It’s important to remember
– whenever the courts get around to letting Californians vote in
the recall election originally scheduled for Oct. 7 – that the
much-debated recall questions won’t be the only items on the
ballot.
While voters, politicians and pundits have publicly and
dramatically wrestled with whether or not to fire Gov. Gray Davis
and who might replace him, two propositions on the ballot have been
overshadowed by the hoopla surrounding the recall election.
It’s important to remember – whenever the courts get around to letting Californians vote in the recall election originally scheduled for Oct. 7 – that the much-debated recall questions won’t be the only items on the ballot.
While voters, politicians and pundits have publicly and dramatically wrestled with whether or not to fire Gov. Gray Davis and who might replace him, two propositions on the ballot have been overshadowed by the hoopla surrounding the recall election.
Fortunately, how to vote on Propositions 53 and 54 are easy calls: no on both.
Proposition 53 would mandate that up to 3 percent of the state’s General Fund be spent on state and local infrastructure projects. California’s already in a fiscal fiasco with too few options for resolving it. Let’s not tie the legislature’s hands further by mandating how they must spend another piece of the ever-shrinking revenue pie.
Projects should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis, and in context with the state’s current financial situation. When times are tight, it will make sense to spend less on infrastructure projects than in boom periods.
We need flexibility in state budgeting. Currently, less than 30 percent of the state budget is money that can be spent at legislators’ discretion. Let’s not mandate an arbitrary percentage of the General Fund to be spent on infrastructure.
Instead, let’s use our brains during each budgeting cycle and spend what needs to be spent and what we can afford to spend – no more, and no less, whether or not that amount equals 3 percent of the General Fund.
Vote no on Proposition 53.
Proposition 54 would ban the state, local governments and public agencies from classifying any person by race, ethnicity, color or national origin. Exemptions to the Prop. 54’s non-classification rules are allowed if they serve “a compelling state interest.”
But it also requires a two-thirds majority to grant that exemption, as well as the governor’s signature. Requiring a two-thirds majority in Sacramento, especially, is a huge hurdle to overcome.
This Ward Connerly-backed proposition is misleadingly called the “Racial Privacy Initiative” by its proponents. It would be more accurate to call it the “Racial Ignorance Initiative.”
It is critically important and absolutely appropriate to tract key information on the state’s population, educational systems, health care and voting trends – just to name a few – from many points of view: age, gender, place of residence, income level and, yes, even race.
Say ‘no’ to ignorance – vote no on Proposition 54.
