Jump to content
XRay

CALIFORNIA BALLOT: If you are in California, your ballot should have arrived or will arrive soon, so go VOTE!!!

Recommended Posts

I got my ballot some time last week and have some time now to look it over during the weekend. But yeah, if you are in California, GO VOTE!!! I decided to make a new thread rather than posting in the US Politics thread since there are a lot Propositions. For Americans and foreigners not voting in California, here is a quick run down of the Propositions we are voting on if you are curious. If you want more detailed analyses and arguments, you can check out Voter Guide and Ballotpedia.

I am still doing research on Prop 21 and the later ones, so I have not finalized my decision yet on a lot of those. A lot of the later ones are hard to decide since it is more nuanced and there seems to be less consensus among Democrats and left leaning organizations. Prop 22 is pretty easy, but 21, 23, 24, and 25 are harder.

I have also included Sacramento's City Measures at the end if anyone is curious about more local stuff. I have no clue on how to vote on Measure A, so if any of you are living in Sacramento, help out a fellow Sacramentan and give me some input! All of my friends who are voting are technically living in Sacramento County outside the city, and not in the city, so they do not get to vote on the Measures and cannot give me any input. Sacramento has weirdly drawn city borders.

— — — — — — —

Prop 14: AUTHORIZES BONDS CONTINUING STEM CELL RESEARCH. INITIATIVE STATUTE.

The gist of it is basically raising taxes to pay for continuing stem cell research. The state issues bonds to raise immediate money, and the taxpayers foot the bill incrementally over time to pay off the bond holders.

Notable Supporters: Gavin Newsom (California Governor; Democrat), Democratic Party, University of California

I vote YES.

— — — — — — —

Prop 15: INCREASES FUNDING SOURCES FOR PUBLIC SCHOOLS, COMMUNITY COLLEGES, AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT SERVICES BY CHANGING TAX ASSESSMENT OF COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.

Notable Supporters: Gavin Newsom, London Breed (San Francisco Mayor), Eric Garcetti (Los Angeles Mayor), Darrell Steinberg (Sacramento Mayor), Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, Pete Buttigieg, Beto O'Rourke, Michael Bloomberg, Democratic Party, Green Party, Los Angeles Unified School District, San Francisco Unified School District, California Teachers Association, American Federation of Teachers, ACLU, Chan Zuckerberg Advocacy, Sierra Club, PTA of California.

Notable Opposition: Republican Party, California Chamber of Commerce, California Small Business Association, NAACP, (there is a long list of business associations and chambers of commerce opposing as well)

The title is pretty self explanatory. Businesses would see their property taxes raised. Homeowners should be unaffected.

I vote YES.

— — — — — — —

Prop 16: ALLOWS DIVERSITY AS A FACTOR IN PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT, EDUCATION, AND CONTRACTING DECISIONS. LEGISLATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.

Notable Supporters: Gavin Newsom, London Breed (San Francisco Mayor), Eric Garcetti (Los Angeles Mayor), Darrell Steinberg (Sacramento Mayor), Nancy Pelosi, Kamala Harris, Pete Buttigieg, Democratic Party, University of California, California Teachers Association, PG&E, Kaiser Permanente, ACLU, NAACP

Notable Opposition: Republican Party

This basically allows affirmative action to be more prevalent.

I vote YES.

— — — — — — —

Prop 17: RESTORES RIGHT TO VOTE AFTER COMPLETION OF PRISON TERM. LEGISLATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.

Notable Supporters: Kamala Harris, Democratic Party, ACLU

Notable Opposition: Republican Party

Title is self explanatory. Gives former criminals the right to vote.

I vote YES.

— — — — — — —

Prop 18: AMENDS CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION TO PERMIT 17-YEAR-OLDS TO VOTE IN PRIMARY AND SPECIAL ELECTIONS IF THEY WILL TURN 18 BY THE NEXT GENERAL ELECTION AND BE OTHERWISE ELIGIBLE TO VOTE. LEGISLATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.

Notable Supporters: Gavin Newsom, Democratic Party, Richard Roth (CA State Senator; Major General USAF (Retired)), Thomas Umberg (CA State Senator; Colonel U.S. Army (Retired))

I am going to quote an argument from Voter Guide. I could not have said it better myself.

"17-year-olds already work and pay taxes, and they can enlist in the military. If young people at this age are volunteering to put their lives on the line for our country and contributing financially to society, they should be able to participate in a full election cycle the year they turn 18. Prop. 18 allows 17-year-olds to vote in primary elections if they are 18 by the general election."

I vote YES.

— — — — — — —

Prop 19: CHANGES CERTAIN PROPERTY TAX RULES. LEGISLATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.

Notable Supporters: Gavin Newsom, Democratic Party, NAACP, California Association of Realtors

If you inherit property, the property tax will be assessed at market value when you get it from your parents or grandparents. Currently, a person can transfer property to their children or grandchildren without having the tax base adjusted to market value, so the children and grand children can save on property tax. The first $1 million is exempt, so this does not impact the poor nor middle class, and the law primarily targets the really rich.

I vote YES.

— — — — — — —

Prop 20: RESTRICTS PAROLE FOR CERTAIN OFFENSES CURRENTLY CONSIDERED TO BE NON-VIOLENT. AUTHORIZES FELONY SENTENCES FOR CERTAIN OFFENSES CURRENTLY TREATED ONLY AS MISDEMEANORS. INITIATIVE STATUTE.

Notable Supporters: Republican Party, Albertsons Safeway

Notable Opposition: Jerry Brown (Former CA Governor; Democrat), Democratic Party, California Teachers Association, ACLU, Chan Zuckerberg Advocacy, University of California Student Association

It basically classifies certain misdemeanors as felonies, which is kind of stupid in my opinion. It just seems like a way to get more people into private prisons to suck more money out of taxpayers' pockets.

I vote NO.

— — — — — — —

Prop 21: EXPANDS LOCAL GOVERNMENTS' AUTHORITY TO ENACT RENT CONTROL ON RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY. INITIATIVE STATUTE.

Notable Supporters: Bernie Sanders, Democratic Party, ACLU

Notable Opposition: Gavin Newsom, Republican Party, California Chamber of Commerce, NAACP

I vote YES.

— — — — — — —

Prop 22: EXEMPTS APP-BASED TRANSPORTATION AND DELIVERY COMPANIES FROM PROVIDING EMPLOYEE BENEFITS TO CERTAIN DRIVERS. INITIATIVE STATUTE.

Notable Supporters: Republican Party, California Chambers of Commerce, NAACP, DoorDash, Lyft, Uber

Notable Opposition: Kamala Harris, Elizabeth Warren, Joe Biden, Democratic Party, California Teachers Association, California Labor Federation

DoorDash, Lyft, and Uber wrote the law. The Prop does sound nice, but a lot of Democrats and unions are against. I will side with Democrats and Unions. I do not particularly trust those three app companies right now.

I vote NO.

— — — — — — —

Prop 23: ESTABLISHES STATE REQUIREMENTS FOR KIDNEY DIALYSIS CLINICS. REQUIRES ON-SITE MEDICAL PROFESSIONAL. INITIATIVE STATUTE.

Notable Supporters: Democratic Party

Notable Opposition: Republican Party, California Medical Association, NAACP

I vote NO.

— — — — — — —

Prop 24: AMENDS CONSUMER PRIVACY LAWS. INITIATIVE STATUTE.

Notable Supporters: Andrew Yang, NAACP, Consumer Watchdog, (note that while there are some Democrats that support the Prop, the Democratic Party as a whole has not weighed in yet)

Notable Opposition: Republican Party, ACLU

I vote NO.

— — — — — — —

Prop 25: REFERENDUM ON LAW THAT REPLACED MONEY BAIL WITH SYSTEM BASED ON PUBLIC SAFETY AND FLIGHT RISK.

Notable Supporters: Gavin Newsom, Darrell Steinberg, Democratic Party, California Teachers Association

Notable Opposition: Republican Party, NAACP, ACLU

I vote NO.

— — — — — — —

— — — — — — —

— — — — — — —

Measure A: SACRAMENTO MAYORAL ACCOUNTABILITY AND COMMUNITY EQUITY ACT OF 2020

It basically restructures the city government. It separates the mayor from the council and gives more power and balancing checks on the mayor.

Notable Supporters: Greater Sacramento Urban League, Youths Parks and Community Enrichment, Service Employees International Union

Notable Opposition: Sacramento Democratic Party, Sacramento Fire Fighters, League of Women Voters

I vote NO.

— — — — — — —

Measure B: SACRAMENTO INDEPENDENT REDISTRICTING COMMISSION TIMELINE EXCEPTION

There are no opposition, so I assume yes is the right way to go. The measure has to do with redrawing our districts.

I vote YES.

— — — — — — —

Measure C: SACRAMENTO COMMUNITY STABILIZATION AND FAIR RENT CHARTER AMENDMENT

Notable Supporters: Service Employees International Union, Sacramento Democratic Party, Sacramento City Unified School District, Sacramento Tenants Union

Notable Opposition: Darrell Steinberg, Greater Sacramento Urban League

It creates a rent control board and I believe it enforces stronger rent control.

I vote YES.

Edited by XRay

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, XRay said:

 

Prop 20: RESTRICTS PAROLE FOR CERTAIN OFFENSES CURRENTLY CONSIDERED TO BE NON-VIOLENT. AUTHORIZES FELONY SENTENCES FOR CERTAIN OFFENSES CURRENTLY TREATED ONLY AS MISDEMEANORS. INITIATIVE STATUTE.

Notable Supporters: Republican Party, Albertsons Safeway

Notable Opposition: Jerry Brown (Former CA Governor; Democrat), Democratic Party, California Teachers Association, ACLU, Chan Zuckerberg Advocacy, University of California Student Association

It basically classifies certain misdemeanors as felonies, which is kind of stupid in my opinion. It just seems like a way to get more people into private prisons to suck more money out of taxpayers' pockets.

I vote NO.

— — — — — — —

 

 

So based on voting yes on this, I question why you'd be undecided on this.

9 hours ago, XRay said:

 

Prop 25: REFERENDUM ON LAW THAT REPLACED MONEY BAIL WITH SYSTEM BASED ON PUBLIC SAFETY AND FLIGHT RISK.

Notable Supporters: Gavin Newsom, Darrell Steinberg, Democratic Party, California Teachers Association

Notable Opposition: Republican Party, NAACP, ACLU

I vote ???.

— — — — — — —

 

A bail system that heavily favors the rich kind of plays into the whole overcrowded private prison thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Jotari said:

So based on voting yes on this, I question why you'd be undecided on this.

A bail system that heavily favors the rich kind of plays into the whole overcrowded private prison thing.

The ACLU and NAACP votes no. Their argument is we are replacing one system that is racially biased with another that could be racially biased as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are these issues you mentioned California only? If not, thank you for letting me know I will have to research before I vote in November. I mean it's a given I guess, but you reminded me.

In Wyoming, I think if you want to vote by mail you have to request it. I am fine with voting in person.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, XRay said:

The ACLU and NAACP votes no. Their argument is we are replacing one system that is racially biased with another that could be racially biased as well.

That was my first thought when I saw the op. In fact it might make it even more racially basised. Right now a black man, for example, can at least get some kind of crowd sourcing to meet the bail(not a great option, but it does technically work). But if it were based on how 'dangerous' someone thinks he is or looks. . . well do I really need to go into that?

Bail itself isn't necessarily a bad system, though I would say it is very prone to becoming one. The problem is that the bail is set to ridiculous amounts. Though even a percentage of income bail runs into the problem of hitting the poorest hardest.

My personal preference would probably sound similar to the proposed in that cash bail really wouldn't be a thing. But rather they should have to prove with a preponderance of the evidence(more likely than not) that release back into the public will either result in an imminent and clear threat to the public or an imminent or clear risk to flight. Basically the burden would be on the police to prove risk rather than on the suspect to prove not risk. I suspect that the California proposal is more the latter than the former, and that will almost certainly cause bias to run amok. Though I would have to read the bill in question in full to know for sure. But the ACLU and NAACP both being against it is rather telling I would think. More than likely it doesn't have anything in place to prevent bias from becoming even worse since after its passing you wouldn't even be able to crowd fund your way out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, XRay said:

 

Prop 19: CHANGES CERTAIN PROPERTY TAX RULES. LEGISLATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.

Notable Supporters: Gavin Newsom, Democratic Party, NAACP, California Association of Realtors

If you inherit property, the property tax will be assessed at market value when you get it from your parents or grandparents. Currently, a person can transfer property to their children or grandchildren without having the tax base adjusted to market value, so the children and grand children can save on property tax. The first $1 million is exempt, so this does not impact the poor nor middle class, and the law primarily targets the really rich.

I vote YES.

I think the assessment that it does not impact the poor and middle class is a misrepresentation of this props actual impact; if an area that was once affordable has its property values raised due to gentrification this could simply be forcing poor and middle class families out of their homes when it gets passes down due to unreasonable tax values. $1 million is unfortunately an easily reached market value for houses in California. Ironically the property tax rules were made the way they were in California thanks to a voter proposition made to counteract events similar to the one described actually occurring.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, XRay said:

Prop 22: EXEMPTS APP-BASED TRANSPORTATION AND DELIVERY COMPANIES FROM PROVIDING EMPLOYEE BENEFITS TO CERTAIN DRIVERS. INITIATIVE STATUTE.

Notable Supporters: Republican Party, California Chambers of Commerce, NAACP, DoorDash, Lyft, Uber

Notable Opposition: Kamala Harris, Elizabeth Warren, Joe Biden, Democratic Party, California Teachers Association, California Labor Federation

DoorDash, Lyft, and Uber wrote the law. The Prop does sound nice, but a lot of Democrats and unions are against. I will side with Democrats and Unions. I do not particularly trust those three app companies right now.

If you do Uber or Lyft full-time, you deserve benefits and health coverage. Prop 22 will stifle that, and the big companies are doing their arm-twisting via coordinated campaigns to ensure they make as much money, hand over fist, at the expense of drivers.

Screw that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Dragoncat said:

Are these issues you mentioned California only? If not, thank you for letting me know I will have to research before I vote in November. I mean it's a given I guess, but you reminded me.

In Wyoming, I think if you want to vote by mail you have to request it. I am fine with voting in person.

Most of the issues have national significance, but the propositions on our state ballots just deal with how California want to approach those issues in our own borders. Although how we approach those issues do have nation wide impact sometimes, and often other states follow what we do.

7 hours ago, Glennstavos said:

Wuh-oh, the President just unveiled his bold strategy to flip California red:

*body begins convulsing* It's w-working...! *vomits all over ballot*

I rather burn in a hell hole fighting global warming than be a coward hiding in shit hole bunker and wall.

7 hours ago, Usana said:

That was my first thought when I saw the op. In fact it might make it even more racially basised. Right now a black man, for example, can at least get some kind of crowd sourcing to meet the bail(not a great option, but it does technically work). But if it were based on how 'dangerous' someone thinks he is or looks. . . well do I really need to go into that?

Bail itself isn't necessarily a bad system, though I would say it is very prone to becoming one. The problem is that the bail is set to ridiculous amounts. Though even a percentage of income bail runs into the problem of hitting the poorest hardest.

My personal preference would probably sound similar to the proposed in that cash bail really wouldn't be a thing. But rather they should have to prove with a preponderance of the evidence(more likely than not) that release back into the public will either result in an imminent and clear threat to the public or an imminent or clear risk to flight. Basically the burden would be on the police to prove risk rather than on the suspect to prove not risk. I suspect that the California proposal is more the latter than the former, and that will almost certainly cause bias to run amok. Though I would have to read the bill in question in full to know for sure. But the ACLU and NAACP both being against it is rather telling I would think. More than likely it doesn't have anything in place to prevent bias from becoming even worse since after its passing you wouldn't even be able to crowd fund your way out.

Yeah, I might abstain on some of those propositions since I just do not feel knowledgeable enough to make a decision. I wish there were more opinions offered from Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, and others to help sway me one way or the other. 21, 23, 24, and 25 seems the most difficult since there are not a lot of guidance from our leaders.

For Prop 23 for example (the dialysis one), I feel totally unqualified to vote on such a measure, and I think it should be something that is determined by the medical community. I think I would feel more comfortable to vote on it if more politicians spotlighted the issue and offered their opinions.

2 hours ago, Eltosian Kadath said:

I think the assessment that it does not impact the poor and middle class is a misrepresentation of this props actual impact; if an area that was once affordable has its property values raised due to gentrification this could simply be forcing poor and middle class families out of their homes when it gets passes down due to unreasonable tax values. $1 million is unfortunately an easily reached market value for houses in California. Ironically the property tax rules were made the way they were in California thanks to a voter proposition made to counteract events similar to the one described actually occurring.

Depends on the city and location. Unless you are in somewhere like San Francisco or Los Angeles, most middle income families are not living in neighborhoods susceptible to that high of a level of gentrification. In Sacramento, while some of our neighborhoods are impacted by gentrification, I do not think it has caused any home to skyrocket to a million dollars.

3 hours ago, sinfonic18 said:

Why bring politics into a forum about Fire Emblem? Just why? 

Politics, the starter of wars, destroyer of friendships and family.

Fire Emblem is all about fictional politics, and those politics have parallels in real world politics. In my opinion, being able to discuss politics and current events not only makes us better informed citizens, it also helps us appreciate the fictional politics in Fire Emblem more. I always find it fascinating when fictional works draw inspiration from real world political events. Some people may find bringing politics, money, religion, etc. to the dinner table or their games off putting, but I find those dinner tables and games to be unengaging and super boring. I want to explore topcis like politics, religion, genocide, abuse, sex, social justice, terrorism, oppression, death, trauma, etc. in my fictional mediums. It gives those fictional mediums a human touch, a dose of the struggles of humanity.

Edelgard wants to crush the aristocracy and theocracy dominating Fódlan, and her motives are similar to revolutions in Europe and Americas in the early modern period. Edelgard's extreme disgust with the aristocracy parallels the extreme frustration that European and American revolutionaries had back then. Today, America is still struggling to maintain its secular status due to constant assaults on our religious liberty from right wing Christian extremism.

Alm and Celica are fighting a war of liberation due in part to extreme differences in religious ideology between the two countries.

Fates is a political mess. Nohr got hijacked from the top by a crazy dragon/slime thing, not unlike the United States highest office being hijacked by an infant propelled there by racists and populists. Racism is also a pretty big problem in Hoshido, although the games has not really touched on that subject much outside of character back story.

Awakening is basically Ylisse flexing its military muscle on the world stage to ensure international peace. It is pretty similar to how the United States is using its military to manage Pax Americana.

Tellius is a racial mess. If you thought America has it bad right now, Tellius dialed racial tensions up to twelve and probably rivals WWII level of racist extremism. Nazi Germany killed off a significant portion of the Jewish population, while Begnion basically wiped out the entire Heron race sans a handful of the Heron royal family. Racism is practically everywhere. Even when the world is confronting Armageddon level of divine hubris, the Greil Mercenaries were barely able to hold an international force together that is fraught with racism and nationalism. (I have not actually played Tellius, so I am not sure if racism and nationalism is as bad as I think it is, but reading the plot gave me those vibes.)

20 minutes ago, Karimlan said:

If you do Uber or Lyft full-time, you deserve benefits and health coverage. Prop 22 will stifle that, and the big companies are doing their arm-twisting via coordinated campaigns to ensure they make as much money, hand over fist, at the expense of drivers.

Screw that.

Yeah, the app companies spent a ton of money on advertising for Prop 22. If they just spent that on their drivers, the drivers probably would not be complaining right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, sinfonic18 said:

Why bring politics into a forum about Fire Emblem? Just why? 

Politics, the starter of wars, destroyer of friendships and family.

To shelter yourself from politics is to shelter yourself from a grander equity to give people a better life.

It destroys friendships and family when, you know, one side votes for a wannabe outright racist autocrat who gases protesters and shits on anyone who disagrees with him. The reason why the world is burning right now is because people like you insist that the absence of conflict is peace, rather than those of us who see a police officer and don't know if the fine will make them miss rent, who are overworked and underpaid and don't have the time to the energy to protest their rights. And can't quit because we're working our ass off at the end of a gun.

But sure, destroys (presumably middle class, who really appear to be the least affected by politics if I'm being honest) friendships and family, we shouldn't discuss this.

Quote

“True peace is not merely the absence of tension: it is the presence of justice.”

If you believe your politics leads to tensions within your friendships and family, you and your family need to learn how to do better, because you're actively making it taboo to talk about issues that affect everyone's everyday life and, ultimately, convinced 43% of this country to vote for an imbecile that's fucking up the pandemic. And inspiring nihilism because it's uncomfortable. Don't force your immaturity onto the rest of us.

 

People even on this forum disagree with each other and are totally fine with each other for the most part. We don't start getting cruel and mean until we actually deal with fucking racists lol

Edited by Lord Raven

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, XRay said:

Fire Emblem is all about fictional politics, and those politics have parallels in real world politics. In my opinion, being able to discuss politics and current events not only makes us better informed citizens, it also helps us appreciate the fictional politics in Fire Emblem more. I always find it fascinating when fictional works draw inspiration from real world political events. Some people may find bringing politics, money, religion, etc. to the dinner table or their games off putting, but I find those dinner tables and games to be unengaging and super boring. I want to explore topcis like politics, religion, genocide, abuse, sex, social justice, terrorism, oppression, death, trauma, etc. in my fictional mediums. It gives those fictional mediums a human touch, a dose of the struggles of humanity.

Edelgard wants to crush the aristocracy and theocracy dominating Fódlan, and her motives are similar to revolutions in Europe and Americas in the early modern period. Edelgard's extreme disgust with the aristocracy parallels the extreme frustration that European and American revolutionaries had back then. Today, America is still struggling to maintain its secular status due to constant assaults on our religious liberty from right wing Christian extremism.

Alm and Celica are fighting a war of liberation due in part to extreme differences in religious ideology between the two countries.

Fates is a political mess. Nohr got hijacked from the top by a crazy dragon/slime thing, not unlike the United States highest office being hijacked by an infant propelled there by racists and populists. Racism is also a pretty big problem in Hoshido, although the games has not really touched on that subject much outside of character back story.

Awakening is basically Ylisse flexing its military muscle on the world stage to ensure international peace. It is pretty similar to how the United States is using its military to manage Pax Americana.

Tellius is a racial mess. If you thought America has it bad right now, Tellius dialed racial tensions up to twelve and probably rivals WWII level of racist extremism. Nazi Germany killed off a significant portion of the Jewish population, while Begnion basically wiped out the entire Heron race sans a handful of the Heron royal family. Racism is practically everywhere. Even when the world is confronting Armageddon level of divine hubris, the Greil Mercenaries were barely able to hold an international force together that is fraught with racism and nationalism. (I have not actually played Tellius, so I am not sure if racism and nationalism is as bad as I think it is, but reading the plot gave me those vibes.)

Well you make a good point. There are political affluences in many games but I never really paid that much attention to detail how many FE games have politcal-driven stories. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, XRay said:

 

Alm and Celica are fighting a war of liberation due in part to extreme differences in religious ideology between the two countries.

 

Well originally it was that. In the remake it's all because the leader of Rigel is bonkers crazy...Oh shit that's really relevant too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just made my final decisions on Props 21 to 25. I will drop my ballot off tomorrow.

For 21, I think it allowing local governments to enact stronger rent control is fine, so I am YES.

For 23, I am going to side with the medical community and vote NO. Personally, I do not think this should be on the ballot at all, and it should be something decided by the professional medical community, not voters. This proposition is essentially the equivalent of asking a layperson to decide how a civil engineer should build a bridge or how a fraud accountant should scrutinize Amazon's financial statements. If we generally do not allow a layperson to dictate professional ethics and standards, we should definitely not allow laypeople to decide on something as serious and life threatening as medical practices.

For 24, I am going to side with the ACLU and vote NO. This is a hard one because progressive organizations are split, and reading the minutiae does not help as everything I read just goes way over my head. I went with the ACLU since I trust them the most.

For 25, I am going to side with the ACLU and vote NO. This is also a really hard one, but I am going with a no for now. If the ACLU did not weigh in on this, I probably would have voted yes. It is not that I do not trust the Democratic Party on civil rights issues, but I trust the ACLU more. This is not a hard no, so I am open to changing my mind in the future. I think if we give Democrats and progressive organizations more time to fix the bail system, they might think of a more nuanced and better solution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...