2020 California Ballot Propositions Megathread

[Donerail]

Prop 14 Yes — it's dumb that stem cell research in California is funded via proposition (has to do with Bush-era restrictions on stem cell funding), but I have to vote in favor of the grad student-industrial complex.
Prop 15 Yes — Prop. 13 was a massive tax break to our largest corporations and this rightfully undoes it.
Prop 16 No
Prop 17 Yes — expand the franchise as much as possible
Prop 18 Yes — see above
Prop 19 Yes — would free up housing market inventory and maybe make this state slightly more affordable
Prop 20 No — tried this before and it blew up the state's prison population (and spending) without making much of a dent in petty theft
Prop 21 Lean No — concerned about impacts on housing construction
Prop 22 No — unfortunate to force some (mostly part-time) drivers out of the market but good to get the remainder (mostly full-time) predictable schedules and benefits
Prop 23 Yes
Prop 24 No — I'm concerned about some provisions in this proposition that would make it easier to charge people more if they don't let companies sell their data
Prop 25 No — cash bail bad, algorithms are probably not the answer

[Donerail]

I've already seen a Australian and a Floridian post here, so might as well give my outsider opinions

I am a California resident

[Donerail]

Just going to drop by and say: Everyone voting against 16 should be ashamed of themselves

Yes being racist against working class asians is good!

Woe, pity, sadness.

In case you are not aware, "race" is a broad category that in the United States is used to encompass a variety of different subgroups. The "black" category, for instance, includes Nigerian-Americans, who on average earn more than whites; the "Asian" category includes Southeast Asians, who on average make well below the average for whites, as well as Indians, who are the highest-earning ethnic group in the country.

It is not clear to me what discriminating against the poorer subgroups in the white and Asian categories in favor of the richer subgroups in the other two categories is supposed to accomplish, as a matter of public policy, apart from improving some surface-level diversity numbers. It's certainly not a targeted proposal to "give disadvantaged minorities a chance to get ahead in life".

[Donerail]

In case you are not aware, "race" is a broad category that in the United States is used to encompass a variety of different subgroups. The "black" category, for instance, includes Nigerian-Americans, who on average earn more than whites; the "Asian" category includes Southeast Asians, who on average make well below the average for whites, as well as Indians, who are the highest-earning ethnic group in the country.

It is not clear to me what discriminating against the poorer subgroups in the white and Asian categories in favor of the richer subgroups in the other two categories is supposed to accomplish, as a matter of public policy, apart from improving some surface-level diversity numbers. It's certainly not a targeted proposal to "give disadvantaged minorities a chance to get ahead in life".

Do you honestly believe that, Donerail?

Do you honestly believe, in your heart of hearts, that affirmative action programs often benefit wealthy Nigerians at the expense of impoverished Thai Americans? In a country where Asians make four times as much as African Americans? And that's what you're going with as your opposing stance? Because that ignores all logic and reason. Statistical anomalies are just that.

Affirmative action is designed to be the opposite of negative action which is what black Americans and Hispanics have received for centuries. To say these institutions in California aren't able to consider the unique challenges one might have faced because of race, which are still an issue and certainly were a clear and present issue in 1996, with people who had lived through Jim Crow and California's deeply racist recent past as evidenced by legislation such as Proposition 187, is not coming from any coherent ideology which you couch in theoretical  ivory tower language. Not to mention the wide difference between funding for wealthy suburban schools and inner city schools.

It's a very base fear that people of a lower caste may one day muscle their way into the privileged experiences wealthy whites and Asians have enjoyed in this country for decades. Yes, not all of them have, and obviously there are exceptions to every rule,  but the numbers don't lie. There is a significant and systemic disparity of opportunity in America that leads to worse outcomes for the groups in question.

Generally, it is not a tremendously effective rhetorical strategy to ask if your opponent actually believes what he is saying; the answer is almost always yes.

Affirmative action has succeeded tremendously in allowing the children of black and Hispanic professionals to experience the same elite educational experiences traditionally enjoyed by the children of white professionals. It has not succeeded on any other count.

[Donerail]

Uber makes you "confirm" some kind of statement acknowledging that your ride prices will go up unless you vote Yes on 22 before you can use their app. Which suggests they are very scared and think it will not pass...

[Donerail]

This is the first day in months where I haven't seen a Yes on 22 TV/YouTube commercial

My condolences. Hope you got some No on 23 ads to make up for it.