The Day After Some More Elections

Well, time for a little post-election analysis, focusing on California.

All eight propositions on the ballot were defeated yesterday, including the four Gov. Schwarzenegger had put on the ballot as part of his reform package. Two of the four were somewhat close votes, the other two were pretty well trounced.

As expected Democrats celebrated; Senate leader Don Perata stated that the Governor "took a wrong turn in January and we wasted a year", while Dianne Feinstein said "The election results should send a strong message that the voters are tired of having issues that should be solved by their representatives placed before them on the ballot,". Hmm, I could definitely criticize Dianne here (like she's never played ANY role in getting some proposition on the ballot), but what's the point.

I was actually surprised to hear that Perata and Assembly Leader Fabian Nunez publicly state today that they were in favor of election redistricting reform, and that they would begin work on it soon. I will not be holding my breath, I suggest you don't either.

So what really happened? Did people vote against Arnold? Against having to vote on propositions? Against the propositions themselves?

Some interesting facts:

1. Labor and Unions outspent Arnold two to one this election. Not bad considering they did it with money that their membership cannot tell leadership which campaigns to use it on. Haha, I couldn't help it.

2. What kind of argument, against Proposition 74, is this (straight from the voter guide) : "Proposition 74 doesn't reduce class size or provide new textbooks, computers, or other urgently needed learning materials. It doesn't improve teacher training or campus safety. Nor does it increase educational funding or fix one leaking school roof." Who said it does? Man, I would LOVE a job where after two years I couldn't be fired. That seems like the way to really encourage growth in one's job.

3. See my note above on Dem. leadership saying today how much they want redistricting reform.

Was there anything wrong with any of these Props? Well I surely didn't like Prop 76 - that's just too much power in the hands of the governor. But what's wrong with the other three?

Prop 77- I HATED the argument that we couldn't trust judges with this; we seem to be ok trusting them with life and death issues, so why not redrawing lines? And the whole concept that they could potentially not be diverse enough sickens me. Yes, I'm a white male, but the whole notion that BECAUSE I'm a white male I can't keep diversity in my decision-making process is amazing. Would a panel of three minority judges remember to keep white people's needs in mind? If I said that publicly I'd be shot.

Prop 74 - Why should teachers get that kind of probation period? Are we really hoping to attract teachers by saying that we'll only keep you under probation for two years? That's what attracts teachers here? Maybe we should raise their salaries instead.... Besides, in a fun fact I learned the other day, Washington DC spends the most money per student; over $15,000 a student; and as we all know, that is not a city known for great schools. So, in a state where 50% of all money is mandated for education, maybe we need to start rethinking this....

Prop 75 - I'm sorry, if I were in a union I'd want to know how my money was being spent and have some control over that. Most people who are in unions don't have any choice - they MUST join the union - then they pay their mandatory dues and leadership gets to decide how to spend the money. Was Arnold making a power grab? Probably - should this law have been extended to corporations and the way they spend money? Yes!(in fact, labor may be putting such a Prop on the June ballot) - does all this mean it should have been voted down? Who am I to say...