Federal Government
President and vice president
Biden/Harris. It almost doesn’t matter who’s running against Trump. We’ll fix it later.
Those who argue that this election is not an existential crisis are those for whom the bell doesn’t toll … yet.
United States Representative CA-13
Barbara Lee. She’s great.
Also, there’s zero reason to believe a Californian Republican would be anything other than another Trump enabler. They need to clean house…
There are no other candidates than Barbara Lee and a Republican.
California
Proposition 14 “stem cell research”
Official voter information guide
Vote no on Prop 14.
CA began funding stem cell research through state funds in 2004, when the Federal Government was engaging in culture wars against stem cells. It funded three billion dollars using bonds aka state debt. The idea was that the State would get money back through intellectual property licensing.
As of June 2020, according to the League of Women Voters analysis on Prop 14 these agreements have only yielded $350,000 – out of $3,000,000,000 in funds. That’s unacceptable. According to the Leage of Pissed Off Voters it’s still unclear if the State or private companies will own intellectual property from this funding. Why are we giving private enterprise free government money?
In parallel the stem cell business is booming with some shady operators. Just search for “shady stem cell business” and you’ll find all kinds of interesting reports.
The state needs to regulate this business area and make sure the People get their money out of it. Stem cell research has by and large moved past the perception issues from 2004 – let’s make sure we’re doing it right.
Proposition 15 “business property taxes at market value”
Vote yes on Prop 15.
Read more here: CA Proposition 15
Proposition 16 “diversity as factor in state jobs, education, contracting”
Vote yes on Prop 16.
Prop 209 which repealed affirmative action is the governmental equivalent to “not seeing color”. This means the system reinforces its own issues … you know, that’s why racism is a systemic problem.
See also: League of Women Voters, League of Pissed Off Voters.
Proposition 17 “right to vote for freed prisoners”
Official voter information guide
Vote hell yes on Proposition 17.
Why the fuck shouldn’t somebody be able to vote once they’ve served their term? (For that matter why don’t prisoners get to vote? Being in prison doesn’t make you a non-person.)
Proposition 18 “17yos voting in primary if 18 at general”
Official voter information guide
Vote yes on Proposition 18.
If you’ll be voting in the General, you should be helping select who goes into that General. End of story.
The scare tactics in the arguments against Prop 18 are remarkable. Apparently teachers will massively corrupt the minds of children to influence primary elections – because we are talking about primary elections – and children are also dumb, therefore, they shouldn’t get a say in the primary for the general they’re voting in.
The main argument the anti-tax advocates against Prop 18 present is that soon-to-be 18 year olds don’t have fully developed brains. I hate to say it, but if recent events have shown us anything, there’s a lot of people who don’t have fully developed brains. Besides, it’s not as if we strike very elderly, demented citizens from the electoral rolls…
Proposition 19 “certain homeowners transfer tax base to replacement residence”
Official voter information guide
Vote no on Proposition 19.
As the League of Pissed Off Voters says, this is a doozy.
Basically, it closes one loophole: stops inheritance of Prop 13 tax basis.
But it opens a very major one: it gives homeowners over 55 the ability to move 3 times with zero change in tax basis, which is a particular problem if they’re moving from cheaper counties to more expensive counties. Why should a county receive less revenue, because one newcomer is purchasing a home versus another?
I can’t wrap my brain around it.
Existing law already covers people over 55 and the disabled. As the League of Women Voters points out, nobody knows what the disaster victim tax assessment would actually cost local governments.
In the end, I don’t think this is the way to close the inheritance tax loophole.
Proposition 20 “reduces access to parole, moves certain misdemeanors to felonies”
Official voter information guide
Vote hell no on Proposition 20.
Proposition 20 increases criminal penalties and makes it harder to serve one’s time. More policing and imprisoning is not what we need.
Proposition 21 “local government authority to enact rent control”
Official voter information guide
Vote hell yes on Proposition 21.
Prop 21 allows local legislature to decide local rent according to what makes sense in that context, not at a statewide level. The worst this proposition does is to enable local government to pass reversible legislation extending rent control.
By the way, Prop 21 still protects 15 years of life for commercial rental development, and exempts landlords who own one or two units.
I liked the League of Pissed Off Voters’ take on rent control.
Proposition 22 “app-based transportation/logistics don’t need to give all drivers benefits”
Official voter information guide
No, no, and hell no.
There is so much out there about this: I won’t repeat it.
Follow the money : Uber, DoorDash, Lyft, Instacart, Postmates have raised a whopping TWO HUNDRED MILLION dollars: $203,272,700 vs opposition $20 million (mostly by labor groups). (Source: Voter’s Edge)
They clearly have money to spend making sure they don’t pay their drivers. What does that tell us, that they are so willing to burn so much cash, to make sure they don’t have to pay people? Our State’s laws are not for sale. For shame.
Proposition 23 “state requirements for kidney dialysis clinics”
Official voter information guide
Vote yes on Proposition 23.
The League of Women Voters’ neutral conclusion is intriguing. The main criticism they bring up is that:
some opponents of the new Prop 23 requirements claim that CDCs will incur higher operating expenses and that there is a potential for rural communities to have trouble meeting all of the newer requirements and therefore, will charge higher rates. According to the Legislative Analyst, having a physician on site at all times “would increase each (clinic’s) costs by several hundred thousand dollars annually on average.”
This seems to disregard the proposition’s provision that, should no doctors be available – as one would expect in rural areas, but not urban – the center can hire comparatively cheaper workers like physicians’ assistants or nurse practitioners.
Follow the money : big pharma spent $111M in 2018 to defeat Prop 8, and have spent $105M in 2020 to defeat Prop 23.
Proposition 24 “stronger consumer privacy laws, establishes California Privacy Protection Agency”
Official voter information guide
Vote no on Proposition 24. Privacy legislation is complex. Asking voters to determine policy with a 52-page initiative, in a fashion that can ONLY be adjusted with voters agreeing in large quantities, is not a good idea.
We very much need such an agency – but this is not the way. The no analyses by the League of Pissed Off Voters and the League of Women Voters made sense to me.
Proposition 25 “replace money bail with system based on safety and flight risk”
Official voter information guide
Vote no on Proposition 25.
Cash bail is a terrible system.
Entrusting a machine learning algorithm is an even worse idea. It is very difficult for even technocrats to understand why algorithms are or are not making certain decisions – and algorithms are inevitably programmed with all the explicit and implicit biases of the developers.
Although cash bail disproportionately affects people of color, an algorithm would take the entire policing data system as input to its decisions. Plus any other factor like employment, residential history, education – all of which also have issues with systemic racism.
Cash bail needs to go. Cash bail should not be replaced by an inscrutable and unaccountable algorithm.
State Senator CA-9
Nancy Skinner.
The other candidate is the Libertarian Jamie Dluzak. He seems like an alright fellow who’s spent a lot of his life in service to others. I respect that. But he is very light on his policy proposals. I am generally skeptical of the Libertarian party given their propensity to want to abolish laws that protect us, such as food and medicine regulations or labor law. So, not having more concrete position statements leaves me unable to feel confident voting for somebody from a party for which I’m generally unenthused.
State Assemblymember CA-15
Buffy Wicks.
The other candidate, Sara Brink, starts her website statement by saying the race doesn’t matter; it appears to be a concession post. I gather from her pinned twitter thread that she had a real uphill battle, as a political outsider getting her butt kicked by COVID. And she put a check on Buffy Wicks’ wealthy fundraisers, which is always valuable. I am grateful for her participation in the process.
Superior Court Judge, Office #2
Elena Condes.
The other candidate is Mark Fickes.
Both candidates have considerable legal experience. They both support increasing access to the justice system.
Fickes has the Democratic Party endorsement at the state and county level; Condes is endorsed by BIPOC, women’s, and LGBTQ groups, several labor unions, the Green Party. Condes is thoroughly endorsed by existing judges, but Fickes is endorsed by several standing and former city councilpeople.
Right now, I think it’s a critical priority to change how the justice system interacts with underrepresented groups. I appreciate Condes being explicit that the legal field needs diversity.
Alameda County
Measure V “extend utility users tax in unincorporated areas”
Background & Full Text from KQED
Vote yes on Measure V: extending “utility users tax” for unincorporated Alameda County.
To be clear, this is not a new tax; it’s extending a tax that began in 1992.
Most other parts of the county have their own utilities tax; for example Oakland’s tax is 7.5%, Berkeley’s is 7.5%, Emeryville a mere 5.5%. The unincorporated areas are getting a comparatively good deal with 6.5%.
An “unincorporated” area means there’s no city; therefore the county itself is the local government agency. This means that infrastructure maintenance, among other functions, is performed by the county.
Measure V opponents are basically throwing sand in our faces. They call it the “Smartphone and Electric Car Tax”. Huh? Then they call it “taxation without representation” – even though the entire county pays into county coffers, to help pay for infrastructure in these areas.
Fair share of taxes … we’re done here.
Measure W “0.5% sales tax for 10 years”
Background & Full Text from KQED
Vote yes on a 0.5% sales tax increase to assist homeless programs.
The opponents of Measure W make an excellent point that the county administrator making $350k/year in base salary, $184k in bonuses, and $250k in further benefits totaling $787k is excessive. See also: Transparent California
They also point out that, technically speaking, the County has no obligation to spend the money on the homeless and will just use it to pay pensions.
That’s why it’s up to citizens of Alameda County: if the money isn’t spent on the homeless programs advertised by Home Together 2020, then maybe we fire everybody who voted in favor of misspending the money and point fingers at them, mocking mercilessly for their fickleness. (Seriously though.) If the anti-tax scare tactic ends up being a scare tactic, then we’ll have contributed to solving one of our region’s most pressing, desperate issues.
AC Transit District Director-at-large
HE Christian “Chris” Peeples.
Candidates:
- Victoria Fierce
- Dollene Jones
- HE Christian “Chris” Peeples (incumbent)
I had a really hard time finding info on Jones. As best I can tell she doesn’t have a campaign site, and although she has Twitter & Facebook pages, it was hard to get quick info on her platform.
The incumbent Peeples is endorsed by the Sierra Club, and local county Democrat + labor groups. He’s also endorsed by the Green Party. He’s been a transit director since 1987 apparently. (Wow.)
Fierce is endorsed by local Young Democrats groups. I deeply appreciate her rideshare tax proposal, and wanting more bus lanes. Interestingly, she is a member-elect of the committee that endorsed her opponent.
Ultimately the Sierra Club endorsement swayed me alongside Peeples’s experience & efforts working with the East Bay Bicycle Coalition to put in new bus and bike lanes.
AC Transit District Director Ward 2
Jean Walsh.
Candidates:
- Jean Walsh (a “sustainable transportation professional”)
- Greg Harper, incumbent (a business attorney)
I couldn’t find much information on Harper. He provided very few details to Voter’s Edge. Walsh on the other hand provides a bunch of information, and comes with serious endorsements such as the Sierra Club again, various local city & county officials.
I favored the incumbent in the At-Large race because he seems to be getting stuff done. But I can’t see what Harper is getting done, and I guess he wasn’t that interested in telling me.
BART Director, District 7
Lateefah Simon.
Candidates:
- Lateefah Simon (incumbent)
- Sharon Kidd (police reform counselor)
Kidd has an intriguing website, and seems to have done great service to the community. I don’t have anything negative to say about her. That said, Simon is resoundingly endorsed by elected officials, labor unions, progressive Democrats, the SF YIMBY group. Given so many groups coming together to agree – and unfortunately no apparent endorsements for Kidd – that did it for me.
Oakland
I live in Oakland’s District 1; green & north on this map:
Here’s what’s on my ballot.
Oakland City Council, at-large
Vote Rebecca Kaplan for Oakland City Council at-large.
Read more here: Rebecca Kaplan for Oakland City Council at-large.
Second choice: Derreck Johnson.
Oakland City Council, District 1 aka “north Oakland”
Vote Dan Kalb for Oakland City Council District 1.
Second choice: Steph Dominguez Walton.
I don’t have anything against Walton, and she has impressive endorsements. Even so I am impressed with Kalb’s work, and he comes with considerable endorsements as well (although, more establishment than Walton).
Oakland City Attorney
Voter’s Edge info on city attorney
Vote Barbara Parker for Oakland City Attorney. (incumbent)
This is a tough one for me. I went with endorsements in the end of the day.
Oakland School Director, District 1 aka “north Oakland”
Vote Sam Davis for Oakland School Director District 1.
This was a tough one for me. I don’t know a lot about OUSD, nor do I know a lot about these candidates. They both have pretty good endorsements.
In the end I found Sam Davis’s endorsements and messaging more compelling.
Oakland Measure QQ “allow 16yos to vote for school director”
Vote yes on Measure QQ.
As with California Proposition 18, there’s a lot of scare tactics around young people voting. Young people aren’t any more or less stupid than older people, or susceptible to (mis)information, as is plainly evident by our politics.
The School Board Director should be accountable to their primary constituent: Oakland pupils.
Oakland Measure RR “eliminate $1000 limit on fines for ordinance/municipal code violation Oakland City Charter Section 217”
Vote yes on Measure RR.
The $1000 cap was set in 1968 – things are very different today.
Although I am uneasy at the idea of fines being raised and then applied unfairly. Incidentally, the opponents of measure RR don’t say a word about that problem, instead saying, effectively, “omg big government, freedom, rights, liberty”. They use fear tactics, like this would put in place unlimited fines straight away – ignoring that there is still a whole process to change fines, with citizen accountability.
Oakland Measure S1 “Inspector General managed by Police Commission to review/report on OPD/CPRA for misconduct; allow Commission + CPRA to hire attorneys independent of city attorney”
Vote yes on Measure S1.
Increasing police accountability is a Very Good Thing.
OUSD Measure Y “$735MM bonds for classroom & school repair/maintenance”
Vote yes on Measure Y.
I’m not a big fan of bonds & debt. That said, education is worth it – our kids deserve high quality facilities and equipment. Children and education are literally the future of our country, and are in dire need of funds.
Perhaps if we didn’t have Prop 13, we’d not need to keep adding supplemental property taxes.