Comments | hermes9291: The Benasaur Election Guide

hermes9291

The Benasaur Election Guide - Part I

Sep 30, 2008 23:39

I have decided to publish an Election Guide this year so I can crystallize the issues to my satisfaction and logically justify my positions before going into the voting booth. Feel free to comment. Read the official voter information guide here.

California Ballot Propositions

Proposition 1A - High Speed Rail Bonds

YES. You don't need me to tell you ( Read more... )

Comments 3

No on Prop 7? anonymous October 1 2008, 19:22:03 UTC

Benasaur, I have read your election guide and I like your thinking! You seem to have a progressively down-to-earth approach for reasoning which is in fact, very similar to mine ( ... )

Re: No on Prop 7? hermes9291 October 2 2008, 05:19:51 UTC

Thanks for your input. Your points are well taken. However, also consider these issues:
1. The provision limiting the utility bill increases to 3% a year has no enforcement provision, which means it has no effect.
2. 370,000 prevailing wage jobs is an estimate. The program doesn't contain any explicit hiring provisions.
3. I am always suspicious of claims that a certain law doesn't raise taxes. In this case, utility ratepayers may be on the hook for costs that are not apparently from the difficult language of the law. That would be scarier than taxes -- at least with taxes, you know how much you'll be paying.

Re: No on Prop 7? anonymous October 2 2008, 18:47:40 UTC

Both the “3% Guarantee” and the “370,000 Jobs Statement” are two statements that were challenged in the Sacramento Superior Court. Here’s what they came up with… “Substantive provisions are structured such that there is a verifiable and mathematically assured result that consumer bills will not experience an increase greater than 3 percent as a result of the initiative”

In short, neither of these 2 statements were found to be “false or misleading.”

I understand that you may have many suspicions of anything “claiming” to not raise taxes. But I must ask you, is that the sole reason that would lead you to not support this Prop? How about being suspicious of the $27 million that has been contributed to the No On Prop 7 campaign by the big 3 utility companies (PG&E, Sempra, and Edison). Isn’t that scarier?