Just in case you haven't voted and haven't already decided on Prop'.s
and judges. As for me, as Obama's California polls %numbers equal
today's high temperature I'll be voting for Cynthia McKinney. We really
need a parliamentary system where politics can/should be much
broader and Obamas advisors would face serious scrutiny. In any event,
I keep hope alive by helping build the Green Party.
I've included a pitch, at the bottom, for phone calls demanding enough
paper ballots for all precincts. Good luck to all of us.
Ed
Goldberg's Ballot Recommendations
November 4th, 2008
Hi Everyone, This edition of Goldberg's unsolicited opinions is coming
early because many of us will be voting by mail so we can work on Election
Day for those candidates and issues we care about.
This truly is a watershed moment for our nation. After almost 30 years of
Reagonomics, the economy is in the toilet, the wars continue, and Americans
are truly afraid for their own future and for that of the next generation.
This is the time to vote for ALL Democrats on your ballot. I know many have
done things you don't like, and some have done little to nothing at all.
But at this particular moment, large majorities of Democrats in Congress and
in Sacramento are essential if the issues facing this state and nation are
to be addressed in a more progressive manner.
It is absolutely essential to get progressive and even moderate voters to
the polls! Turn-out will decide the future of this state and nation.
As to the Ballot initiatives, the Critical Measures to DEFEAT are
Propositions 4, 6, 8, 9, and 10. These are ugly, reactionary and for the
most part deceptive measures, funded by the foes of middle class folk. They
are well funded, and some keep coming back in the hopes they will finally
pass. And most of the truly ugly measures are Constitutional Amendments.
Right now, I urge a NO on all Constitutional Amendments, and on all those
listed below in the "ugly" category.
The Critical Measures to PASS are Propositions #2 and 5. These move forward
the agenda of humane treatment of animals raised for human food, and the
essential task of prison reform where drug addiction is at the core of the
non-violent criminal behavior.
THE GOOD: Deserve your effort to help pass.
Proposition #2 gets my "YES" vote because it requires more humane treatment
for calves, egg-laying hens and pregnant pigs that are raised for human
food.
Proposition #5 deserves an unequivocal "YES" recommendation on the November
ballot, of statewide measures. You may or may not remember Proposition #36
which was passed by the voters to begin to treat drug addiction more as a
medical issue than as a criminal one. That measure was heavily supported by
the
Drug Policy Alliance, which are the key supporters of Proposition 5. Almost
all police agencies and District Attorneys opposed Proposition 36. But it
works! This measure ONLY applies to nonviolent drug offenses, and increases
funding for Drug Rehab.Programs. It also would shorten Parole for
non-serious Drug offenses, while lengthening parole for serious and violent
felonies. Drug treatment works! Most addicts need more than one try at it,
but it is the only thing that works over time, on a regular basis. Law
enforcement and prison guards don't like it. Nonetheless, this is a
definite YES on Prop. 5.
THE GOOD, BUT EXPENSIVE:
Proposition #1 provides additional funding for the complex planning for a
High Speed Rail system between Los Angeles and San Francisco. It does NOT
actually build the High Speed Rail, but it does provide funding to plan it,
and to improve existing public transportation that would ultimately connect
to it.
The only question is whether or not to sell bonds would cost $19.4 billion
over 30 years (Principal and Interest). In spite of the cost, I am
personally voting YES on Prop. 1.
Proposition #3 will also get my "YES" vote as it provides funding for
hospitals at University of California facilities, and for Children's
Hospitals around the state. It will increase access to pediatric care of
children throughout California.
The cost, however, is $2 billion over 30 years, for both Principal and
Interest.
Proposition #12 will provide home loan guarantees for about 3600 California
Veterans. It does NOT have a "financial needs" test and it does not require
the veteran to have served in combat or even in a combat zone. But, since
most military members are there through the "poverty draft," I will be
voting YES on Prop. 12, the $1.8 billion dollar bond.
THE UGLY: Deserve your effort and money to oppose!
Proposition #4 on the ballot for the third time, and it is still rotten to
the core. It would require young pregnant women, under the age of 18 to
have parental notification, and to wait 48 hours AFTER that notification to
get an abortion. This measure is a CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT, and therefore
would take a 2/3 vote to change. It will harm the health of young people
because more teens will seek unsafe and illegal abortions rather than tell
their parents. Also, many times the person who impregnated the young woman
is a family member, maybe even a parent or step parent. The measure would
also authorize damages to be paid by a physician who violates the ban.
CALIFORNIA VOTERS HAVE ALREADY DEFEATED THIS MEASURE TWO TIMES IN RECENT
YEARS. It is only on the ballot again because of the belief that with a
Presidential election going on, many will read the title and vote yes.
If you care about young women and their reproductive rights, if you are
pro-Choice, this is a no-brainer. Keep voting no, and vote NO on Prop. 4.
Proposition #6 is just as "ugly" as Proposition 4. It is brought to you by
the Runner family. Sharon and George Runner spend all of their time, money,
influence, and effort trying to find ways to arrest, prosecute, and imprison
for life the largest number of people in the world. This measure lengthens
prison sentences on many non-violent crimes, raises Misdemeanors to
Felonies, creates NEW crimes, and uses State Funding for increasing local
police and sheriff departments. It is therefore NOT surprising that police
chiefs and sheriffs around the state support this medieval measure.
California already has the highest prison rate in the nation, and maybe in
the world. We imprison for "Life" more people than the Soviets did at their
height of power. And it will only cost about one billion dollars per year,
on-going, with increases annually based on the Consumer Price Index. That
cost will come ahead of Education, Healthcare, Infrastructure needs, and
every other need of this state. But even if the price were "free," the
proposed sentences are so far out of kilter that they do not meet the simple
criteria of "let the punishment fit the crime." THIS IS A CRITICAL "NO"
VOTE.
Vote NO on Prop. 6
Proposition #8 would amend the California Constitution to eliminate the
right to marry for same gender couples. It is evil and wrong, and for the
very first time would enact discrimination against a group of Californians
into the state's otherwise exemplary civil rights-oriented constitution.
New polling shows that the religious right's advertising is working, and now
Prop. 8 leads by 5% in a shift in the polls. Do NOT assume that your
friends and neighbors understand that "Yes" means NO to the civil rights of
same-gender couples, and will require permanent discrimination in the
California Constitution. Vote NO on Prop. 8
Proposition #9 appears to be a "victims' rights measure, but the only goal
of this constitutional amendment is to keep people in prison forever, even
though they have served their sentence. It REDUCES the number of Parole
hearings an inmate is entitled to. That is its real purpose. The rest is
camouflage. Vote NO on Prop. 9
Proposition #10 is a wolf in sheep's clothing. It looks like it would help
get us to alternative fuel for motor vehicles. But really what it is does
is provide subsidies to move us to natural gas to fuel our vehicles rather
than oil. But here is the catch, natural gas is not a renewable energy
source, and like oil, is a fossil fuel. And though it looks like it will
help subsidize electric and hybrid vehicles, the wording would all but
exclude hybrids, plug-in hybrids, electric cars, and other clean fuels from
assistance. It would make natural gas billionaire T. Boone Pickens very
happy and even richer than he already is. There are NO requirements to
improve air quality or reduce greenhouse gases. And it does not require any
of the industries that would get "clean energy" grants in the tens of
millions of dollars to ever produce clean power! This is a $10 billion
measure paid for by a very special interest group, without any clean air
goals. In the right direction, but the WRONG policy method to get there.
Vote NO on Prop. 10
PROPOSITIONS #7 AND #11
Proposition #7 Almost all groups and individuals are opposed to Proposition
7 because they say it would force small renewable energy companies out of
business, and it would allow power providers to always charge 10% above
market price of power to pay for the costs to shift to renewable energy.
But, most of California's electricity comes from burning coal and fossil
fuels. And, most experts believe that 40% of global warming pollution comes
from this type of electricity generation. One-half of all the electricity
in Los Angeles is generated from out-of-state coal. California currently is
the 16th world's largest global warming polluter. The private,
investor-owned utility companies do NOT want to be required to shift to
clean, renewable energy. That is why Southern California Edison and others
have spent so much money on a campaign to defeat this proposition and why
you have been seeing "NO on 7" advertisements for months. Yes, there are
problems, and I think it will go down to defeat. But I for one, probably
will be voting "YES" on this, because it is TIME for us to seriously set
goals and requirements to reduce pollution in California and the to reduce
our share of the pollution that leads to global warming. I urge you to
consider the positives and the negatives, and make up your own mind. It is
a flawed measure, and maybe we should defeat it, fix it, and put it on the
next ballot. I'm just not sure I want to wait another two years.
Proposition #11 is another difficult issue. It is absolutely true, in my
opinion, that the current Assembly and Senate districts favor one political
party or the other, and that that means that members can take more
ideological views on issues than perhaps they might if they were in
contested districts. And I believe that is why the California League of
Women Voters supports this measure. But there are flaws in this thinking,
because it does not take into account that the key reason for gridlock in
Sacramento is that there are no moderate Republicans since the right-wing
purged moderate Republicans from its ranks of officeholders. And, no
redistricting plan will yield 2/3 for Democrats in both Houses, so the
budget gridlock will be unaffected. Finally, I am not sure why the majority
party would want to share redistricting power with the minority party in any
state! These "commissioners" will be appointed, not elected. There really
won't be any way to hold them accountable. Thus far the only thing I saw in
contested seats was that the Democrats, who won contested seats, were
largely more like "moderate Republicans than like Democrats. I am not sure
we need more of those in the state legislature. I plan to vote "NO" on
Proposition 11, and would urge you to do the same. Vote NO on Prop. 11.
SUMMARY: Proposition 1--YES Proposition 7-Undecided
Proposition 2-YES Proposition 8-NO
Proposition 3-YES Proposition 9---NO
Proposition 4---NO Proposition 10-NO
Proposition 5-YES Proposition 11-NO
Proposition 6-NO Proposition
12-YES
(If you are unsure, except for Propositions 2 and 5, when in doubt, vote NO
in spite of my recommendations.)
JUDGES
Office No. 72 Hilleri Grossman Merritt
Office No. 82 Cynthia Loo
Office No. 84 Lori-Ann C. Jones
Office No. 94 C. Edward Mack
Office No. 154 Rocky L. Crabb
County Measure R-places a ½ cent sales tax on L.A. County residents, for 30
years to pay for certain specified transportation costs. Many projects did
NOT make the list, and that is why there are Supervisors both For and
Against the measure. I do NOT like sales tax increases, and think maybe
they should pass a list that helps ALL parts of the County, so I will be
voting NO on this measure. However, you should read the list of projects,
and if they seem good to you, you should vote YES on the measure.
SCHOOL, Los Angeles Community College District Proposition J-Vote "YES"
SCHOOL Angeles Unified School District Proposition Q-Vote "YES"
CITY OF LOS ANGELES:
Proposition A-Vote "YES"
Proposition B-Vote "YES"
***
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, November 03, 2008 11:27 AM
Subject: [PDLA] Please Call Co Supes to Demand More Precinct-Specific
Ballots
>From Work the Vote Los Angeles ...
Please call or email the Supervisors now. Info below. Also, please let us
know if your precinct runs out of ballots tomorrow. Take an incident report
(or ten) with you to the polls. Thanks! here is the link:
http://www.workthevotela.org/pdf-files/incident-report-LA-observers.pdf
If you can help us tomorrow in any way, please email immediately:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Thanks, Sheri Myers
Call Your Supervisor & Demand More Precinct-Specific Ballots Be Printed &
Distributed
GLORIA MOLINA
(213) 974-4111
(213) 613-1739 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Yvonne Burke
(213) 974-2222
(213) 680-3283 Fax
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
ZAV YAROVSLAVSKY
(213) 974-3333
FAX (213 625-7360
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mike Antonovich
(213) 974-5555
(213) 974-1010 FAX
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Don Knabe
Tel: 213-974-4444 |
Fax: 213-626-6941
Staff Contact:
David Sommers
Press Secretary
(213) 974-1095
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Call the County Supervisors and demand precinct-specific ballots NOW!
LA County Registrar Dean Logan refuses to print up enough precinct-marked
ballots to guarantee a ballot for every one of LA County's estimated 4.3
million registered voters.
Are we about to see another spectacle of election mismanagement like the
double-bubble debacle of the 2008 primary?
Or, will this be another Florida 2000, where vote counts are held up for
days, and law suits ensue?
****************************************************************************
"With voters waiting in line for five hours to vote at the County
Registrar 's office this weekend, we can easily predict a record turn-out on
Tuesday, with previously inactive voters becoming active, engaged voters,"
said Marcy Winograd, co-founder of Progressive Democrats of Los Angeles.
"We understand the Registrar's office has ordered extra yellow emergency
ballots, but these are not precinct-specific and require a third party to
transcribe the voter's intent onto another ballot," added Winograd. "Why
not just print more precinct-marked ballots and distribute them immediately
to precinct captains?"
Here are just a few of the problems with Logan's 'contingency.'
He said that all yellow stock emergency ballots will be 'duplicated' onto
normal ballot board stock in Norwalk.
Even if these are "trained personnel" it takes a while to fill out those
little bubbles.
What if there are thousands of emergency ballots filled out?
He said that there would be a 'transparent' process in doing this and
election protection monitors 'can observe.'
But what does that mean? From a window 20 feet away? Are the campaigns
prepared to send monitors for this?
Even if there is no malicious intent on the part of the people doing the
'duplication,' the ballots are lengthy, tiny and people will be under
pressure to hurry it up. Mistakes can certainly be made.
And these ballots can't possibly be counted for days!
We want to know why can't Logan print and deliver precinct-specific ballots
to the precincts that are under-supplied if he works on it today? He has
refused to do so all weekend. Why?
There are some very important local races and propositions that can be
impacted by this problem in districts where there has been a huge surge in
new voter registration, and where inactive voters will show up to vote for
the first minority presidential candidate who has a shot at the White House.
Several news outlets have picked this up. We don't know why the Board of
Supervisors is not paying attention to this problem. If we have a crisis
this Tuesday, then it's not only Dean Logan who should be held accountable,
it is the Supervisors who hired him, over the protests of election integrity
activists.
**********************************************************************
_______________________________________________
PDLA mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mailman.svpal.org/mailman/listinfo/pdla
------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LAAMN: Los Angeles Alternative Media Network
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Digest: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Help: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Post: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archive1: <http://www.egroups.com/messages/laamn>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archive2: <http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/laamn/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/laamn/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
