"The phrasing of the propositions in this election may be confusing, promoting false practices, and overall controversial. For these reasons (and for the sake of getting voters out to the polls), this article will provide you with a guide to some of the more pressing and confusing propositions on the ballot." - Chloe Xtina
A typical Saturday morning for Maya Nunez-Adler and Aaliyah Washington-Perry looks like a clipboard, a friendly face, and a conversation with Oakland citizens on why it’s important to get out and vote. Both girls volunteer for Oakland Community Organizations, which identifies itself as “a federation of congregations, schools, and allied community organizations . . . (that) through relationships, research and action, . . . live out the call to serve one another and to seek justice.” What Maya and Aaliyah are practicing is one of the oldest forms of campaigning: canvassing. Canvassing is the act of going door to door, asking citizens on their intent to vote, and sometimes attempting to inform and sway opinions.
“It’s important to vote because it’s not just going to affect the (voters) but it’s going to affect everyone within that community . . . If we don’t vote then the government is just going to do whatever they want . . . We need to have a voice to speak (in our community).” says Aaliyah.
Maya adds on, “Big politicians (want voters) to not (get out to vote) because they feel so defeated but . . . we all need to get empowered to do this . . . This is about our community. This is about us.”
As of February 2016, 247 Wall Street (Insightful Analysis and Commentary for U.S. and Global Equity Investors) reports that California is the 12th state with the lowest voter turnout. With a percentage of 60.3, just lower than half the eligible population in California is not voting. This may be due to a number of reasons, but the one that may shine brightest is what Maya has aforementioned: many people have lost faith in the government, believing they are powerless. But by exercising your right to vote, you are fueling a form of power in changing the structure of government. And as Aaliyah says, without voting, policies may change or stay consistent with values that go against what the majority of the population aligns with.
This election season is rough. Presidentially, it’s nearly impossible to escape with numerous scandals, information leaks, and constant media coverage. But that’s not this article’s focus. This article is meant to inform you about the more controversial propositions in California’s general election.
“(Voting) is the most important thing that people need to be doing . . .” says Maya, “Because the issues that are on the local ballot are . . . so critical on what’s going to happen to us as students and . . . people in general.”
The phrasing of the propositions in this election may be confusing, promoting false practices, and overall controversial. For these reasons (and for the sake of getting voters out to the polls), this article will provide you with a guide to some of the more pressing and confusing propositions on the ballot. Both sides to the argument will be weighed (to an extent, not all sides of each issue are completely factual) and hopefully it will ignite the purpose to vote.
“It’s important to vote because it’s not just going to affect the (voters) but it’s going to affect everyone within that community . . . If we don’t vote then the government is just going to do whatever they want . . . We need to have a voice to speak (in our community).” says Aaliyah.
Maya adds on, “Big politicians (want voters) to not (get out to vote) because they feel so defeated but . . . we all need to get empowered to do this . . . This is about our community. This is about us.”
As of February 2016, 247 Wall Street (Insightful Analysis and Commentary for U.S. and Global Equity Investors) reports that California is the 12th state with the lowest voter turnout. With a percentage of 60.3, just lower than half the eligible population in California is not voting. This may be due to a number of reasons, but the one that may shine brightest is what Maya has aforementioned: many people have lost faith in the government, believing they are powerless. But by exercising your right to vote, you are fueling a form of power in changing the structure of government. And as Aaliyah says, without voting, policies may change or stay consistent with values that go against what the majority of the population aligns with.
This election season is rough. Presidentially, it’s nearly impossible to escape with numerous scandals, information leaks, and constant media coverage. But that’s not this article’s focus. This article is meant to inform you about the more controversial propositions in California’s general election.
“(Voting) is the most important thing that people need to be doing . . .” says Maya, “Because the issues that are on the local ballot are . . . so critical on what’s going to happen to us as students and . . . people in general.”
The phrasing of the propositions in this election may be confusing, promoting false practices, and overall controversial. For these reasons (and for the sake of getting voters out to the polls), this article will provide you with a guide to some of the more pressing and confusing propositions on the ballot. Both sides to the argument will be weighed (to an extent, not all sides of each issue are completely factual) and hopefully it will ignite the purpose to vote.
THE (Most Controversial) PROPOSITIONS:
Measure HH - Taxes Soda in Oakland
This may be the most talked-about measure in Oakland as both sides of the issue paint two very different pictures. Yes on Measure HH calls it a “soda tax” while No on Measure HH calls it a “grocery tax”. You may have seen advertisements with local grocers speaking on how if HH is passed it will affect the income of grocers. However, HH has nothing to do with groceries itself. The price of produce and meat won’t systemically grow. In fact it is true that grocers will have to pay more on tax day but only if they are purchasing and distributing soda from big soda companies. If HH is passed, city and county officials would not be able to raise sales taxes on beverages after one-cent-per-liter takes effect on July 1st, 2017. Health officials back Measure HH, citing that higher prices on sodas may discourage consumers from regularly purchasing beverages that will cause higher obesity rates, type 2 diabetes, and other damaging effects on teeth, heart, and liver. No on Measure HH receives a great majority of its funding from the American Beverage Association which, if the measure is passed, will have to pay more money on taxes despite the large revenue they get from major sodas like Coca-Cola, Pepsi-Cola, and Dr. Pepper.
Prop 60 - Requires Porn Stars to Wear Condoms
On the surface, this proposition seems beneficial for the community. By requiring the porn industry to provide condoms for their actors porn will be promoting safe sex for their own actors as well as representing safe sex as ¨sexy¨. But what happens when actors don’t wear condoms under this new law? You may think the company would be sued itself but in fact, it’s not the company who is affected but the porn stars themselves. Anyone is able to file a lawsuit against a specific porn star if they do not fulfill the requirements. This means that the plaintiff will receive personal information of the actor being sued which may include personal contact information and home addresses, a violation of privacy and means for stalking. The company distributing the porn itself would not be punished, it would be a source of shaming for actors in the porn industry. Prop 60 is actually opposed by the California Democratic Party, the California Republic Party, the San Francisco AIDS Foundation, and AIDS Project Los Angeles because to them, the proposition is not promoting safe sex, it is giving Californians and specifically Michael Weinstein of the AIDS Healthcare Foundation too much legal power. Weinstein is seen as a figure with the intent to rid of the porn industry through shame of those involved. But to many, Prop 60 is seen as a way to promote and practice safe sex with the hope that viewers will attempt to replicate safe sex they see used in porn. But is that worth the cost of humiliation and danger for porn actors?
Props 62 and 66 - Repeal or Quicken the Death Penalty
This is one of the most complicated and emotional debates about morality in California, or overall on a federal level. Prop 62 calls to repeal the death penalty in California and replaces said penalty with life sentences without possibility for parole which will immediately apply to all state prisoners currently serving on Death Row. Prop 66 calls to keep the death penalty in California, create speedier appeals by expanding the amount of courts and attorneys involved in the process while setting up set deadlines, and allows the state to transfer Death Row inmates among prisons. In total, 930 inmates have been sentenced to death in California since 1978. Only 15 of these inmates have been executed and only one inmate has been executed since 2006. The issue with the amount of people on death row to the amount in reality that are executed is that there are far too many cases and not enough courts and attorneys to hear appeals and enact a deadline. Prop 62 would eliminate this issue by keeping inmates in prisons making it more fiscally possible to maintain courts as they are. Prop 66 would place a limit of five years on appeals and allow lower trial courts to hear appeals. Prop 66 would also require attorneys who take on criminal appeals to take death penalty appeals as well so as not to make it more difficult for Death Row inmates to find an attorney. Another issue that both props either face or address is that nearly $150 million a year could be salvaged if the death penalty was eliminated. Death Row inmates are held in solitary confinement which creates more space for less people, causing a financial surge. In addition, $55 million is put towards appeals against execution. Again, Prop 62 would eliminate this all together which may allocate said funding towards a general fund or further rehabilitation methods for prisons. Prop 66 does not so much answer this problem but does suggest that these inmates work throughout their sentence with 70% of their income going towards debt owed to victims. And then there’s the issue of how to execute. The main reason California has not been able to execute inmates since 2006 is due to legal struggles on lethal injection. Prop 66 would allow state officials to research new methods without public oversight or opinion although they must be approved by federal court orders. Although the death penalty is extremely emotional for victims and those directly affected, it is also a matter of fiscal, legal, and ethical responsibility. It’s a tough decision that needs some chewing.
There are many more propositions which I highly suggest you take a close look at all of them before voting on November 8th. Take a look below to find more information on propositions that legalize marijuana, build and improve schools, makes it easier for non-violent offenders to receive parole, and more!
Measure HH - Taxes Soda in Oakland
This may be the most talked-about measure in Oakland as both sides of the issue paint two very different pictures. Yes on Measure HH calls it a “soda tax” while No on Measure HH calls it a “grocery tax”. You may have seen advertisements with local grocers speaking on how if HH is passed it will affect the income of grocers. However, HH has nothing to do with groceries itself. The price of produce and meat won’t systemically grow. In fact it is true that grocers will have to pay more on tax day but only if they are purchasing and distributing soda from big soda companies. If HH is passed, city and county officials would not be able to raise sales taxes on beverages after one-cent-per-liter takes effect on July 1st, 2017. Health officials back Measure HH, citing that higher prices on sodas may discourage consumers from regularly purchasing beverages that will cause higher obesity rates, type 2 diabetes, and other damaging effects on teeth, heart, and liver. No on Measure HH receives a great majority of its funding from the American Beverage Association which, if the measure is passed, will have to pay more money on taxes despite the large revenue they get from major sodas like Coca-Cola, Pepsi-Cola, and Dr. Pepper.
Prop 60 - Requires Porn Stars to Wear Condoms
On the surface, this proposition seems beneficial for the community. By requiring the porn industry to provide condoms for their actors porn will be promoting safe sex for their own actors as well as representing safe sex as ¨sexy¨. But what happens when actors don’t wear condoms under this new law? You may think the company would be sued itself but in fact, it’s not the company who is affected but the porn stars themselves. Anyone is able to file a lawsuit against a specific porn star if they do not fulfill the requirements. This means that the plaintiff will receive personal information of the actor being sued which may include personal contact information and home addresses, a violation of privacy and means for stalking. The company distributing the porn itself would not be punished, it would be a source of shaming for actors in the porn industry. Prop 60 is actually opposed by the California Democratic Party, the California Republic Party, the San Francisco AIDS Foundation, and AIDS Project Los Angeles because to them, the proposition is not promoting safe sex, it is giving Californians and specifically Michael Weinstein of the AIDS Healthcare Foundation too much legal power. Weinstein is seen as a figure with the intent to rid of the porn industry through shame of those involved. But to many, Prop 60 is seen as a way to promote and practice safe sex with the hope that viewers will attempt to replicate safe sex they see used in porn. But is that worth the cost of humiliation and danger for porn actors?
Props 62 and 66 - Repeal or Quicken the Death Penalty
This is one of the most complicated and emotional debates about morality in California, or overall on a federal level. Prop 62 calls to repeal the death penalty in California and replaces said penalty with life sentences without possibility for parole which will immediately apply to all state prisoners currently serving on Death Row. Prop 66 calls to keep the death penalty in California, create speedier appeals by expanding the amount of courts and attorneys involved in the process while setting up set deadlines, and allows the state to transfer Death Row inmates among prisons. In total, 930 inmates have been sentenced to death in California since 1978. Only 15 of these inmates have been executed and only one inmate has been executed since 2006. The issue with the amount of people on death row to the amount in reality that are executed is that there are far too many cases and not enough courts and attorneys to hear appeals and enact a deadline. Prop 62 would eliminate this issue by keeping inmates in prisons making it more fiscally possible to maintain courts as they are. Prop 66 would place a limit of five years on appeals and allow lower trial courts to hear appeals. Prop 66 would also require attorneys who take on criminal appeals to take death penalty appeals as well so as not to make it more difficult for Death Row inmates to find an attorney. Another issue that both props either face or address is that nearly $150 million a year could be salvaged if the death penalty was eliminated. Death Row inmates are held in solitary confinement which creates more space for less people, causing a financial surge. In addition, $55 million is put towards appeals against execution. Again, Prop 62 would eliminate this all together which may allocate said funding towards a general fund or further rehabilitation methods for prisons. Prop 66 does not so much answer this problem but does suggest that these inmates work throughout their sentence with 70% of their income going towards debt owed to victims. And then there’s the issue of how to execute. The main reason California has not been able to execute inmates since 2006 is due to legal struggles on lethal injection. Prop 66 would allow state officials to research new methods without public oversight or opinion although they must be approved by federal court orders. Although the death penalty is extremely emotional for victims and those directly affected, it is also a matter of fiscal, legal, and ethical responsibility. It’s a tough decision that needs some chewing.
There are many more propositions which I highly suggest you take a close look at all of them before voting on November 8th. Take a look below to find more information on propositions that legalize marijuana, build and improve schools, makes it easier for non-violent offenders to receive parole, and more!
