Confused? So was I, until I spent some time reading information about these. My thoughts:
30: Gov. Brown and a number of us want more revenue for the state. California's revenue has dropped 15 percent from its peak while our population grows. We are overly dependent on taxes that fluctuate too much with the economy and we are now 47th in educational spending. If we want better government, we must pay. You don't get what you don't pay for. Vote yes.
31: Not well explained and will add tens of millions in costs for no apparent reason. Just another attempt to legislate good spending practices by fiat. If you want a good legislature, pay for one. If you continue to pay little or nothing to people who serve in state legislature—well, there is no free lunch. Vote no.
32: A proposition to cripple unions paid for by corporations pretending to be a balanced limitation on both. Nonsense. Corporations don't take their political money from employees; they rip off shareholders like me instead. Prevent the neo-fascists who control most corporations from spending what should be my dividend money supporting reactionary causes and we can talk—until then, no thanks. Vote No.
33: George Joseph and Mercury Insurance Co. spending big bucks to re-write insurance law—again. No thanks. Vote no.
34: The death penalty. Supported by right-wingers who hate lawyers but naively believe that death sentences are always right. $4 billion spend to execute a handful of people and over $100 million a year wasted. Residents of Death Row are much more likely to die a natural death than to be executed. But it is not true that life insurance companies are selling policies there—yet. Vote yes to repeal the death penalty.
35: Higher penalties for human trafficking opposed by some crazies. Vote yes.
36: The three strikes law. Life in prison for stealing a slice of pizza. Time for a repeal of this wasteful and expensive nonsense. Vote yes.
37: Require genetically modified food to be labelled. Large costs. And lots of litigation. Lots of stuff is genetically engineered. There is no scientific basis to treat such food differently and we will have endless disputes over what is covered and what is not. Corn is genetically modified—as is wheat. This will be like Proposition 65—everything will have a label. Vote no.
38: A close call. Raises more money than 30 and dedicates the money clearly to schools. All good. But raises income taxes on very low earners and raises taxes just a bit too much. Vote no.
39: We are a bunch of fools letting corporations pick different formulas to calculate their share of California taxes. Surprise! They manipulate the formulas. This proposition will base taxes on percentage of sales in California—removing the incentive to move jobs outside the state. Vote yes.
40: Put on the ballot by people opposed to the neutral redistricting of legislative districts. Then they argued—gee, the proposition we put on the ballot is not needed so no "yes" vote is needed. Not true. Unless the proposition passes, redistricting for the state senate goes back to the courts. Vote yes.
Tom Long
Yes on 32, 35, 36. 40 No on the rest. As for any more initiatives -- the state needs to give it a rest!
30 - vote no. We do not need more taxes, we need less government, less waste, more accountability, less spending, fiscal responsibility, enforcement of our immigration laws, and the elimination of unions that have an absolute stranglehold on the state and the country. The money from this initiative goes to the general fund (not to schools as they falsely assert) so we can build high speed railroads we don't need, fund pensions that are beyond ludicrous (creating in the next generation a "privileged class" comprised of retired government retirees), and the list goes on and on. The only way to reign in out of control spending, which exists at every level of government, starting with out own cities on the Hill, is to cut off the unlimited supply of money.
Prop 32 - absolutely vote yes. It may not be perfect, but no legislation ever is. Unions are BY FAR the most dominant force in the politcal arena spending vastly more money than corporations and individuals combined. 32 does not prevent members of unions from forming PACs to which they can individually contribute (just like everyone else who contributes to a PAC), and support the causes near to their hearts and values. To force payroll deductions in the form of union "dues" to funnel tens of millions into campaigns to support causes not support by those who foot the bill is just wrong. The CTA (CA Teacher's Association) is one of the worst offenders. We will never be able to get the out of control pension problems resolved as long as unions call all of the shots at the local, state and federal levels.
34 - vote No. The death penalty is appropriate and it is not the problem. The judicial system that allows 30 years of repeated appeals on multitudinous grounds is the problem. The system needs to be overhauled; the death penalty needs to be retained and actually enforced. The people of CA continuously vote to keep it. We know that if it actually was enforced it would be a deterrent to violent crime. What we have is a joke. Let's fix the problem, not eliminate the death penalty.
I am still studying the rest of the Propositions and will write my views once they are finalized. In the meantime, it is a sad commentary on our legislature the there are so many Propositions in the first place. It means that those we have elected to serve us have continuously failed. Let's clean house and get some career politicians (like Waxman) out of office and get a breath of fresh and unspoiled air. Vote for Bloomfield.
And no, let's not let Mr. Bloomfield, a vacuous inexperienced multi-millionaire internet businessman who has donated millions to conservative causes and now masquerades as an "independent" buy a seat in Congress with millions of his own dollars. We can have a representative with a record of actually getting things done. Vote for Waxman.