Culver City Observer -

Print headline:

by Alyssa Erdley

Voting with Attitude

There are many alarmingly radical propositions on the ballot this election. Please go through the many measures, educate yourself, and vote. Otherwise, you will be unpleasantly surprised with the results, which could include your favorite businesses closing, increased costs for everything - including ride shares - and uncontrollable crime on the streets.

Proposition 14 - Bonds for Stem Cell Research

NO

Investors who are experts in calculating potential benefits should fund medical research, not a government bureaucracy which is only expert at wasting and misusing money.

Proposition 15 - Raising Tax Assessment

NO

This measure will destroy the protections of Proposition 13. While residences are exempt from this proposed increase on commercial property tax, all of California's citizens will end up paying through higher prices. In addition, claiming new taxes are for the schools is the political equivalent of Lucy promising Charlie Brown she won't sweep the football out of the way.

Oh, and the bill's promoters have already admitted they're going after residential property taxes next.

Proposition 16 - Allowing Race, Sex, and Ethnicity as Factors in Public Employment and Contracting Decisions

NO

Currently, the state constitution supports a color-blind, merit-based approach to hiring candidates for public jobs and awarding contracts. This bill would turn that on its head and allow (that is, force) public entities to give preference to certain races, sexes, and national origins over others. It's racism. Legitimized.

Proposition 17 - Allows parolees to vote

NO

This bill gives people who have NOT completed their sentence the right to vote. Since Proposition 57 allows many more prisoners to be released on parole, this means many more criminals voting. They could vote on more measures like this one that reduce punishments and grant unearned privileges.

Proposition 18 - Lowers voting age

NO

Need I say more?

Proposition 19 - Ends property tax savings on inherited property

NO

Seniors and those affected by natural disasters are already protected from higher taxes if they are forced to move. The true purpose of this measure is to strip tax relief from family members inheriting real property.

Proposition 20 - Repairs the damage wrought by Props 47 and 57

YES

This bill would no longer allow the release of such "nonviolent" offenders as those who shoot at someone with a gun, bomb a church, or kidnap a child as a sex slave. (A partial list) It will also allow stiffer sentencing for repeat offenders instead of letting them off the hook over and over again.

Proposition 21 - Gives power over rent control back to local government

NO

Promoted as a way to reduce homelessness, the law would actually increase it by killing motivation to build more housing. Even Governor Newsom opposes this proposition.

Proposition 22 - Classifies ride-share drivers as independent contractors

YES

This proposition repairs half of the problem created by AB5, an anti-market, anti-independent worker, prosperity-killing law that forces freelancers to become officially employed. Anything that can be done to blunt it is good.

Proposition 23 - Requires a doctor on site at dialysis clinics

NO

The California Medical Association urges a no vote on this measure. This proposition does nothing for dialysis patients, so it probably puts money into somebody's pocket.

Proposition 24 - Adds (and subtracts) consumer privacy rights

NO

This is yet another deceptively written law that attempts to sell you on the idea it is going to provide you with more online privacy and restrict business's ability to collect data on you. It does not do this. The ACLU opposes this bill, for which input was sought from big tech but not from consumer groups.

Proposition 25 - Referendum on the no-cash bail law

NO

A "no" vote means you want cash bail back. And you do. We have seen the effects of no-cash bail during the lock-down when it was instituted as an emergency measure. Criminals were immediately released and immediately re-offended. Why should police bother to catch criminals if they are only going to have to catch the same criminal again - and again?