October 29th, 2012


Amar's 2012 California/SF Voting Guide


President & Vice President - BARACK OBAMA AND JOSEPH BIDEN
United States Senator - DIANNE FEINSTEIN
United States Representative (i.e. Congressperson), District 12 - NANCY PELOSI


State Senator, District 11 - MARK LENO
Member, State Assembly - TOM AMMIANO


Member, Board of Education (pick 3) - RACHEL NORTON, JILL WYNNS, SANDRA FEWER
Member, Community College Board - WHO CARES


Prop. 30: Temporary Taxes to Fund Education, Public Safety, Etc - YES

Raises taxes on those making more than $250k. Due to CA's insane anti-tax measures and budgetary gridlock, bond measures and props like this are the only way basic services can get funded any more. If this fails to pass, a bunch "trigger cuts" (mandatory budget cuts) will kick in. $5.35 billion from schools/community colleges, $250 million from University of California, cuts to fire/water/police/fish & game/parks... it would be bad.

Prop. 31: California Government Performance and Accountability - NO

No idea, too complicated, don't make CA govt more complicated.

Prop. 32: Ban on Political Contributions by Payroll Deduction - NO

Funded of course by romney linked republican operatives… f*** you, union busters!

Prop. 33: Auto Insurance Rates Based on Driver History - NO

Sponsored by some guy from Mercury General Corporation (insurer) - no doubt it will make them a lot of money if passed

Prop. 34: Death Penalty Repeal - YES

Starkly racist, hugely expensive, no more of deterrent than life in prison without parole, alarming # of cases where prisoners on death row have been proven innocent by new DNA evidence

Prop. 35: Increased Penalties for Human Trafficking - NO

Seems like this is just pandering to hysteria about online predators. We already have sufficient laws in place for dealing w/ this. Mandatory sentencing restrictions won't make things any better, it will just lead to more prison overcrowding

Prop. 36: Three Strikes Reform Act - YES!!

It doesn't solve anything to lock up so many people and make sure they'll never be able to vote, get a regular job, get college aid, learn new skills or in any way adapt for life when they get out. Just stupid. The U.S. has the highest incarceration rate of any country on earth. What has it gotten us?

Prop. 37: Labeling Genetically Engineered Foods - YES

Funded by Dr. Bronner's Magic Soaps, Nature's Path Foods, etc. Opposed by Coca Cola etc. Sure, I'm in :D

Prop. 38: Molly Munger's Tax for Education - NO

Wealthy attorney Molly Munger has poured 33 million into this -- raises taxes on everyone, not just 250k'ers. Prop 30 and Prop 38 are mutually exclusive-- if both are passed, the one with most votes will take effect and nullify the other. So if 38 gets more votes, the trigger cuts mentioned above go into effect. 38 ties down how the funds are used, restricts to just one or two things. Enough with this bullshit straightjacketing of funds it's made CA so hard to govern

Prop 39: Multistate Business Tax and Clean Energy Initiative - NO

I dunno this cleans up some tax loop hole, generates revenue, but (natch) ties up the revenue for some clean energy commission. Funded by a hedge fund dude who stands to get rich if clean energy takes off

Prop. 40: Referendum on Redrawn State Senate Districts - YES

Long story short, CA political districts got redrawn by an independent citizen's commission as the result of a proposition that passed in the last election cycle. The new district map they came up is an improvement over the old one, featuring less gerrymandering and more logical district borders. Voting YES votes to accept this new map. Cali Republican activists funded this referendum pushing for a NO vote, hoping to invalidate the redistricting plan so they could get their own passed instead. A recent CA court decision upheld the citizen's commission plan, so this whole thing may now be moot.


Prop. A: City College Parcel Tax- YES
Prop. B: Parks Bond - YES
Prop. C: Housing Trust Fund - NO
Prop. D: Consolidating Municipal Elections - YES!!!
Prop. E: Gross Receipts Tax (i.e. eliminate payroll tax) - YES
Prop. F: Water and Environment Plan (i.e. drain Hetch Hetchy) - NO
Prop. G: Repealing Corporate Personhood (i.e. nonbinding resolution) - WHO THE FUCK CARES

KCET Proposition Cheat Sheets (very useful! shows who's funding what)


SPUR 2012 voting guide:


SFBC endorsements:


Good SF School Board overview from sfgate:

SF school board faces touch choices
"On one side, there are three incumbents - Jill Wynns, Rachel Norton and Sandra Fewer - who voted to ignore seniority in teacher layoffs at 14 of the lowest-performing schools. Largely based on that one decision, the influential teachers union turned its back on the three, whom they had previously supported…"
I'm voting for the school board incumbents, cos they have the advantage of experience and there's no good reason to kick them out. Certainly not cos they stood up to teacher's unions with regards to choosing who gets laid off. Why should layoffs be based primarily on seniority, as opposed to merit? Sure, teaching "ability" is hard to quantify. It doesn't mean there's no distinction to be made, or that bad teachers don't exist! Also, Rachel Norton appears to be the only candidate who actually has kids enrolled in the SF public school system at present.

Stick a fork in it, I'm done