California Propositions November 3, 2020

by Tony Medley

 PROP 14 AUTHORIZES BONDS CONTINUING STEM CELL RESEARCH. INITIATIVE STATUTE.

This measure claims a cost of $5 billion but opponents say it will be at least $7.3 billion. Regardless, medical research should not be financed by bondholders of state bonds. This is just another California boondoggle.

No

PROP 15 INCREASES FUNDING SOURCES FOR PUBLIC SCHOOLS, COMMUNITY COLLEGES, AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT SERVICES BY CHANGING TAX ASSESSMENT OF COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.

This is another lie by state Atty. Gen. Xavier Becerra who is accomplished at misinforming voters in his presentation of propositions. In essence, this is an attack on the revered proposition 13 that had so helped middle-class Californians over the decades. It’s a property tax increase that is presently banned by proposition 13. It’s the first step in the Democrats avowed intention to get rid of proposition 13, which limits property taxes on real estate to 1% of the purchase price when the owner bought the property. This will apply only to commercial and industrial property but it will be devastating to small businesses.

No

 PROP 16 ALLOWS DIVERSITY AS A FACTOR IN PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT, EDUCATION, AND CONTRACTING DECISIONS. LEGISLATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.

This proposition would repeal California’s current ban on affirmative action enacted by Proposition 209 in 1996. It was placed on the ballot by the Democratic controlled state legislature. It amends the state constitution to allow affirmative action, in other words and specifically, race may be considered in hiring and school admissions. Basically, it will allow less qualified people to be hired and admitted to schools solely because of the race. This would allow the state to discriminate against better qualified people of the majority race in favor of less qualified people of a minority race. That is racism.

No

PROP 17 RESTORES RIGHT TO VOTE AFTER COMPLETION OF PRISON TERM. LEGISLATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.

This is another attempt by Democrats to amend California's constitution to grant violent criminals the right to vote before completing their sentence including parole. Just as a blatant example, it allows criminals convicted of murder, rape and child molestation to vote before paying their debt to society. How would that make victims feel?

No

PROP 18 AMENDS CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION TO PERMIT 17-YEAR-OLDS TO VOTE IN PRIMARY AND SPECIAL ELECTIONS IF THEY WILL TURN 18 BY THE NEXT GENERAL ELECTION AND BE OTHERWISE ELIGIBLE TO VOTE. LEGISLATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT

Yet another attempt by Democrats to amend the State Constitution, this time to allow 17 year-olds to vote. Today’s Law prohibits younger teens from smoking, drinking and even tanning because research shows the logic and reasoning area of their brains is not fully developed. Those abilities are vital to responsible voting. Considering the low quality of education provided by Calfornia public schools, who would want a 17-year-old to have any influence on any election? They don't have the life experience or education to have reliable judgment.

No

PROP 19 CHANGES CERTAIN PROPERTY TAX RULES. LEGISLATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.

Again, the Democrats are attempting to attack Proposition 13 with a reprehensibly misleading title. "Proposition 19 is an attempt by Sacramento politicians to raise property taxes by removing two voter-approved taxpayer protections from the State Constitution. This measure would require reassessment to market value of property transferred from parents to children, and from grandparents to grandchildren."—Jon Coupal, President, Howard Jarvis Taxpayers

No

PROP 20 RESTRICTS PAROLE FOR CERTAIN OFFENSES CURRENTLY CONSIDERED TO BE NON-VIOLENT. AUTHORIZES FELONY SENTENCES FOR CERTAIN OFFENSES CURRENTLY TREATED ONLY AS MISDEMEANORS. INITIATIVE STATUTE.

This is an initiative and it toughens the law that was loosened by a previous Proposition. It:

• Changes state law to increase criminal penalties for some theft-related crimes.
• Changes how people released from state prison are supervised in the community.
• Makes various changes to the process created by Proposition 57 (2016) for considering the release of inmates from prison.
• Requires state and local law enforcement to collect DNA from adults convicted of certain crimes.

With soft on crime DAs supported by George Soros being elected in different jurisdictions (one is running against LA County DA Jackie Lacey and was endorsed by the LA Times), we need tougher laws to keep bad people in prison longer.

Yes

PROP 21  EXPANDS LOCAL GOVERNMENTS' AUTHORITY TO ENACT RENT CONTROL ON RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY. INITIATIVE STATUTE.

Another attempt by Democrats to stifle free enterprise and restrict landlords from earning a reasonable return on their investments. Landlords were made to bear the burden of the China Virus and have become easy victims for Democrat politicians to attack. But landlords are the ones who are providing housing. Where does it say that they have to subsidize renters?

No

PROP 22 EXEMPTS APP-BASED TRANSPORTATION AND DELIVERY COMPANIES FROM PROVIDING EMPLOYEE BENEFITS TO CERTAIN DRIVERS. INITIATIVE STATUTE.

This one is in response to last year’s Assembly Bill 5, which forced companies like Uber and Lyft to recognize its drivers as employees and provide the benefits and protections that come along with that. Proposition 22 would essentially reverse that but guarantee drivers a minimum level of compensation and health care subsidies. The few drivers with whom I have spoken were against Assembly Bill 5 and say it would impact their means of livelihood. According to the Mercury News, Uber and Lyft say their futures depend on it.

Yes

PROP 23 ESTABLISHES STATE REQUIREMENTS FOR KIDNEY DIALYSIS CLINICS. REQUIRES ON-SITE MEDICAL PROFESSIONAL. INITIATIVE STATUTE.

I seem to recall voting against this once before: Proposition 8 in 2018. This would greatly increase the cost of dialysis and probably close down lots of clinics who are providing the service. It seems to be bureaucratic nonsense without rhyme or reason.

No

PROP 24 AMENDS CONSUMER PRIVACY LAWS. INITIATIVE STATUTE.

According to one source, Proposition 24, also known as the California Privacy Rights and Enforcement Act of 2020, would expand or amend the provisions of the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018, create the California Privacy Protection Agency, and remove the ability of businesses to fix violations before being penalized for violations. The ballot initiative would require businesses to do the following:

• not share a consumer's personal information upon the consumer's request;

• provide consumers with an opt-out option for having their sensitive personal information, as defined in law, used or disclosed for advertising or marketing;

• obtain permission before collecting data from consumers who are younger than 16;

• obtain permission from a parent or guardian before collecting data from consumers who are younger than 13; and

• correct a consumer's inaccurate personal information upon the consumer's request.

I don’t like more laws and this one is something like 52 pages long. I’m not going to read it. Here’s what Richard Holober, President of the Consumer Federation of California, a Democrat, says,  "No one reads the thousands of words of legal fine print that you have to 'Accept' before you can use an app or visit a website. The fine print is where you sacrifice your privacy. The same is true of Proposition 24. Its 52 pages are full of privacy reductions and giveaways to Facebook, social media platforms and big tech companies that misuse our personal information." If that’s true and if it helps Facebook, I’m against it. I also checked with people I respect who know about it and they agree.

 No

 PROP 25 REFERENDUM ON LAW THAT REPLACED MONEY BAIL WITH SYSTEM BASED ON PUBLIC SAFETY AND FLIGHT RISK.

“No bail” is the new rallying cry for the lawless DAs, again supported by George Soros, that means that violent criminals can’t be held. They get arrested and released. This is a referendum on the idiotic law passed by the Democratic state legislature and signed into law by Newsom. It’s ordinary people’s chance to overturn the law and keep dangerous people who are arrested to be held in jail unless they pay bail. But since it’s a referendum to overturn the law, if you want bail to remain a part of our criminal justice system, you have to vote “No!”

 No