Propositions and Candidates on the February 5, 2008 Ballot

Presidential Candidates | Statewide Propositions | Local City Measures

Presidential Candidates

Libertarian

I am taking no stance on possible Libertarian candidates for President, since our delegates are not assigned through the primary (which instead serves as an opinion poll to guide delegates' choices). I encourage all registered Libertarians to consider serving as a delegate, getting to know the candidates, and making an informed decision at the Libertarian National Convention.

Republican

I recommend voting for Ron Paul.

I do not agree with Dr. Paul on all issues (most especially abortion and his assertion that states may disregard out-of-state marriage contracts), however he is the only candidate of either major party who stands in favor of the Constitution, limited government, and freedom. His stance against the Iraq war and America's militaristic foreign policy frankly trumps my concerns about his other platform issues (particularly since he is the only candidate who believes in the system of checks and balances, so Congress and the courts should be able to keep him in check).

Republican

I tentatively recommend voting for Mike Gravel.

I consider all the Democratic candidates on the California ballot to be very bad for America economically and Constitutionally. However, on the key issues of Iraq (and foreign policy) and civil liberties, Dennis Kucinich, Mike Gravel, and Bill Richardson are the only candidates whose positions I can support. Though I like Kucinich a lot, he remains a true "tax and spend" candidate while Gravel and Richardson both advocate fiscal responsibility. Both Gravel and Richardson have records on gun rights that are better than average. However, of the two only Gravel supports true marriage equality (sadly, through requiring states to recognize it rather than the more sensible approach of getting government out of the marriage business altogether), and so I consider him to be the best of bad choices.

Statewide Propositions

Proposition 91

I recommend a NO vote on Proposition 91.

Even if you support this principal, this proposition is redundant to 1A, which passed in November 2006.

Proposition 92

I recommend a NO vote on Proposition 92.

Mandating spending at the state constitutional level is a recipe for disaster. Nothing in this proposition will get more money into the classroom, and will only increase the waste already inherent in our community college system. We could do far more to reducing costs to students by streamlining our system rather than bogging it down in more red tape.

Proposition 93

I recommend a NO vote on Proposition 93.

This proposition actually weakens our already existing term limits. If you favor term limits, paradoxically, you need to vote against this measure.

Proposition 94, 95, 96, and 97

I recommend a Yes vote on Propositions 94-97.

Frankly, I consider this one a no-win situation. I feel that Native American reservations are sovereign nations, and California should not be negotiating agreements to dictate what they may or may not do in their independent country. But since a "yes" vote will overall enhance rather than restrict these nations' independence, "yes" is the better answer.

Local City Measures

Pasadena Measure D

I strongly recommend a NO vote on Measure D.

This is not what it claims to be. Rather than an extension of an existing tax, Pasadena is asking for the blanket authority to tax the internet. If an extension of the existing tax is needed, Pasadena needs to ask for that. If new taxes are desired, Pasadena needs to ask for them openly and honestly.

There is no need to tax the internet. There is no indication that the city faces an imminent financial problem due to the hypothetical notion that people might give up their phone lines. Even if there were, new taxes must be approved by voters on a case-by-case basis, not imposed unilaterally by the city.

This is a dangerous and deceptive proposition that should be rejected soundly by all voters.

Los Angeles Measure S

I strongly recommend a NO vote on Measure S.

This is not what it claims to be. Under the guise of reducing an existing tax, Los Angeles is asking for the blanket authority to tax the internet. If new taxes are desired, Los Angeles needs to ask for them openly and honestly.

There is no need to tax the internet. There is no indication that the city faces an imminent financial problem due to the hypothetical notion that people might give up their phone lines. Even if there were, new taxes must be approved by voters on a case-by-case basis, not imposed unilaterally by the city.

This is a dangerous and deceptive proposition that should be rejected soundly by all voters.

San Gabriel Measure A

I recommend a NO vote on Measure A.

I'm all in favor of schools, but bond measures are the worst way to pay for improvements. Only a fraction of the money borrowed makes it into the classroom, and the cost to repay the debt is far greater than the cost to simply pay to fix our schools directly. This is like renovating your home on a credit card and expecting to never have to pay the bill. San Gabriel instead needs to tighten its belt elsewhere and behave in a fiscally responsible manner.