Voters get practical on ballot measures
The way the California electorate came down Tuesday on the 10 measures on the statewide ballot shows the enormous fallacy of the national myth that voters in our state are somehow hostage in a knee-jerk way to merely progressive memes for their own sake.
To the contrary, the votes in the main showed a heartening practicality among the California citizenry, and an unusual ability to think for themselves and split the ticket, as it were, saying yes and no to some proposals that were considered “liberal” and some “conservative” without sticking to party lines.
Many of the results on the individual measures were in agreement with the stand taken by the members of our editorial board, and some were not. At least one of the ballot issues was about a subject so complex and arcane that we should never have been asked to vote on it, and many who did in all likelihood had no idea what they were really deciding on. But the bottom line is that voters in our state showed themselves to be a people who take the time to analyze complicated political and governance issues on a case-by-case basis, and we applaud them for it — making us proud to be Californians.
We’ll take the last of the 10 numbered ballot issues first, as it was the most consequential and got the most lopsided support in the incomplete but nonetheless clear results we have at press time. Proposition 36, “Felonies for theft and drug crimes,” was written to increase prison sentences for certain crimes involving fentanyl and shoplifting, changing them to felonies. It took over 70% of the vote. Clearly, Californians are tired of and worried about crime at all levels, and skeptical of sentencing reforms. For us, the measure includes a return to antiquated ideas: packing our prisons with people for simple drug possession and dealing with homelessness by locking up those with drug problems or who commit low-level theft. But the landslide in favor shows Californians perceive a growing crime problem and an inability of politicians to deal with that problem. With its passage, we must all work together to ensure this doesn’t just become a prison guards’ job-protection act.
Proposition 2, providing public education bonds, allows the state to borrow $10 billion for repairs and upgrades at thousands of public schools and colleges. Almost 57% approved, showing support for educational infrastructure. We disapproved, as bonds are delayed tax increases, and the state’s finances are a mess already. Much of the money raised will be wasted on projects using expensive paid union labor. And for decades to come, the state budget will have less money to tend to the needs of Californians as it tries to repay the bond debt.
Proposition 3 enshrines marriage rights, amending the state constitution to recognize marriage as a fundamental right, replacing the unconstitutional same-sex marriage ban. Our only concern: the 39% in opposition shows some Californians still want to meddle in others’ romantic and family lives. This editorial board believes the government should stay out of the boardroom and out of the bedroom.
Proposition 4’s $10 billion natural resources bonds were approved by 58% of voters. Well, we do love our mountain lions. We aren’t sure it’s worth this mess of a bond, though, which like Prop. 2 will crowd out finite resources.
Proposition 5 has seemingly been rejected by voters, with 56% realizing that requiring just 55% rather than two-thirds of the vote to pass local bond measures could lead to municipal financial ruin and higher property taxes. Make no mistake, if Prop. 5 was approved, Proposition 13 would be next. This was a risky play by the Legislature to gauge whether voters might be receptive to unwinding taxpayer protections.
Proposition 6: 55% properly refuted the notion that requiring convicted felons to work in prison has anything to do with legal “slavery.” This editorial board is sympathetic to the common sense notion that people should be free to make their own choices. But the framing and potential consequences of this measure seemed off base.
Proposition 32: Minimum wages are skyrocketing just fine on their own, thanks, without a statewide mandate, and 52% of Californians said no to a new $18 minimum hourly. While that’s too close to call, it is nice to see that Californians can recognize that minimum wage increases have negative trade-offs.
Proposition 33: Rent control doesn’t work, and 61% of voters refused to let cities set new stricter price controls on rental housing. Californians are right to recognize that government price controls don’t work despite the “good intentions.”
Proposition 34: Absurd as it is to have to ballot-box legislate against the misguided AIDS Healthcare Foundation, 52% agreed that the group needs to stick to its knitting. If this is approved, we can be sure this will end up in the courts either way.
Proposition 35: A supermajority agreed to extend a tax on managed health insurance plans to fund Medi-Cal, even though the Legislature is the place to make such decisions. On the one hand, we questioned the wisdom of putting this before the voters and don’t care for ballot box-budgeting. On the other, there’s no denying that the Legislature would misuse this money if they were able to pass the tax extension before the voters could.