This From a Subscriber Who Recently Voted…

Virtually every initiative that I tried — and tired — to read reminded me that these are all issues that should have been dealt with in the Legislature.  

(Editor’s Note: Totally. The subscriber’s reactions to specific ballot measures follow:) 

Prop. 30:  Tax myself?  Go figure.  No

Prop 31:  Two-year budget?  What would they do in the off-year?  No

Prop. 32:  It’s not my money!  Why should I have a vote?  No.

Prop. 33:  Despite Harvey (Rosenfield), No.

Prop. 34:  It’s time to fire up Sparky!  No.

Prop. 35:  If he didn’t diddle her, how can he be a sex offender?  No.

Prop. 36:  Three Strikes.  A wobbler.  Courts and jails already a mess.  No.

Prop. 37:  Would homeboys care if Mickey D’s sold McGeneburgers?  No.

Prop. 38:  Fire up the Enola Gay! No.

Prop. 39:  Comcast gets a carve out, then they leave town?  No.

Prop. 40:  No.  Too complicated. A yes vote rejects new Senate districts and a no approves.   

(Editor’s Note: Not the voting guide of California’s Capitol, as though this paragon of bipartisanship would presume to create such an abomination. But there’s certainly some trenchant observations here voters might wish to consider. The  long-term impact of firing up Sparky and the Enola Gay being just two examples.)


Filed under: Venting


  1. No on 40?



    Comment by Bruce Ross — 10.16.2012 @ 6:26 pm

  2. Now here’s a guy that thinks like me!

    Comment by Rusty Peter — 10.18.2012 @ 2:37 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Leave a comment