Ballot Initiatives: The Good, The Bad And The Ugly

[Charlie T Waite]

[Hardpan Curmudgeon SASS #8967]

Quote

The law requires that an initiative must have an accurate, honest title and summary, as the complete text of the proposed law is usually far too long to be placed on the ballot.

 

We see this a LOT in California.

 

The classic example is 2014's Proposition 47, "a criminal justice reform that reduced simple drug possession and some property crimes from felonies to misdemeanors, thereby realizing cost savings that would be reinvested in preventative and county-based services and interventions."

 

This led to literally opening the doors of jails and state prisons; many felons were passed down from state prisons to already crowded county jails.  Due to that overcrowding, many, many were released.  The proposition also established a $950 value for theft, forgery, fraud - any that did not exceed that value would be classified as a misdemeanor, essentially a "ticket-able offense."  Shoplifting and other theft crimes skyrocketed.

 

Oh... and Prop 47's title on the ballot??

 

Proposition 47: The Safe Neighborhoods and Schools Act

 

[bgavin]

Bad checks, identity theft and sex trafficing were also decriminalized.
Here in Sacramento, the thieves walk out of stores with arms full of stolen merchandise.
My neighbors work in grocery stores who force employees to sign contracts they will not confront nor apprehend shoplifters, on fear of termination.

Nobody remembers the lesson of appeasement taught by Neville Chamberlain.

I understand there is a proposition on the November ballot to restore some of these criminal penalties.
 

[Blackwater 53393]

16 hours ago, bgavin said:

Nobody remembers the lesson of appeasement taught by Neville Chamberlain.

 

 

That’s because most of these politicians are Quislings!!

[bgavin]

It sure does seem that way.

 

[Hardpan Curmudgeon SASS #8967]

21 hours ago, bgavin said:

I understand there is a proposition on the November ballot to restore some of these criminal penalties.
 

 

That would be Prop 20, which barely begins to correct Prop 47.

 

Oh... another proposition of interest is Prop 17.  This one would allow 17-year-olds to register to vote in general elections if they turn 18 by that election date, but does allow them to  vote in primary and special elections at age 17.

[bgavin]

When in doubt, vote NO on everything.
The lone exception is Prop 20, which does seek to restore SOME criminal penalties removed by voter-approved Prop 47.

Maybe it will be illegal once again to steal identities and sex-traffic children.
One can always hope.

The 800 pound gorilla on the ballot is the repeal of Prop 13 commercial property tax protections.

Make no mistake:  this is a huge tax increase. 
CA is hungry for $12 billion in increased tax revenues, and is determined to squeeze it out of CA commercial property owners.
After the smoke clears, they will repeal Prop13 for residential tax protection.
 

Increasing the taxes paid by the business absolutely increases the price of goods and services provided by that business.  This is a knee-jerk reaction as certain as the sun rising in the East every morning.

Sad to say it, but I have every confidence the Zero Liability Voters will support this in droves. 
They are stupid sheep, not realizing they are raising the prices on everything they buy from any business residing in a commercial building.  

Including apartment buildings.

This is how economic Death Spirals are created.

 

 

[Hardpan Curmudgeon SASS #8967]

21 hours ago, bgavin said:

The 800 pound gorilla on the ballot is the repeal of Prop 13 commercial property tax protections.

Make no mistake:  this is a huge tax increase. 

CA is hungry for $12 billion in increased tax revenues, and is determined to squeeze it out of CA commercial property owners.
After the smoke clears, they will repeal Prop13 for residential tax protection.
 

 

For those not familiar with California's Prop 13, a brief explanation:

 

Passed in 1978, Prop 13 placed strict limits on property tax, including limiting the amount said taxes could be increased due to property value capital appreciation.  

 

A simple example would be people (I knew several) who were retired, their homes were paid for, yet were forced to sell and move, as they could not afford the huge, runaway increases in taxes supposedly based on the increased value of those homes.  

 

The proposition was heartily opposed by a certain party (guess who loves taxes), but passed by a vote of something like 63% to 32%.  A true taxpayer revolt.  "D" controlled cities immediately cut back on services and closed public areas and blamed it on the people who passed this terrible proposition.  (The very morning after the election, the City of San Francisco Public Works Department chained and locked the gates to the playground next door to my apartment building).

 

The earlier mentioned tax-loving party has been trying for years to overturn or heavily modify the law... and here they go again.  

[bgavin]

When my mom passed, I found out the hard way that her trust attorney failed to do his job.
There is a Form 58 or somesuch that protects children from horrendous tax increases.

I got a supplemental tax bill from San Diego where they raised my taxes to $16,600 yearly.
The bill was a $24,000 supplemental tax bill.
Payable in 60 days or lose the property to a tax sale.

I ponied up the cash, and spent the next two years (at $16,600 per year) trying to get my money back.
I was successful, and they returned all my money, without interest, after having 2 years' free use of it.

The good news:  San Diego did not send it back as a "tax refund" which would have force me to pay income taxes on my own money.

The repeal of Prop13, will destroy the CA economy in every aspect.

[Hardpan Curmudgeon SASS #8967]

32 minutes ago, bgavin said:

When my mom passed, I found out the hard way that her trust attorney failed to do his job.
There is a Form 58 or somesuch that protects children from horrendous tax increases.
 

 

That would be Prop 58, from 1986.  That was actually a voter-passed constitutional amendment that excluded property from reassessment when passed between parents and children grandchildren.

 

A good thing!!