Blog: Propositions - Big Money and Constitutionality + the Facts

Propositions - Influence of Big Money and Corporations, Constitutionality + the real facts about public education funding.

I was a history minor at USC, and I am a native Californian. So with that understanding, I think it’s important for all of us to recall that propositions were originally placed on our California ballots to wrestle power away from Leland Stanford and the other railroad magnates who were running Sacramento.  Someone had the good sense to give decision-making to the people. 

That concept was glaringly attacked by PG&E and Mercury Insurance last June.  They wrote initiatives that looked like they were in our best interests—but were really only supportive of their bottom line—profit! And California voters turned down those initiatives.

At that point I decided that I would never support an initiative that was proposed by a corporation. Additionally, in this election I’ve decided that I will not ever support an initiative that is proposed by a very wealthy person who can pay to get the signatures to put their favorite idea on the ballot. 

Big Money and Corporate Initiatives 

I am voting “No” and encourage you to vote “No” on the following:

Proposition 32 – NO

This is funded by Charles Munger,Jr. Clearly he doesn’t like workers and employees. And, in spite of what the “Yes” ads say, it gives unfair power to corporations to influence politics. This is not democratic. NO on 32!!

Proposition 33 – NO

This is funded by Mercury Insurance (again). It changes state laws to ensure that they will make more profit. NO on 33!! 

Proposition 38 – NO

This is funded by Mollie Munger, daughter of Charles Munger and half-sister of Charles Munger, Jr.! Are we really going to allow by a very wealthy man and his half-sister to change our laws? This is a poorly written proposition. It would unnecessarily tax middle income families—for a long time. And it doesn’t start soon enough to help our schools. It also doesn’t address the community college, CSU and UC systems. NO on 38!

And sometimes corporations are against an initiative, which makes me investigate more thoroughly. 

Proposition 37 - YES

There are already ingredient labels on food packages—thanks to Congressman Henry Waxman! Europe has required the GMO label for quite a while without any increase in cost. Don’t we deserve to know what’s in our food? Adding 5 letters (No GMO) to a label isn’t going to cost millions of dollars. And—the corporations supporting “No” on 37 are the manufacturers of GMO seeds: Monsanto, Dupont, Dow. YES on 37!!!


I have always felt that propositions should be reviewed for constitutionality before signatures are gathered and it ends up on the ballot.

Proposition 31 – NO

We live by the Rule of Law. The U.S. Constitution provides the overall laws that we all follow. In California our State Constitution provides the next level of laws.  This proposition would allow local municipalities to ignore those laws when addressing things like the environment. There are some good parts of the proposition but the bad parts are more important. It needs to be re-written. NO on 31 

And finally, the facts on funding public education 

Proposition 30 – YES

When Governor Schwartzenegger reduced the fees on our auto licenses, the state budget immediately went into an $8 billion deficit. No one is discussing his approach to balance the budget—deferred payments to school districts. He started withholding 25 percent of the funding to all school districts and this has been done for at least the past 6 years. 

Imagine the impact on your personal finances if your employer decided to withhold 25 percent of your salary each year—for many years. 

The state budget also depends on revenues—property taxes. The foreclosure rate in CA has significantly contributed to the budget problems in Sacramento.

If Proposition 30 does not pass, all school districts will face an increase in class size, will let teachers go, and some may close schools. This is the fiscal cliff that no one is talking about in California. School districts have NOT been irresponsible in the management of their finances. The need for Proposition 30 is because the state has been withholding 25 percent of their funding every year for the past several years.

Proposition 30 is urgently needed by our public schools. Please join me in voting “Yes” on 30.

This post is contributed by a community member. The views expressed in this blog are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Patch Media Corporation. Everyone is welcome to submit a post to Patch. If you'd like to post a blog, go here to get started.

penny markey November 01, 2012 at 08:17 PM
Diane, Thanks for your sensible and cogent analysis.
Always Right November 06, 2012 at 03:51 AM
Sensible and cogent analysis? Now that is very very funny.


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »