HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Places » U.S. » California (Group) » Latest polling: props 30 ...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Thu Nov 1, 2012, 11:23 PM

Latest polling: props 30 and 37 barely hanging on with ~48% Yes

I went to ballotpedia and looked up latest polling data for proposition 30 (http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/California_Proposition_30,_Sales_and_Income_Tax_Increase_%282012%29) and proposition 37 (http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/California_Proposition_37,_Mandatory_Labeling_of_Genetically_Engineered_Food_%282012%29). The latest polls find both with around 48% support as of now. For p37, ~40% no and 12% undecided. P30: ~44% no, ~8% undecided.

Looking at previous polling, the failed prop. 19 had 49% No in the final pre election poll (http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/California_Proposition_19,_the_Marijuana_Legalization_Initiative_%282010%29). More recently, the tobacco tax Proposition 29 (http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/California_Proposition_29,_Tobacco_Tax_for_Cancer_Research_Act_%28June_2012%29) had 50% support in the last poll; by a very narrow margin it failed at the ballot box. I think the best way to predict whether a proposition will definitely pass is if its last pre election poll has over 50% yes support, see the open primary proposition 14 from 2010 as example, it had 52% yes in its latest poll and ultimately passed (http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/California_Proposition_14,_Top_Two_Primaries_Act_%28June_2010%29).

My personal thoughts on prop 30: I don't want education to be cut, but where's the evidence that the funding will be absolutely earmarked for education rather than dumped in the general fund? In fact the nonpartisan legislative analyst office reports: "The 2012-13 budget plan (1) assumes that voters approve this measure and (2) spends the resulting revenues on various state programs. A large share of the revenues generated by this measure is spent on schools and community colleges." The "various state programs" part is probably what turns off many California voters, not just the right wing tea party types but also independents, moderates, and even some Democrats as well! California politics is so frustrating sometimes.

18 replies, 2514 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

Response to alp227 (Original post)

Thu Nov 1, 2012, 11:42 PM

1. 37 is extremely important.

We need something to regain our food sovereignty.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to roody (Reply #1)

Fri Nov 2, 2012, 01:59 AM

7. I've been phone banking a bit for Prop 37

and of the people that I have spoken with, most are voting yes. I did spend over 10 minutes talking with a voter about each and every argument the big businesses have put up against it. She claims that I convinced her to vote yes....but who knows.... I'll continue trying, it is so important and should have been done 25 years ago.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tumbulu (Reply #7)

Fri Nov 2, 2012, 12:22 PM

9. Thank you! I've been standing

in front of grocery stores doing the same.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to roody (Reply #9)

Fri Nov 2, 2012, 03:45 PM

11. Thank you!!!!!

What is your impression from talking to people?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alp227 (Original post)

Thu Nov 1, 2012, 11:55 PM

2. Prop 38

Just got home from a PTA meeting with a presentation about Prop 38 which California PTA supports. The presenter, a local teacher, stated those funds go directly to the schools and only 1% can be used for administrative costs at the district level. Parents and the school community decide how the funds will be spent. Also, part of the money will be used for the first few years to pay off the school bonds so actual school allocation increases as the years go on. My children are almost out of school but if neither of these measures pass we will be funding education at the lowest per pupil rate in the nation. So much has already been cut...the trigger cuts would be catastrophic.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Twerps (Reply #2)

Fri Nov 2, 2012, 01:48 AM

6. Problem with Prop 38 is that it is rigid and will not allow the governor and legislature the freedom

to respond to problems in our society other than education with the money it raises. It does not, for example, provide relief on college tuition in our state schools -- and that is undeniably a very serious problem.

Also, Prop. 38 as opposed to Prop. 30 imposes taxes on people earning as little as $7,500 per year.

The California Democratic Party has endorsed Prop. 30.

In my opinion, Prop. 38 is the rogue effort of a few very wealthy people to protect the very rich from having to bear an appropriate share of the burden for funding the state.

I support our Democratic governor and Prop. 30.

According to the California Democratic Party website,

Proposition 38

• Increases tax rates for Californians earning as little as $7,316 per year
• Raises taxes on middle class families at almost the same rate as millionaires
• Forces a $6 billion cut to education this year
• Cuts the school year short for K-12 Students

http://www.stopthemiddleclasstaxhike.com/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JDPriestly (Reply #6)

Fri Nov 2, 2012, 02:00 AM

8. very good points!

I am voting yes on 30, no question!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JDPriestly (Reply #6)

Fri Nov 2, 2012, 10:21 PM

13. +1 And it does nothing for the universities. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alp227 (Original post)

Thu Nov 1, 2012, 11:59 PM

3. The RW has POURED money into the no on 30 campaign, and Monsanto has done the same with 37.

The ads were horribly misleading. Suggesting the money from 30 would not reach schools and that 37 was full of holes and will cost jobs. Of course, just the opposite is true. But I've only heard a few pro-37 ads, and Brown's pro-30 ads are drowned out by the anti-30 ads. This is CA politics at its worst, and Citizens United has put it on steroids.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SunSeeker (Reply #3)

Fri Nov 2, 2012, 01:10 AM

4. A common RW talking point against 30 is a quote from the state school boards assoc.

Anti-30 ads I've seen on TV and in mailers quote the CSBA: "...the governor's initiative does not provide new funding for schools."

The reality: the CSBA did endorse BOTH P30 and P38. The full context:

“CSBA is the only statewide educational association to endorse both initiatives. While each initiative presents a different funding scenario for our schools, the bottom line is that both will generate billions of dollars in much-needed revenue for public education,” said Vernon M. Billy, CSBA executive director. He added, “The initiatives are stop-gap measures that minimize the hemorrhaging. Ultimately, we need the Legislature to commit to sustained adequate yearly funding.” According to Billy, CSBA opted for the dual endorsement because schools desperately need funding. Yet, he and the CSBA leadership want to make it clear to the public that the governor’s initiative does not provide new funding for schools. Instead, it bolsters the General Fund with new revenue. “Under the governor’s plan, schools would get back some of the billions of dollars that were redirected away from them and used to shore up the state’s funding gap in the last budgetary cycle. The governor’s initiative only restores some of the funds already owed to schools,” Billy said.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alp227 (Reply #4)

Fri Nov 2, 2012, 01:18 AM

5. Yes, very Romnian, wouldn't you say? nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SunSeeker (Reply #3)

Fri Nov 2, 2012, 12:25 PM

10. The Yes on 37 ads began 10 days before

election day.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alp227 (Original post)

Fri Nov 2, 2012, 07:43 PM

12. I'm mostly concerned about 37 that's so important, have mixed feelings about 30. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Raine (Reply #12)

Mon Nov 5, 2012, 05:13 PM

14. I cannot think of a proposition more important than 30

If it passes, then we are more likely to see increased taxes on the wealthy nationally. If it fails, then I suspect most elected officials will be scared to raise taxes and instead agree to cut programs.

It's one of the first states who would have tried to reverse all the Reagan era tax cuts on wealth citizens.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cally (Reply #14)

Mon Nov 5, 2012, 06:38 PM

15. I voted early over the weekend and after giving it some thought voted YES

on 30.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Raine (Reply #15)

Mon Nov 5, 2012, 08:26 PM

16. Thanks!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Raine (Reply #15)

Tue Nov 6, 2012, 02:42 AM

18. I turned in my ballot today and voted yes on 30!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alp227 (Original post)

Tue Nov 6, 2012, 01:53 AM

17. Prop 30 is crucial. My friend who is a college librarian will lose his job if 30 fails.

 

He has already been told this. His boss will also be cut back.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread