So BallotCon was this past weekend @LA City Hall. For 16 (of 17) ballot props in CA, representatives supporting and against came out to debate. As I was volunteering, I didn’t get to listen to them all, but I got to talk to some of them and some of my opinions were solidified and changed through my interactions there (particularly the condom/pornstars & marijuana props).

Generally speaking, though, I have become wary of state ballot propositions as a vehicle to change our laws. Two big reasons for me:

1. There has been $463M (nearly half a BILLION) raised to fund the support of or opposition against these ballot propositions. That’s a lot of money. It’s more than the two major Presidential candidates have spent in TV advertising across the country! When so much money is in play, it’s one of two things: the rich really want something (so they can get richer) OR the rich really don’t want something (because it will make them poorer).
2. I only learned this recently, but laws created through ballot props can ONLY be changed by another ballot prop (except for Prop 64, the one on marijuana). So it’s more difficult to look at the results of a law and to tweak it. So if you don’t like part of a ballot prop, it won’t be easy to change it!

(same) NO on Prop 51: $9B debt for CA to build & improve schools

“We need a more comprehensive look at how to improve education. This seems more like trying to fix the exterior of the house when we know the foundation is bad.”

(same) NO on Prop 52: Keeps Status Quo on Hospital Fee Scheme

Basically, I don’t support this because I want our legislature to have the ability to negotiate how much of the money goes to the state general fund & what goes to the hospitals. Yes, the hospitals may not want to fight this every year, but that’s their problem, not ours. Don’t use the people to take power away from the legislators.

(same) NO on Prop 53: Voter Approval for Revenue Bonds Greater than $2B

“[T]he people should be keeping our politicians accountable and not having to keep personally voting on measures.”

(same) YES on Prop 54: Show the people what is being voted on

“This is a no-brainer and something that Congress at the national level should adopt! People have the right to know what is being voted on before it is being voted on.”

(same) YES on Prop 55: Maintain additional tax on those making more than $263k

“Some rich men like to say that they are self-made men, and yes it may have been through their efforts and intelligence, but the truth is that no one lives in a vacuum. We live together, in a society, who’s very structure allows for the abundance & wealth of a few.”

(same) YES on Prop 56: Increase tax on e-/cigarettes $2.00

This was one that I struggled with. I did definitely think that this would be a regressive tax (meaning, it has a greater negative impact on the poor), but the guy I talked to at BallotCon was talking about how half of the users in CA are poor and also about how CA has the 2nd lowest usage rates in the country. Also, about how only 13% of the increased tax goes to rehab/education programs, with most going to healthcare. So, it definitely seems flawed, but I’d still like to make a statement that this harms our society.

(same) YES on Prop 57: Easier parole for non-violent criminals + Judicial review for juveniles sent to adult court

“It again goes to the question of what kind of society we want to create: one where we try to see the good in people or one where we keep the majority’s utmost absolute safety in mind.”

(same) YES on Prop 58: Give locals control on how to teach non-English speakers

“I’m generally for a ‘market-based’ solution. Let the people try different ways and see what works best.”

(same) YES on Prop 59: for or against Citizens United

“In a funny way, [Citizens United] made millionaires feel priced out of the system because now there were no limits on how much one person could spend.”

(same) NO on Prop 60: force pornstars to wear condoms (during sex)

This measure got the most people out in support AND against @BallotCon. But, I got to talk to people from both sides, and I came away really conflicted. More than protection against STD’s (the guy debating for Prop 60 mentioned a HIV infection purportedly from the adult industry), it really became about performer privacy.

First, the fact that was shared with me from a “Yes on Prop 60” advocate was that the average time a performer stays in the industry is 3 months. So, with such high turnover, performers wouldn’t have much power to dictate condom usage, even if they wanted it.

Then, I talked with a board member of APAC (Adult Performers Advocacy Committee), who’s still an active performer. She was telling me that yes, a lot of people try out the industry, so there is high turnover. However, those who have been in the industry for a while, are against this…that testing procedures are satisfactory to them.

So, yeah, from the active performer’s perspective, the health risks weren’t an issue, but the main reason I ended up being against this was for their privacy. This prop allows any member of the public to sue a producer for violating this condom provision, but what I learned was that many performers end up producing their own videos (ex. web cams). The legal system then opens up performers to the potential of sharing their personal information with the public, which is a scary thought for performers & some of their fans.

For the condom provision, it seems that this can be regulated through CAL/OSHA, which oversees workplace safety, so I hope that more work could be done through this particular agency. This particular proposition, however, is too flawed for me to support.

(same) YES on Prop 61: prices the VA pays for drugs, becomes ceilings for some other state health programs

As iterated in my previous post, I’m supporting this mainly because this may force the pharma industry to either acquiesce and give everyone lower drug prices (by keeping VA discounts as they are) OR raise drug prices on the Veterans Administration. I’d be interested to see what the pharma industry chooses to do :).

(same) YES on Prop 62 & NO on Prop 66: Either don’t allow death penalties to exist or make them happen quicker

“It would be impractical for a small town to house a potentially dangerous criminal securely for life in relatively humane conditions. In today’s day & age, I feel that we have the means to do so.”

(same) NO on Prop 63: even stricter gun control

“I am all for smart gun control, but I don’t particularly agree with all of these measures and am not sure what the effect of the actual execution will be.”

(diff) NO on Prop 64: legalizes recreational marijuana

I am changing my vote on this measure for two main reasons:

1. Not enough protection of the medical marijuana industry in CA.
2. I don’t see this blocking the creation of Big Weed.

This measure essentially makes it difficult to continue on as a medical marijuana user. Yes, a good number of current medical marijuana users are not really in it for medical reasons. However, for those who are using it for medicinal purposes, to pay retail prices for the quantity of marijuana that they use, would become cost-prohibitive.

I was asking a current medical marijuana user @BallotCon about what it would cost on the retail market to get the amount that‘s used for medicinal purposes: $6,000-$24,000. Obviously, this isn’t something that’s going to be covered by insurance anytime in the near future, so that’s pretty expensive for an average citizen to cover. Whereas, right now, they can grow it themselves at much lower costs.

As for “Big Weed”: looking at all the people funding the Yes on Prop 64, it just smells like a money grab. A lot of people who want to make a good return on their money (like Wall Street) are funding this. That just doesn’t seem right for me. There’s enough support state-wide for the legalization of recreational marijuana, so let’s let our legislature negotiate a good solution.

(same) NO on Prop 65 & YES on 67: plastic bag ban + if banned, who keeps the fee?

This just looks like a play by the plastic industry to confuse voters, which I particularly disdain…and there’s enough trash in our oceans.