Tuesday, October 26, 2010

Current Events-Elections 2010


Review the local propositions on the November ballot, and choose one to outline. Where do our leaders stand on the issues? Where do our parties stand on the issues? For example, Prop 19, legalizing marijuana: what are the pros and cons? What is the position of those running in this state election?
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=130812586

20 comments:

  1. Right now the debate for wether or not marijuana should be legalized in California is still up in the air. For the most part the rules of legal pot have not changed. "Prop. 19 would let people age 21 or older legally possess as much as an ounce of marijuana, and grow it in a space of up to 25 square feet. Cities and counties could choose whether to regulate and tax commercial production and sale. Possessing it on school grounds, using it in public, smoking it while minors are present or providing it to anyone under 21 would remain illegal, as would driving while impaired." There are people against this idea such as MADD or Mothers Against Drunk Driving. Their view point is that "Prop. 19 would threaten public safety, violate federal law and drug-free workplace rules, allow a patchwork of different regulations, and wouldn't raise much, if any, tax revenue. Those critics include Mothers Against Drunk Driving; most law enforcement groups; all major-party candidates for governor, state attorney general and U.S. Senate; the California League of Cities; the California State Association of Counties; and business groups." Right now its still any ones vote but according to recent polls the opposers of Prop. 19 are in the lead.
    http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_localsfo/20101025/ts_yblog_localsfo/prop-19-could-flicker-out

    ReplyDelete
  2. Prop 19 has many pros, but the cons are also major. If passed Prop 19 will legalize pot Marijuana. This enables the state government to tax it and also watch its progression, more easily regulating who uses it. However if legalized, there will be greater penalties for minors caught with possession. The taxation of marijuana would be just as much of a bad thing as good. It will help get our state out of deficit, but people shouldn't have to pay to grow their plants. Jerry Brown is against the legalization of marijuana because he believes it will influence the power of international drug cartels. Whitman is also opposed to it, but displays little knowledge of the topic or proposition.

    http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2010/10/21/poll-california-voters-back-off-whitman-prop-19/

    ReplyDelete
  3. Currently, California is voting whether or not to legalize marijuana. This proposition, if passed would allow people 21 and older to possess, use and grow marijuana. There would be a high tax which would directly benefit the state's economy. In addition to taxes, it would also create many new jobs. The biggest conflict is that it goes against Federal policy. If this proposition passes, it will show how desperate the state of California is to get out of its current economic crisis.
    The biggest fears of those against legalizing marijuana are the health risks and hazards of people under the influence of the drug. Driving under the influence of weed could be very dangerous for the public. If this proposition is passed, it will have both positive and negative affects on the people of California.

    ReplyDelete
  4. The question of whether or not marijuana should or should not be legalized has yet to be answered. Proposition 19, the Marijuana Legalization Initiative 2010, will "legalize various marijuana-related activities, allow local governments to regulate these activities, permit local governments to impose and collect marijuana-related fees and taxes, and authorize various criminal and civil penalties."
    (http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/California_Proposition_19,_the_Marijuana_Legalization_Initiative_(2010))
    Eleven cities in California have ballot measures that are local for people to vote on this proposition. Our leader, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger "signed SB 1449 on October 1, 2010. Effective January 1, 2011, SB 1449 turns the possession of less than an ounce of marijuana from a criminal misdemeanor into an civil infraction." Medical marijuana is legal in California as well as the rest of the United States of America. Some of the pros are, it prohibits people from having marijuana on school campuses, in public, or smoking in front of minors. It is expected to "Savings of up to several tens of millions of dollars annually to state and local governments on the costs of incarcerating and supervising certain marijuana offenders. Unknown but potentially major tax, fee, and benefit assessment revenues to state and local government related to the production and sale of marijuana products." Some of the cons are, if people go against the laws that are set and take advantage of legalizing marijuana. Also impaired drivers could cause many crashes and or deaths. But this proposition is expected to save a ton of money.
    (http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/California_Proposition_19,_the_Marijuana_Legalization_Initiative_(2010))
    As for the two candidates running in the state election, Meg Whitman said, " "Every single law enforcement official in this entire state is against Proposition 19." She is against proposition 19 and believes that every other law enforcement official is as well, against this proposition. Jerry Brown is against the legalization of marijuana as well, he believes that there are more cons than pros to this proposition.
    (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/10/21/cops-blast-meg-whitman-fo_n_771899.html)
    Both the Republicans and Democrats are against passing proposition 19. Both parties agree that passing this proposition will have more negative outcomes than positive.

    ReplyDelete
  5. November 2nd, 2011 is a big date for many politicians, but most importantly the two gubernatorial candidates running for governor, Jerry Brown and Meg Whitman. Among who runs for governor, there is also legislation being voted upon. These propositions will affect our daily lives, and maybe what the government will be focusing upon for the term of the legislation. Prop 23, a proposition, if passed will suspend AB 23. AB 23 is also known as the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006. Prop 23 would stay in effect until the unemployment rate drops below 5.5% from its now 12.4%. Since money is being directed towards reducing greenhouse gas levels to that of 1990’s by 2020, there is not much money going into funding those that are unemployed, or those that will employ the unemployed. In 2006 Governor Schwarzenegger declared "I say the debate is over. We know the science. We see the threat. And we know the time for action is now. Global warming and the pollution and burning of fossil fuels that cause it are threats we see here in California and everywhere around the world.”
    The most important candidates running for governor, Jerry Brown and Meg Whitman, have stated their stances towards this propositions. Meg Whitman is for prop 23, criticizing AB 23 as a “dangerous job killer.” Jerry Brown, being the first candidate to oppose prop 23, is against it and questions his opponents inconsistent stance towards the proposition. Jerry Brown calls California’s climate change legislation “vital to the survival of our industry.”
    The pros that may come with the passing of Prop 19 include a better economy at the cost of suspending our fight against greenhouse gases. Our economy would redirect attention towards those that are in need, and may open doors to climate change advocate jobs. The cons of not passing Prop 19 include our fight against global warming would suffer for a time, that is detrimental and is in much need of action. Our gas intake is on the rise everyday and ridding our dependence on gasoline would benefit us, and future generations to come. If we can make another solution, it would be to compromise the two sides and make jobs to fight climate change. That would benefit both and if advocated by both then there wouldn’t be an issue.

    http://gov.ca.gov/speech/1885/
    http://articles.sfgate.com/2010-09-24/news/24086995_1_meg-whitman-climate-change-law-alternative-energy
    http://www.jerrybrown.org/brown-blasts-proposition-23-questions-whitmans-commitment-californias-green-economy

    ReplyDelete
  6. "Proposition 19, which would legalize marijuana in California, is the most talked-about ballot initiative in the country. If it passes, it would revolutionize the state's drug laws, provoke a clash with the federal government and fire up the movement to pass similar laws in other states — even other countries." Proposition 19 is the regulation of recreational use of marijuana. It allows users to have up to 1 oz of marijuana and a growing space. It only permits users of 21 years of age and older. Though the pros include release of many people in jail for marijuana-related crimes; which will lead to spending less money on prisions. It will also lift up our economic debt in California, and take police official's attention to more important and dangerous crimes. Another pro is more jobs, "And the endorsement of the Service Employees International Union and the United Food and Commercial Workers, which see legalized marijuana as an industry that could create union jobs, means slate mailers will reach about 900,000 members and hundreds of volunteers will make calls and walk precincts." This is especially important in our decreasing jobs here in California. The cons include higher tax and regulation, more driving laws (as one may NOT drive under the influence of marijuana), and more laws against under-age smoking. Also, many other people believe that proposition 19 promotes higher drug use. It is, right now, the most popular campaign in California today. Whether it passes or not, we we find out after the poll on November 2nd, 2010.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Prop 23 suspends implementation of air pollution control law requiring major sources of emissions to report and reduce greenhouse gas emissions that cause global warming, until unemployment drops to 5.5 percent or less for full year. The pros of prop 23 are that it saves over one million california jobs, saves billions in higher energy taxes and costs. The cons of prop 23 are that texas oil companies designed prop 23 to kill california clean energy and air pollution. Both are very misleading and confusing. Democrats oppose prop 23 and Republicans support prop 23.

    ReplyDelete
  8. A California Congressional Redistricting Initiative, Proposition 20 is on the November 2, 2010 ballot in California. Election officials announced on May 5 that the proposition had collected sufficient signatures to qualify for the ballot. The measure is known by its supporters as the VOTERS FIRST Act for Congress.

    The Congressional Redistricting Initiative, if approved by voters, will:

    * Add the task of re-drawing congressional district boundaries to the commission created by Proposition 11.
    * Define a "community of interest" as "a contiguous population which shares common social and economic interests that should be included within a single district for purposes of its effective and fair representation. Examples of such shared interests are those common to an urban area, an industrial area, or an agricultural area, and those common to areas in which the people share similar living standards, use the same transportation facilities, have similar work opportunities, or have access to the same media of communication relevant to the election process."

    Ballot language was filed by Charles Munger, Jr., who is also Proposition 20's largest financial supporter. He was a supporter of Proposition 11 in 2008, which created a new way for political districts to be drawn for California's state legislators and its state Board of Equalization.

    A competing initiative that has also qualified for the November 2 ballot, Proposition 27, Elimination of the Citizen Redistricting Commission, seeks to repeal Proposition 11.

    Proposition 20 and Proposition 27 each have a so-called "poison pill" provision. This means that if they both receive a majority vote, the proposition that receives the highest majority vote is the law that will go into effect. This means that they could both, technically, be approved, but that only one of them would become law.

    Legislative and congressional redistricting will take place in every state in the wake of the 2010 federal census. Ballot questions about redistricting are on the ballot not just in California, but also in Florida and in Oklahoma.

    Biography:
    http://www.ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/California_Proposition_20,_Congressional_Redistricting_(2010)

    ReplyDelete
  9. Proposition 19 is now in debate as to whether marijuana should be legal on conditional terms. "This measure would make lawful specified personal marijuana activities, authorize local governments to regulate and control specified commercial activities, and allow for local governments to impose appropriate marijuana fees or taxes." http://www.boe.ca.gov/news/pdf/Proposition%2019%20draft%20analysis.pdf
    There are many pros and cons to this act. This act would allow medical patients to receive some relief from their suffering and pain. This act would also provide more job opportunities for those who would have to make and distribute this drug. Also, taxes would go down because the money used to regulate marijuana would go down because there would less to regulate. Some possible cons would include the abuse of the distribution of marijuana. There will always be a struggle in regulating the drug and making sure that it's distribution is not abused. It could also build up to become a gate way drug to other dangers of drug dealing.
    Candidates Meg Whitman and Jerry Brown are both strongly against the idea of legalizing marijuana. In an interview, Jerry Brown stated, "I don't think fostering chemicals is a smart move." http://www.politicsverbatim.org/topics/marijuana/ Neither party is for this proposition and they are certain of their opinions.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Proposition 21 is on the November ballot this year, and it states that $18 would be charged annually when someone registers a motor vehicle. "The surcharge revenues would be used to provide funding for state park and wildlife conservation programs. Vehicles subject to the surcharge would have free admission and parking at all state parks." (http://www.voterguide.sos.ca.gov/propositions/21/). The $18 that are collected by the DMV would go straight to the California State Parks to cover any maintenence, and provide park rangers. Those who are in favor state that, "Thousands of scenic acres are closed to the public because of reductions in park rangers, and crime has more than doubled. Destruction and vandalism of the parks themselves has grown fourfold, and beachgoers are often unprotected because of decreases in lifeguards."(http://www.yesforstateparks.com/get-the-facts/fact-sheets/general-fact-sheet.
    With this extra charge annually, our State Parks would be a lot safer, cleaner and pleasant. Aside from that we would all have free admission into these State Parks whenever we want. We wouldn't have to worry about having that extra cash to pay when we attend any California State Park.
    Those who are against Prop 21 state that "For the first time in many years, California's parks would be flush with money. But they would be the only item in the state budget that could make such a boast. Schools, colleges, DMV offices, health clinics, public transportation — almost everything has taken hits during the economic crisis and would continue to do so."(http://articles.latimes.com/2010/sep/27/opinion/la-ed-prop21-20100927)
    Their argument is that those who dont visit State Parks would be paying these extra $18 without knowing if the State Parks are actually being improved and maintained. Some believe that there are other important issues that need that money, more than the State Parks, for example education and health care.
    "Environment California is endorsing Jerry Brown for governor. As a long time advocate for the environment, Brown has the know-how and the experience to make a real difference on key environmental issues in California"(http://www.environmentcalifornia.org/issues/election-2010) Jerry BRown supports this proposition.
    Meg Whitman is opposed to this proposition.

    ReplyDelete
  11. A local proposition on the November ballot would be Prop 22. It prohibits the state from borrowing or taking funds used for transportation, redevelopment, or local government projects and services. This proposition illustrates the power struggle between state and local governments. Supporters include the League of California Cities and redevelopment agencies. They support this proposition because it will stop the state from taking money that belongs to local government which helps them run transportation and form new building projects. Opponents include California's teachers and firefighters, who say further restriction of state funding will cause deeper cuts in schools, public safety, and health care. Ventura County Supervisor, Kathy Long says that if Prop 22 passes, "$1 billion will be cut from the school system" (http://www.caivn.org/article/2010/10/22/prop-22-could-play-pivotal-role-future-california-budgets). Meg Whitman supports Prop 22 because she thinks it's right to prevent the state from stealing money from cities. Jerry Brown has not taken a stand on this proposition.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Proposition 25 is a majority vote initiate. It would require legislatures to pass the budget on time with a simple majority instead of two-thirds. If they do not pass the budget on time they will forfeit pay. “Provides that if the Legislature fails to pass a budget bill by June 15, all members of the Legislature will permanently forfeit any reimbursement for salary and expenses for every day until the day the Legislature passes a budget bill.” (http://www.ballotpedia.org) By passing the budget on time it would save the state money. Late budgets waste the taxpayers’ money. The draw back of this proposition would be a bad budget. The legislatures might just pass a budget to get there pay, but it would cause more harm than good. The California Democratic Party favors proposition 25. The Republican Party is against prop 25.

    ReplyDelete
  13. The political issue in today's society would be Proposition 23. Proposition 23 is the issue on "Suspends implementation of air pollution control law (AB 32) requiring major sources of emissions to report and reduce greenhouse emissions that cause global warming, until unemployment drops to 5.5 percent or less for full year."
    (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Proposition_23_(2010)#Political_parties)
    The political leaders who would be for the issue is Barbara Boxer Jerry Brown. The political leaders who are against the issue is Dianne Feinstein, Meg Whitman, and Arnold Schwarzenegger.

    ReplyDelete
  14. If the adults do this what can they expect from their children, if they don't show the example to us what can we learn from them now.
    Most of young people are marijuana's users since 12 years old, kids start consuming this type of drug, in my opinion, I totally disagree with these people. Before they Legalize marijuana, people should start thinking about their future.
    because, we know there are kids that consume marijuana today, but there still good kids out there.
    Legalizing marijuana is just going to give more money to the government with paying taxes, etc.
    In someway it might be good, and in someway it might be bad

    ReplyDelete
  15. Prop 19 is the legalization of marijuana. Its probably the most controversial proposition on the ballot. The benefits of it would be tax revenue to the state, more jail space, and reduction of crime. Obviously, if it passes, it won't last long. Someone will complain to the federal government, and they will shut it down. But if it does pass, it will send a mesage of what the people want. I think a problem with it is testing. There arent really many efficient ways to test to see if someone is high at the time. Of course, this isn't a valid reason against it, because someone could be driving high if marijuana was still illegal, and would still be difficult to prove. But above all, if proposition 19 is passed, all the hippies at music festivals will have nothing to talk about, and isn't that really want we've wanted all along?

    http://www.ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/California_Proposition_19,_the_Marijuana_Legalization_Initiative_(2010)

    ReplyDelete
  16. I think marijuana should be legal because the State needs more money to save but some people don't like it to be legal because is not necessary to get the economy better. That means people can be crazy in the city and the state. Obama is probably not going to let California do that.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Prop 19 is a very controversial prop. Legalizing marijuana would, like mentioned in the responses above, bring in tax revenue to the state but I believe it would bring in very little of it. This is because I do not believe the government will be able to make positively sure that every marijuana dealers, whom will legally be able to possess and distribute marijuana, would pay their tax on the product. So legalization doesn't really make that much sense. It's more of a danger to the nation be legalized then it already is illegally.On the other hand legalizing marijuana would cause the release of many prisoners for state prisons, making more jail space for more extreme lawbreakers, and the release would mean the economy could stabilize a little more.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Proposition 19 of this year's Gubernatorial election is quite the controversial topic, or as I write, was. The official summary of the ballot is that if instated it "Allows people 21 years old or older to possess, cultivate, or transport marijuana for personal use. Permits local governments to regulate and tax commercial production and sale of marijuana to people 21 years old or older. Prohibits people from possessing marijuana on school grounds, using it in public, smoking it while minors are present, or providing it to anyone under 21 years old. Maintains current prohibitions against driving while impaired". Initially it was greeted with a positive response, but as the weeks began to droll on, the percentage of those for began to dwindle in comparison to those against. Both of the main running candidates for California's governor position opposed the bill as well as numerous well known politicians including re-elected senator Barbara Boxer and both Attorney General Candidates Kamala Harris and Steve Cooley.
    The pros of this would be "savings up to several tens of millions of dollars annually to state and local governments on the cost of incarcerating and supervising certain marijuana offenders", not to mention potential major revenues to the state related to the marketing of marijuana. The cons obviously allowing a what is considered harmful substance free into the streets endangering those who feel it should not be even grown in the first place.
    On an unrelated note, this proposition seemed to give the wrong idea to many people. As I was also mistaken, this proposition would not necessarily legalize marijuana, as this is a federal law and cannot be changed by the state. However, if passed, proponents of the proposition hope to raise a movement across the United States, that eventually would take over enough to challenge the law in the Supreme Court.
    However, the law did not pass, and thus we wait for another year to see if such a radical law can have a place in our state, if not our country.

    http://www.ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/California_Proposition_19,_the_Marijuana_Legalization_Initiative_(2010)

    ReplyDelete
  19. Prop 19 will legalize marijuana so that adults can possess an ounce and not get in trouble for smoking it. Adults must be age 21 and older to possess and consume marijuana or grow it in a 25 square foot area. I believe that if this prop is passed then it will be better for adults because they won't go to jail for such a minor offense but at the same time, children could get in more trouble for using inappropriate material. Also, because there is tax on marijuana, people will have to pay to grow and buy marijuana. Jerry Brown is against the legalization of marijuana because he believes that drug cartels will be able to get more power for having such a large amount of marijuana that is now legal to sell and easier to sell. Meg Whitman is also against the legalization of marijuana, but she doesn't have a lot of knowledge on the topic.

    http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2010/10/21/poll-california-voters-back-off-whitman-prop-19/

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_localsfo/20101025/ts_yblog_localsfo/prop-19-could-flicker-out

    ReplyDelete
  20. Proposition 19, also known as the Marijuana Legalization Initiative, proposed that marijuana should be legalized in the state of California to a certain amount. Had it passed, anyone over the age of 21 would be allowed to possess no more than one ounce of weed and would be allowed to grow it within an area of 25 square feet. Also, the government would have been allowed to regulate and tax it. Some of the pros are that the tax brought in from legally selling the drug would help lower the California deficit, which is currently the highest out of any other state in the country. Another pro is that there would be less people in jail which means less money would be spent in jails and there would be more money to spend on things like school. Also it would turn the governments attention to more serious and dangerous crimes. Another pro would be that it would create a lot more jobs which would really help our economy. There are also cons to legalization of marijuana though, such as if it were legalized it would give underage kids the impression that smoking marijuana is ok which means there would be a lot more people “addicted” to it and there would be a lot more people driving and/or working under the influence.

    http://www.ballotpedia.us/wiki/index.php/California_Proposition_19,_the_Marijuana_Legalization_Initiative_(2010)

    ReplyDelete