Richie-boy’s 2020 Ballot

Overview

It’s election time again. Like most Americans, I’m really hoping that Joe Biden wins, and the Democrats win the Senate. This is California, though, so there’s some other important things on the ballot. I’ve listed this year’s ballot propositions, a link to the the ballotpedia page for the proposition, my vote , and a blurb about why I voted how I did. Please note that most of my blurbs don’t explain what the prop does. They expect some familiarity with the proposition. Further down, I’ve included my recommendations for the Santa Cruz City Council race. At the very bottom, I’ve made some predictions about the results.

Prop 14 — Stem Cell Research

https://ballotpedia.org/California_Proposition_14,_Stem_Cell_Research_Institute_Bond_Initiative_(2020)

• Mild YES

If we had a functioning federal government, California wouldn’t need to invest in its own medical research. At this point, I don’t trust the federal government to work in the best interests of the people, especially Californians. As such, I think we need to do some things in parallel with the federal government, and medical research is one of those things.

Prop 15 — Business Property Taxes

https://ballotpedia.org/California_Proposition_15,_Tax_on_Commercial_and_Industrial_Properties_for_Education_and_Local_Government_Funding_Initiative_(2020)

• Strong YES

The modern conservative movement, characterized by anti-tax policies, started in 1978 when California pass Prop-13. Like most people, I appreciate that law’s goal of allowing older people to remain in their homes, but there’s so much other crap in Prop-13(1978), and that other crap costs California’s localities a ton of money. There’s a reason why the richest state has the 37th ranked public school system. It’s Prop-13(1978). We need to whittle Prop-13(1978) down to it’s core function, and Prop-15(2020) takes an obvious step towards that by taxing valuable business properties on their current market value, rather than the value from decades ago.

Prop 16 — Restores Affirmative Action

https://ballotpedia.org/California_Proposition_16,_Repeal_Proposition_209_Affirmative_Action_Amendment_(2020)

• Strong YES

This one’s a no-brainer. Clearly there is still discrimination against people of color, and the best way we’ve had to address that over the years is to tip the scales in the opposite direction with affirmative action type programs. I understand that, on an individual level, there are some people who might feel cheated because they scored higher or are more qualified. The entire concept of merit, and what defines it, is just something someone made up, though. Diversity is every bit as important as other metrics.

Prop 17 — Voting Rights for Felons

https://ballotpedia.org/California_Proposition_17,_Voting_Rights_Restoration_for_Persons_on_Parole_Amendment_(2020)

• Strong YES

Every American should have the right to vote, and that should never be taken away. I’m no longer a big fan of Bernie Sanders, but I applauded when he stated an obvious truth earlier this year, that even prisoners should be allowed to vote. That’s the only way to prevent a ruling political class to use jail as a way of maintaining power. This isn’t a hypothetical, either, as we’ve seen from the decades old drug war that more harshly treated some people than others, and ended up removing the right to vote in an unequal manner. Of course, Prop 17 doesn’t give prisoners the right to vote, but it does take a tiny step in the right direction. In democracies and republics, we should strive to have as many people vote as possible.

Prop 18 — Voting Rights for Kids

https://ballotpedia.org/California_Proposition_18,_Primary_Voting_for_17-Year-Olds_Amendment_(2020)

• Strong YES

This one allows 17 year olds who will be 18 by the time of the November election to vote in primaries. If California had normal primaries, I’d probably vote no on this one, but since we passed Prop 14(2010), our primaries act as more of a first round of voting than they act like real primaries. The only available opportunity to vote for a 3rd party, or, in some cases even for a 2nd party, is during the primary. Given that, everyone who will be eligible to vote in the real election should be allowed to vote in this 1st round.

Prop 19— More Prop13(1978) changes

https://ballotpedia.org/California_Proposition_19,_Property_Tax_Transfers,_Exemptions,_and_Revenue_for_Wildfire_Agencies_and_Counties_Amendment_(2020)

• Strong YES

This one doesn’t really whittle down Prop-13(1978) very much, as it offsets the changes to taxes on inherited homes by allowing more transfers of the tax base from a current home to a new one. That said, the inherited tax base is one of the worst components of Prop-13(1978), as it perpetuates racism. That’s because due to housing policies in the 50’s, 60’s, 70’s and even beyond, people of color were prevented from purchasing homes in certain communities. The effectively makes the inherited tax base of Prop-13 into a tax deduction that is only available to white people.

Prop 20— Increased punishment for crimes

https://ballotpedia.org/California_Proposition_20,_Criminal_Sentencing,_Parole,_and_DNA_Collection_Initiative_(2020)

• Strong NO

Our prisons and jails are already overcrowded. We already have too many people in jail. We shouldn’t be increasing that number, as this prop will do. Beyond that, we know from decades of knowledge that this prop would impact people of color more than others. If you believe that black lives matter as much as other people’s lives, then vote no on this heinous prop.

Prop 21 — Repeals parts of Costa-Hawkins Act

https://ballotpedia.org/California_Proposition_21,_Local_Rent_Control_Initiative_(2020)

• Strong YES

I liked Prop-10(2018) better, but this tries to do largely the same thing as that previous prop, which is to repeal parts of a law that restricts the ability of cities to control their own housing policies. Contrary to popular belief, rent control works. It achieves its goal of allowing people to remain in their homes, even as market forces might otherwise drive them out. Opponents of rent control claim that it reduces the overall availability of rental housing, and that might be true, but that isn’t the goal of rent control. In any case, this prop doesn’t implement any new rent control laws. All it does is allow cities to choose their own destiny.

Prop 22 — Special Rules for Uber & Lyft

https://ballotpedia.org/California_Proposition_22,_App-Based_Drivers_as_Contractors_and_Labor_Policies_Initiative_(2020)

• Strong NO

I love Uber. I use Uber Eats a lot now. I used to take Uber rides often. That said, I know that I am underpaying for these things. I would be happy to pay a more in order to provide the workers of those companies with the standard protections that employees of other companies get. This is similar to how I prefer not to purchase items produced with child labor.

Prop 23 — Dialysis Clinic Regulation

https://ballotpedia.org/California_Proposition_23,_Dialysis_Clinic_Requirements_Initiative_(2020)

• Mild NO

Were it not for the requirement to have a doctor on site for all hours of operation, I would be a yes on this one. I agree with all of the other regulations in this bill. Of course, these clinics should be reporting infection rates, and, of course they shouldn’t be able to refuse Medicaid patients. That doctor requirement ruins it though. Doctors already have an obscene monopoly on healthcare in this country. They already have an obscene amount of control over who can access which medicines and procedures. Let’s not add the their monopoly by requiring their constant presence at clinics that are working reasonably well under the current rules.

Prop 24 — CRPA Changes Privacy Laws

https://ballotpedia.org/California_Proposition_24,_Consumer_Personal_Information_Law_and_Agency_Initiative_(2020)

• Mild NO

As I understand it, this prop adds some privacy protections but also takes some away. The California Democratic Party is neutral on this one, as is the EFF, which points out that it’s backward steps offset it half-steps forwards. The EFF is particularly concerned with the pay-for-privacy component, which doesn’t bother me all that much. My bigger concern has to do with CCPA, which only went into effect this past January. I feel like we should give that law some time and learn what works and doesn’t before rushing to replace it. FWIW, I had a twitter conversation with the author of the CCPA and she is a strong NO on this prop. One issue she pointed to is that any amendments to this prop would need to consider the impact on business and innovation, which she says sets a ceiling on what could be improved.

Prop 25 — Eliminate Cash Bail

https://ballotpedia.org/California_Proposition_25,_Replace_Cash_Bail_with_Risk_Assessments_Referendum_(2020)

• Strong YES

My friends used to get arrested quite a bit. These arrests were mostly for things like selling and/or growing pot, but I knew people who got arrested for other drugs and and also things like bank fraud and insider trading. I think I was still in high-school when it was first explained to me how to avoid jail time. I was told that first you make bail. While you’re out on bail, you get a job and become an upstanding citizen. You delay your trial as long as possible. Any opportunity to delay, real or fake, should be acted on. The longer you delay, the better. Once your trial comes around, you prove to the judge that you’ve reformed and turned your life around. The judge will understand that putting you into prison at that point will undo your progress, and they’ll give you probation. A few years later another friend put it to me a different way. He said that once you’re out on bail, they need to create a spot for you to put you back behind bars. If you’re already in the system, though, there’s already spot in the system so you’re less likely to get probation. Anyway, the key is bail. People who have the ability to get out on bail are much more likely to get a lenient sentence than other folks. That’s not how things should be. This prop isn’t perfect and certainly algorithms will screw up, but those can be fixed, and, hopefully this system will be a little fairer.

Santa Cruz

Santa Cruz Superior Court Judge

• Nancy De La Pena

The other candidate dropped out

Santa City Council

https://santacruzlocal.org/elections/

• Kumar, Hill, Brown, & Conlan

In general, we have a great slate of candidates. I like all of them. That said, there are 3 candidates that are considered progressive in terms of housing policies and homelessness. I think Sandy Brown captures my own thoughts perfectly with her statement that, “I disagree with the premise that housing production/supply will lead to greater affordability. Housing affordability does not just happen. It is produced through deliberate intention and policy.” Kelsey Hill and Kayla Kumar are the other progressive candidates. All three of those candidates oppose the downtown parking garage project, which I also oppose.

I think Elizabeth Conlan is the best option among the remaining candidates. Among other things, I think she’s the only one who isn’t endorsed by the Coonerty family. More importantly, I love that she understands the need to provide bathrooms and sanitation for people without them and that she will prioritize this. Finally, her website has a nice ‘platform’ section, in which she states her views clearly and concisely.

Predictions

Props: 17, 19, 20, 22, 23

City Council: Watkins, Brown, Brunner, Hill