Tuesday, May 18, 2010

Kacer’s Call - June 8, 2010 - California Primary

General Guidelines - How I approach Propositions (Do’s & Don’ts):

  • Do: First read the Summary, Analysis, Actual Text, then the Arguments for and against
  • Do: Ask yourself if this is a proper role of government
  • Do: Ask yourself if this is the right thing to do, who it benefits, and the consequences
  • Do: Determine what principles apply (Biblical, conservative, practical)
  • Do: Apply common sense; come to tentative conclusion – find position of those I trust
  • Don’t: Rely upon organizations by name only (many sound good but are deceptive)
  • Don’t: Wait until the last day to do your research (spread it out over time)
  • Don’t: Support government going into future debt (some rare exceptions)
  • Don’t: Allow rare circumstances to overly influence you (“rare cases make bad law”)
  • Don’t: Support anything that’s too complex to completely understand (obfuscation)

Note: “(C)” following Proposition Number indicates a State Constitution change; (S) a Statute change

Prop 13 (C): Property Tax – New Construction Exclusion: Seismic Retrofitting  – Support (Yes)

Concerns: None foreseen at this time
Consider: Restrains government from arbitrarily changing earthquake retrofit requirements to allow re-
            assessments solely for revenue generation purposes.  Safety is a valid governmental concern
            and should not entail penalty (taxation) when required (Rom 13:3-4)

Prop 14 (S): Top Two Candidate Open Primary Act Oppose (No)

Concerns: Allows all voters to vote for ANY congressional and state elective office in Primary.
Candidates must reach entire electorate (costly); political conventions will be needed to select,
endorse and promote party favorites to membership. Special interests will still influence front
runners (ads, mailings, precinct ops). No-Party (or preference) designation will obscure what
candidate stands for and remove party alignment (Prov 14:8). 3rd Party candidates and write-ins
removed from General election, guarantees major party candidates unopposed (no protest vote
other than not voting).
Consider: Anyone can vote for any candidate now (register with party of choice). Increased participation
            is doubtful. Minority voice removed from General election (Prov 18:17). No write-in candidates
            allowed (Prov 28:12). Primary will benefit less fragmented political party (fewer competing
            candidates equals less fragmentation). Who does this initiative benefit?

Prop 15: (S) California Fair Elections Act of 2008 Oppose (No)

Concerns: Makes current campaign/election laws even more burdensome and complicated. Favors
            incumbents (incumbent success high already; campaign full time not fund-raise; use office
            visibility). Funding work-a-rounds still possible (attack issues only; massive funds at end of
            campaign (no time to adjust)). Will not remove influence on non-participants. Taxes legitimate
            lobbyists (charities). Allows legislature to apply to all elections. Removes use of donor visibility to
            see who candidate is beholding to (John 3:20). Purpose of the law (actual text) has very little
            correlation with actual content
Consider: Government (through taxes) will be pro-actively supporting incumbents, ensures continuance of
            existing imbalance for some time. Government regulation is restraint on the elective process,
            encouraging less visible activities

Prop 16 (C): The Taxpayers Right to Vote Act Support (Yes)

Concerns: Current law allows local government “Community Choice Aggregator” approaches to take over
            private “Investor Owned Utilities” market without local voter approval.  Expansion of government
            electricity service being considered in many cities/counties. Private competition should be
            encouraged, not government control/takeover (Rom 13:3-4). Government incapable of showing
            restraint – either in use of power or limiting fiscal indebtedness (presumption James 4:13-14)
Consider: Measure doesn’t limit access to green sources of power (good stewardship Gen 1:28; 2:15).
            Allows voters to decide if public debt is allowed for startup/expansion of government utilities (2/3
            super-majority; like other tax increases) (Prov 15:22)

Prop 17: (S) Continuous Coverage Auto Insurance Discount Act Support (Yes)

Concerns: CA Insurance Commission approves all rates & allowable discount factors (subject to Prop 103
of ’88), restricts free market principles. Current continuous coverage discount options are non-transferable.
Claims of “surcharges” and discrimination not credible, without transferability increased
competitiveness and consumer benefit reduced.  “Optional” basis by insurer overlooked – not a mandatory discount factor.
Consider: Government should inform consumer on options/issues (public service), not restrict and
            manage entire industry (Rom 13:3-4); also ensure equal treatment (Lev 19:35-36) only. Measure
            provides option CA currently prohibits, but caveat emptor applies. Encourages personal
            responsibility(maintaining insurance) to gain cost savings (2 Thess 3:10)

Information Provided by C3 of San Diego, a 501(c)3 Non-Profit
Religious Corporation. For more information contact frankkacer@hotmail.com


Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home