gee, only unions fund political contributions that way - corporations take the money they need for political contributions out well before it gets to workers' paychecks.

And it prohibits both corporations and unions from making political contributions.  (Which might not stand up under Citizens United.) But it allows Super PACs and uber-wealthy individuals to still make those contributions.  Vote no.  No, no, no.

Here are some editorials that lay it out pretty well:

http://www.contracostatimes.com/news/ci_21583886/contra-costa-times-editorial-proposition-32-is-deceptive

http://www.sacbee.com/2012/09/23/4843939/endorsements-proposition-32-power.html

Proposition 34
This one would end the death penalty in California.  (Okay, I know I already posted about this, but I feel strongly about this proposition.)  I am excited that this is on the ballot. Vote yes!  Yes, yes, yes!

As I put it when I was running for California Attorney General in 2010:


The death penalty process in California is broken, and the costs of California's death penalty are too high.  The costs are too high for taxpayers, for crime victims and their families, for the court system, for the convicted criminal, and ultimately for all Californians.

The death penalty has become an absurdity.  A criminal has already been convicted and is locked up in prison, yet we spend 20 or even 30 years more on the case, continuing to argue about whether we should kill him. Stop already! Move on, go after the violent criminals who are still out there.

As these cases drag on for decades, the costs of the lawyers on both sides are being paid by California's taxpayers.  Victims and their families keep being reminded of their trauma as the cases drag through the already clogged court system.  And what is the product of all this time, money, energy and pain? The state gets to kill one of its citizens.  Or maybe not.  The whole process is a pointless waste. The costs are far too high and the benefits far too low.  

The solution is to end imposition of the death penalty.  Life in prison without possiblity of parole would become the maximum sentence imposed in California.  With this one change, the appeals process could be cut to a fraction of its current duration, the state would save millions of dollars, our most capable and experienced prosecutors would be freed up to go after more violent criminals, court backlogs would be reduced, crime victims and their families could try to move on with their lives, and the state would no longer be in the business of killing.

Eliminate the death penalty.  California cannot afford it. 

And now we can eliminate it by voting yes on Proposition 34.

Proposition 37
Do you want to know what is in your food?  Proposition 37 would require that genetically engineered food be labeled to disclose that it has been genetically engineered.  Seems like a good idea to me, so I am voting yes on 37.

Countries in Europe and Asia already do this.  With labeling, if you like genetic engineering, you can buy foods produced that way.  If you don't like it, you can avoid them.  Right now you can't do either, because you can't easily tell from the label whether something has been genetically engineered or not.

Here are a couple of editorials:

http://articles.latimes.com/2012/oct/11/opinion/la-oe-imhoff-prop-37-gmo-labeling-20121011

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/frances-moore-lappe-and-anna-lappe/gmos-facts_b_2009917.html

Proposition 40
This one is a bit odd, and the back story is way convoluted.  But in the end it is pretty simple.  (The answer: vote yes.)

Remember how a few years ago we voted for a citizens commission to redraw legislative districts, rather than having the legislature gerrymander districts into weird shapes?  Well, even if you don't remember, we did that, and the commission drew up new maps accordingly.  Voting yes on Proposition 40 just confirms that yes, we do in fact want to use the maps drawn up by the process we voted for.

So yes means yes, we meant yes, and we still mean yes.  And pretty much everyone actually agrees on this one.  Vote yes on 40.

An editorial:

http://www.sfgate.com/opinion/openforum/article/Yes-on-Prop-40-for-fair-redistricting-3954742.php

And for the truly masochistic, here is the background story (that I can barely sort of follow):

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/opinion-la/la-ol-prop-40-fiasco-20121023,0,7870049.story