Links:
http://cahsr.blogspot.com/ - California High Speed Rail Blog
My facebook cause for voting Yes on 1A - Join it. DO IT NOW. THE POWER OF ARNOLD COMPELS YOU.
http://www.cahighspeedrail.ca.gov/map.htm - Look at this interactive map. LOOK AT IT. LA to San Fran in 2.5 hours and for $55. If you do not vote yes on 1A you are going to hell because if that’s not something you can believe in, you have no soul.

Basically, thanks to rising oil prices our car-truck-and-airplane-heavy transportation system is going to screw over the entire California economy horribly if we don’t do something about it NOW. As a frequent Metrolink rider, I can tell you that despite what you may think, trains are a VERY popular transportation option even though they are somewhat limited in their routes and availability still. Metrolink is constantly smashing previous records of ridership especially as gas prices rise. Besides your daily commute, how cool would it be to be able to zip up to San Francisco or norcal, or if you’re up in that direction, down to LA, OC, or San Diego for the weekend without airport hassles… or airport prices.

The only people opposed to this are nutty libertarian types who don’t like spending money on things AND have heavy investments in roadways and airports of some sort. If we don’t build high speed rail, it will cost at minimum double (in reality, probably much more, and this is WITHOUT measuring the economic costs) to expand freeways and widen airports to satiate passenger demand, while simultaneously crippling the economy as a larger slice of YOUR pocketbook goes to transportation costs. This one is a no-brainer. If you’re a Republican, this will be a huge boon to businesses and job creation, and there is already a LOT of private interest in the economic stimulation high speed rail would provide. If you’re a Democrat, this is about the cleanest form of mass transit there is as it runs on electricity instead of dirty fuels, plus hey it’s mass transit. If you’re a libertarian with at least half a brain (and I’m the Easter bunny–LOL!) you realize that this is good for the economy, will cost the government LESS money, and is good for business in general. Oh and for everyone, they’re going to build it on two grades, eliminating the need for dangerous and annoying train crossings across public streets.

Links:
http://yesonprop2.com/ - Doesn’t seem to be owned by PETA, yay!

I’m not a vegetarian or vegan (although a certain someone is) in fact to be quite honest I’m eating chicken right now. Because of that, I’d like to have some reassurances that what I’m shoving down my maw came from a chicken that’s not a diseased pile of sickly flesh that lived its life in a one square inch metal bin. If you’re vegan or vegetarian, you likely are aware of and strongly support this already.

The argument against it is that it will make food less safe because we’ll then import from mexico or whatever but that’s kind of dumb considering that’s easily solved by import standards. They obviously work because US meat packing factories have to follow certain standards before the EU will import our meat. Still, it’s kind of dumb and really, do you want to eat sickly, diseased chicken that never had any room to move and therefore is full of fatty, gristly meat? I didn’t think so. Yes on this one.

Hard to be against funding for sick children! My only issue with it is that it seems awfuly…. specific. Great if you have diabetes or lukemia I guess, but what about Lupus? I mean I know it’s never Lupus, but come on!

OK at least Prop 8 is a controversy what with LIEable activist judges and whatnot but seriously, how many times do we have to vote no on this for it to go away forever? While I would love to live in a world where teen girls can always rely on their parents to do the right thing and treat them fairly, give good advice, and guide them into right choices, in reality it gets much more complicated. Unfortunately, requiring parental notification for abortions is more likely to turn an unfortunate situation into a disasterous and abusive one than into a happy one.

The arguments for it are at least rather honest in saying that it’s a rather weak law and “easy” to circumvent, but basically in order for a teen to get around the notification they’d have to basically press abuse charges against their parents which opens up a whole new window of horrible. Let’s let this sleeping dog lie.

If I’m understanding this proposition correctly, this eases up a bit on sentencing in non-violent drug crimes and provides for some rehab support. The war on drugs has been stupid and costly, and even if you’re strongly anti-drug, you MUST recognize that locking up a bunch of druggies in a room with nothing better to do for months on end is a pretty horrible idea when it comes to actually solving this issue. Better rehabilitation to avoid the “revolving door” and to actually, you know, reform people and turn them into productive members of society is kind-of-sort-of our obligation as civilized people.

Looking at the official arguments and rebuttals, the people for it are judges, prison wardens, drug treatment specialists, and you know, people who actually know a thing or two about this issue. The people against it are MADD who are a bunch of insane reactionaries, as well-meaning as they may be. I’ve been told by many people who have been some part of our prison system that those who work with it have a far better idea of how to help and fix it than those who have never had much exposure to it. As a sheltered whitey, I’m taking that advice and voting with the people who seem to know what they’re doing on this one.

This one is a tough one. I’d like some input on it, actually. Basicaly, it allocates one BILLION dollars (that’s a LOT of trains!) to… throw a bunch of money at law enforcement. Then it will lock up a ton more people into our already crowded system, mostly because they’re brown immigrants of often questionable residence status I guess. It really just reeks of expensive and misdirected hate toward “them brown people” that will just kind of screw other stuff up in the process. I’d like to hear if anyone else has some deeper thoughts or information on this, but as far as I understand it, it reeks of MORE BARS MORE PRISONS which is nice in theory but has been terrible in practice.

I have no idea on this one. There’s a lot of money going into telling people to vote no on it, which is making me want to vote yes. Both sides have a pretty convincing argument but I’m not sure who is lying to us here. Please, comment with any insight you might have!

UPDATE: Apparently this prop is horrible and nobody should vote for it. Republicans and Democrats even agree on this one.

Links:
http://eqca.com - EQCA has been dedicated for the right for everyone to marry for quite some time
http://noonprop8.com/home - Spreading LIEbral media filth promoting the horrendous idea that maybe, just maybe, gay people are people too and deserve the same rights as everyone else
http://signingforsomething.org - Mormons who do not agree with the LDS Church’s obviously strong stance on Prop 8

Oh my. Prop 8. Where to begin? Let’s start here. In doing this site I’ve covered some pretty important stuff that until writing this, I hadn’t thought much about. Prison system reforms, potentially huge energy company scandals, terminally sick children… I mean these are all pretty real and important issues. Not to mention while *I* am very interested in 1A, many other people seem to not even know it exists which is kind of a problem when it’s basically, you know, the thing that could singlehandedly keep CA’s economy from being crushed like a bug when oil hits $500 a barrel. So, what HAVE we been going on about, as a state, like headless chickens with a severe case of rabies? None other than gay people, of course!

Seriously, wtf on this one. It’s so unnecessary, and I’m rather embarassed as a human being that it’s even an issue. Even if you find gay marriage icky, or an affront to God, or whatever, if you’re a decent person you’ll quickly recognize that FORCING other people to not participate in something that is deeply meaningful and personal to them is a rather mean thing to do. You don’t have to gay marry, or even go to a gay marriage, if you don’t want to. That’s cool. Vote no on 8 anyway though, because other people would rather have nothing to do with some of the things you believe and do but they’re letting you keep on doing them because we live in a country that values freedom.

Meanwhile, I’m rather shocked by the lack of integrity of the anti-marriage anti-freedom (”yes on 8″) camp here. When you have to resort to blatant lies and scare tactics to bully your way into getting people on your side, it’s extremely pathetic. Those darn LIEable acty-vist judges made it pretty clear that churches will not lose their tax exempt status or be forced to marry gays. The California Educational Code is very clear about sex and family being opt-in, and if your children being taught that other kids might have gay parents offends your sensibilities THAT much, you can opt-out easily. If homosexuality really is this horrible thing that will destroy the universe as we know it, please make arguments that are grounded in reality and not outright lies.

I must say, I appreciated the most recent volley in this campaign as of when I wrote this: a No on 8 TV spot that ends with “Keep the government out of our lives.” Come on people, governments are good at things like, oh say, building trains or hospitals for sick children, or keeping us from getting blown up by people who don’t like us. They’re NOT good at forcing morality on others.

Finally, a special mention of a certain organization that has raised obscene amounts of money and huge virtual phonebanks (through emotional/spiritual browbeating) from out of state to enforce Utah-style Mormon standards upon my state. Quite honestly, I’m ashamed. To the LDS church and its members: You know what you really believe in. Article of Faith 11 is very clear on this matter. I’m disgusted that the leaders would start this quixotic crusade and that the members would follow blindly without thinking about their own theology or what is the right thing to do as a human being or a follower of Christ. Needless to say, do I really need to remind everyone who was the original “alternative lifestyle” in this country? What does it say about your character and your faith when you turn around at the first opportunity to persecute people who are doing the exact same kind of thing that got your not-too-long-ago ancestors run out of town only a couple generations back? Stop doing what you’re told and start doing what’s right.

I don’t like the sound of this one. It sounds rather reactionary, and apparently has failed before. Emotional issues end up a big mess like unto a certain proposition just before this one, numerically. The pro argument tells a 25 year old story that apparently wouldn’t have happened under current law, anyway. It’d be one thing except if it sucks it’d be really hard to repeal and really, the “victim’s rights” card sounds kind of dumb and hard to enforce and likely just another legal loophole for more criminals to go free and frivolous lawsuits to be filed. I’m open for opinions on this one, but I don’t like the sound of it.

This proposition reeks of a scam to me. First tipoff: the “pro” argument rails on “dirty, aging diesel trucks” which are actually not that terrible (you can run the damn things on vegetable oil if you’re so inclined). They want $10 BILLION for this, you know, what they’re asking for to build a high speed rail network through the entire state. This seems to be pushing “natural” gas vehicles, a fossil fuel, and a complete and total dead end seeing as how it’s not renewable and even more scarce than that crude we love so much. I mean really, this is seriously expensive, and not solving the problem with a real solution, like better public transit or research into and subsidies for pure EVs. And don’t get me started on that hydrogen fuel bullshit, ugh.

Links:
put “yes” or “no” before onprop11.org to go to the site of your choosing on this matter.

Drawing district lines is hilariously difficult. I know, I played a flash game about it once. He or she who draws the district lines wields more power than you might think. This proposition creates a rather complex system of committees and reviews before the districts are approved and, in an admittedly sick kind of way, I like it. The more ridiculous checks and gridlocks we put on government the better it seems to work; this being a rather unsung source of power, the more reviewed, fought over, and discussed district boundaries are, the better. I’m open to change my mind on this one, but I like where it’s going.

Update: apparently the way this nutty thing works is rather favorable toward Republicans, so I’m changing to no.

This proposition sounds like kind of a shoe-in formality. The only person arguing against it is one guy that doesn’t even seem to have his heart really into it. It passed unanimously in the state senate and assembly, and has been going on forever to help veterans buy homes and such.