Propositions! 51, 52, 53, 54

Alright, by popular request, here is the first batch of my recommendations on the upcoming statewide ballot measures.

Prop 51 - Eh. This would authorize $9 billion in state bonds to be used towards school construction and improvements.  It would go to K-12 schools and community and state colleges and universities.   I have mixed feelings on this one.  On the one hand, public schools could use money for facilities, and a bond issue is an appropriate way to raise money for capital-intensive projects like this.  On the other hand, it would increase the state's indebtedness (general obligation bonds like these are not free), and opponents point out that this measure is designed to benefit construction companies.  In addition, this is a change in funding, as local school districts can and do issue bonds to fund their needs, and this is a shift to a statewide approach, so Sacramento gets to pick winners and losers (which may not match local needs).  Interestingly, Governor Brown opposes this measure, but lots of local school districts support it.  Go figure.  Feel free to vote either way on this - it is not a disaster if it loses.

Prop 52 - Yes. This is a technical tweak regarding how federal money flows to the state for health care.  Trying to explain it is difficult, and any explanation is likely to be either baffling or soporific.  I would just point out that it is supported by the Democratic, Republican and Green Parties, the California Chamber of Commerce, a bunch of unions, and legislators from both parties.  Seems like a yes vote would be fine.

Prop 53 - No. This would require voter approval for the state to issue revenue bonds for amounts over $2 billion. (Right now they can be approved by the legislature.) Revenue bonds are paid for by users of the project that is funded (like tolls on a bridge), as opposed to just being paid out of the state's general fund like general obligation bonds (see Prop 51 above), so they are less of a burden on taxpayers.  I think the opponents have raised good arguments, including: there is no exemption for emergency projects (think repairs after an earthquake - you want those to happen fast); and some local projects would require a statewide vote, reducing local control.  This is also the pet project of a Central Valley agribusiness owner, Dean Cortopassi.  Seems like overall a poor idea. Vote no.

Prop 54 -Yes.  The main thing this proposition would do is require that a bill be published in print and online at least 72 hours before a vote is taken.  Having seen the legislature use the "gut and amend" process where a bill is suddenly transformed into something radically different and almost immediately voted on with little or no analysis, I think this is a good idea.  Too many important bills end up being voted on at the last minute with no time for anyone to really understand what is in them (other than the staff and/or lobbyist who drafted the new language), resulting in (at best) poorly written laws. I won't say what the worst is.  The legislature needs to do things in a more transparent and deliberative manner.  This is a step in that direction.  Vote yes.

More later - including YES on 62 (ending of death penalty) and No on 66 (speeding up death penalty)