This election, I've decided to publish my votes openly instead of keeping them secret. I consider myself a "green liberal libertarian socialist", so needless to say my views do not tend to fit in with our two-party winner-takes-all system. I'm a registered "decline to state". I voted for Ralph Nader in 2000, and for various independent candidates during the Clinton year elections. This year, I'll vote more along Democratic Party lines because the most important thing to do is to get rid of our current criminal president.
| Position |
Candidate |
Notes |
| Gavilan Joint Community College District |
Mark Dover |
| San Benito High School District (vote for 2) |
Raymond Rodriguez, Shelly Donati |
Evelyn Muro seems to have a conflict of interest - family that works for the school district, or so I'm told. |
| Hollister School District (vote for 2) |
Randal R. Phelps, Chuck Spandri |
The school board needs a shakedown: please do not vote for Margie Barrios! |
| State Proposition |
Vote |
Notes |
| 1A: Protection of Local Government Revenues |
Yes |
Not that local governments will spend our money smarter, though, but one can hope. |
| 59: Public Records, Open Meetings. Legislative Constitutional Amendment |
Yes |
Keep the workings of our government out in the open for all to see and criticize. |
| 60: Election Rights of Political Parties. Legislative Constitutional Amendment |
Yes |
|
| 60A: Surplus Property. Legislative Constitutional Amendment |
Yes |
Whatever. |
| 61: Children's Hospital Projects. Grant Program. Bond Act. Initiative Statute. |
No |
Children's hospitals? How about basic universal healthcare for all? If children are needing hospitals that seems to indicate much larger problems with our society in general. |
| 62: Elections. Primaries. Initiative Constitutional Amendment and Statute |
No |
|
| 63: Mental Health Services Expansion, Funding. Tax on Personal Incomes Above $1 Million. Initiative Statute. |
Yes |
Proper funding of mental health services will save us money in the long run, not to mention providing needed services to people in pain. The rich can afford it. |
| 64: Limits on Private Enforcement of Unfair Business Competition Laws. Initiative Statute. |
No |
Polluters and crooked companies need to be stopped, not helped at taxpayer expense. |
| 65: Local Government Funds, Revenues. State Mandates. Initiative Constitutional Amendment |
No |
|
| 66: Limitations on "Three Strikes" Law. Sex Crimes. Punishment. Initiative Statute. |
Yes |
Three-strikes was not well thought out, a reaction to a barbarious act. We should not be throwing people in for 25 years for stealing a loaf of bread or breaking a window pane. |
| 67: Emergency Medical Services. Funding. Telephone Surcharge. Initiative Constitutional Amendment and Statute. |
No |
|
| 68: Non-Tribal Commercial Gambling Expansion. Tribal Gaming Compact Amendments. Revenues, Tax Exemptions. Initiative Constitutional Amendment and Statute. |
No |
|
| 69: DNA Samples. Collection. Database. Funding. Initiative Statute. |
No |
I'm a database programmer. I know how cool it would be to be able to enter a DNA sample and get a match instantaneously. But it is inappropriate to enter people into this database against their will before they've been convicted of a crime. Innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. |
| 70: Tribal Gaming Compacts. Exclusive Gaming Rights. Contributions To State. Initiative Constitutional Amendment and Statute. |
No |
|
| 71: Stem Cell Research. Funding. Bonds. Initiative Constitutional Amendment and Statute. |
No |
While stem cell research needs to be pursued, and has incredible potential for all kinds of advances in health care, we can't afford this. If we can get our budget balanced, our K-12 schools paid for and excelling, our people clothed, housed, and fed, and with basic health care, then we can think about the more advanced goals of attaining higher knowledge such as the Stem Cell Institute. Come on, liberals! Stay focused! There are plenty of ways to spend $6 billion that will help people right now! |
| 72: Health Care Coverage Requirements. Referendum. |
No |
We need universal health care, not a better way to siphon money from employers into private health company coffers, and at "significant annual revenue losses" to the state. |
