HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Places » U.S. » California (Group) » Recommendations on CA sta...

Thu Oct 18, 2012, 01:41 PM

Recommendations on CA state propositions.

I like this particular source for info and recommendations on the CA propositions.

http://www.bohemian.com/northbay/vote/Content?oid=2316965

14 replies, 2324 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 14 replies Author Time Post
Reply Recommendations on CA state propositions. (Original post)
Webster Green Oct 2012 OP
stopbush Oct 2012 #1
KamaAina Oct 2012 #2
Chilly8 Nov 2012 #14
pinboy3niner Oct 2012 #3
roody Oct 2012 #6
We are Devo Oct 2012 #4
xxqqqzme Oct 2012 #5
pinboy3niner Oct 2012 #7
savalez Oct 2012 #8
Mike Nelson Oct 2012 #9
nwliberalkiwi Oct 2012 #10
Webster Green Oct 2012 #12
mackerel Oct 2012 #11
cbayer Nov 2012 #13

Response to Webster Green (Original post)

Thu Oct 18, 2012, 02:15 PM

1. CA Dem party endorsements:

Yes on Props 30, 34, 35, 36, 37, 40

No on Props 31, 32, 33, 38

Neutral on Prop 39

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Webster Green (Original post)

Thu Oct 18, 2012, 02:30 PM

2. No on Proposition 35

No one argues that stiffer fines and penalties for human traffickers aren't warranted. Unfortunately, the devil is in the details of this ballot measure. Ambiguous language and broad definitions would set up dangerous legal challenges to the rights of both victims and suspects, while at the same time putting burdensome new requirements on local law enforcement agencies that are already overwhelmed with tracking the state's 90,000-plus registered sex offenders. Consensual relationships between teenagers hovering just above and below the age of 18 could also fall into a legal gray area. Proposition 35 will likely pass, because its goal is noble, but the execution of the language leaves much to be desired.


Also, I love that the altie paper in the area of the secretive Bohemian Grove is called the "Bohemian"!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KamaAina (Reply #2)

Tue Nov 6, 2012, 05:17 PM

14. Prop 35 will be unenforceable


No one argues that stiffer fines and penalties for human traffickers aren't warranted. Unfortunately, the devil is in the details of this ballot measure. Ambiguous language and broad definitions would set up dangerous legal challenges to the rights of both victims and suspects, while at the same time putting burdensome new requirements on local law enforcement agencies that are already overwhelmed with tracking the state's 90,000-plus registered sex offenders. Consensual relationships between teenagers hovering just above and below the age of 18 could also fall into a legal gray area. Proposition 35 will likely pass, because its goal is noble, but the execution of the language leaves much to be desired.




Disclosing internet identities is also unenforceable. All someone would have to do is use a VPN to hide what they are doing. This why Alpha Crucis Radio urges Californians to vote no on propositions. This will burden law enforcement with someone the cannot possibly enforce, if someone is teach saavy enough.

Being that most VPN services do not keep logs, they will render this law useless and why Alpha Crucis Radio urges a NO vote on prop 35. It will never work.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Webster Green (Original post)

Thu Oct 18, 2012, 02:31 PM

3. ACLU of Southern California Ballot Guide

Prop. 30: YES - Generates $6-9 billion for schools and services
Prop. 31: NO - Shifts checks and balances and erodes state laws that protect families and workers
Prop. 32: NO - Discriminates against labor union political speech
Prop. 34: YES - Replaces California's death penalty with life in prison without the possibility of parole
Prop. 35: NO - Misleads voters by increasing criminal penalties without reducing human trafficking
Prop. 36: YES - Restores the original intent of the Three Strikes law
Prop. 38: Neutral - Increases funding for low-income students
Prop. 39: YES - Closes corporate tax loophole to raise $1 billion each year
Prop. 40: YES - Upholds the State Senate district maps drawn by independent commission

http://www.aclu-sc.org/community/let-me-vote/?etname=Ballot+guide&etjid=511071

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pinboy3niner (Reply #3)

Sat Oct 20, 2012, 01:27 AM

6. What about 37?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Webster Green (Original post)

Thu Oct 18, 2012, 07:24 PM

4. Thanks!

I'll be checking back here come Nov. 7...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Webster Green (Original post)

Fri Oct 19, 2012, 04:10 PM

5. But there is

a Yes on 31 planted in the middle of DU home page, WTF!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Webster Green (Original post)

Sat Oct 20, 2012, 02:41 AM

7. CHART showing recs of CA Dem Party and 13 state labor and progressive organizations

The pdf chart at the link is provided by the Courage Campaign:

http://courage.3cdn.net/dc70549415e8bf39a2_6cm6bhvzs.pdf

Where they take a position, These organizations recommend:

NO: 31, 32, 33, 38

YES: 30, 34, 35*, 36, 37, 39, 40

* Despite the Yes recommendation on 35, the Courage Campaign notes that there are constitutional concerns about this proposition:


PROP 35: Increased Penalties for Human Trafficking

Increases penalties for human trafficking, sex offenses and imposes new restrictions on registered sex offenders. Some allies believe it is unconstitutional and have concerns about increasing penalties within the troubled criminal justice system, which incarcerates people of color and the poor at a disproportionately high rate.

More info: http://www.couragecampaign.org/page/content/Prop35/


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Webster Green (Original post)

Sat Oct 20, 2012, 02:01 PM

8. Voted today. Thanks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Webster Green (Original post)

Mon Oct 22, 2012, 07:49 AM

9. thank you! -nt

*

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Webster Green (Original post)

Tue Oct 23, 2012, 04:56 AM

10. Question on Prop 32

Why the hell do I see an add on DU to vote YES on Prop 32. Have seen several adds for Repukes and Rightwingers on DU.
What the hell is up with the people at DU?!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nwliberalkiwi (Reply #10)

Tue Oct 30, 2012, 11:19 PM

12. The ads generate revenue for the site, and cost wing-nuts money.

You can donate to DU, and they will go away.

Or just use Ad Block.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Webster Green (Original post)

Tue Oct 30, 2012, 03:28 PM

11. Measure D in San Joaquin County

Does anyone have a rec on this measure?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Webster Green (Original post)

Thu Nov 1, 2012, 08:57 PM

13. Thank you so much for posting this.

It is exactly what I came here to look for.

Happy voting!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread