The Malibu Times Endorses

    0
    304

    Each election cycle the Times tries to evaluate and endorse candidates and ballot propositions. Generally, trying to make the choices is an interesting exercise, but this has been a completely lackluster year, making it very difficult to stay focused. But here it goes, anyway.

    Governor-Since “None of the Above” is not on the ballot, you’re on your own in choosing between Tweedledee and Tweedledum, or throwing away your vote on the Greenie.

    Lieutenant Governor-The Times endorses Republican Bruce McPherson, who is a moderate Republican, former senator from Santa Cruz, and a man with a political future if he wins.

    Secretary of State, Controller, Treasurer-These offices are of concern only to those running for Secretary of State, Controller and Treasurer, since they’re all pretty much civil service run. It’s reasonably irrelevant who the office holders are, other than they constitute the on-deck circle for future governors and such.

    Attorney General-The Times endorses Bill Lockyer all the way. He was a major force in the state Senate before, and he’s carried that over into the Attorney General’s office. He definitely deserves to be retained.

    Insurance Commissioner-John Garamendi, who was California’s first insurance commissioner and a man with whom Malibu has some personal experience after the 1993 fires, is the pick for this post. He is a very impressive guy, although I’ve also heard that Gary Mendoza, the Republican, is an up and comer and a man to watch.

    Superintendent of Instruction-The Times endorses Jack O’Connell, a very effective former state senator, with a longtime interest in education.

    U.S. Congress-We endorse Rep. Henry Waxman (D-29) who is one of the significant members of the House and deserves retention.

    State Assembly- Fran Pavley (D-41) has done a splendid job in the Assembly and is fast rising in importance and clout in that body, and well deserves retention. Her opposition is a very energetic young man named Michael Wissot, who, even though he is new and up against an established incumbent in a strongly Democratic district, handles himself well and probably has a promising political future if he can find a district with friendlier registration numbers.

    The following proposed state bonds are all part of an attempt by various special interests to go around the Legislature and get the electorate to set aside monies for something the special interests want badly. One of the reasons the state is so over its head in debt is we all keep voting for these bonds that pull money out of the Treasury in the mistaken belief that somehow a bond is different than a tax. It’s not. Balancing priorities is a decision the Legislature should make, and our decisions shouldn’t be based on an expensive public relations campaign, which is what most of these are. If we don’t start voting ‘No’ this time, there will be even more bond issues on the ballot.

    Proposition 40-Housing and Emergency Shelter Trust Fund Bond

    Vote No. Costs $2.1 billion.

    Proposition 47-Kindergarten-University Public Education Facilities Bond

    Vote No. Costs $13.05 billion, which is an insane amount when the state debt is more than $25 billion and promises to continue on into future years.

    Proposition 49-Before and After School Programs

    Vote No. This is a big public relations scam to kick off Arnold Schwarzenegger’s campaign for governor in 2006. If he wants it bad enough, let him fund his own campaign and not come to us to make him look like Mr. Good Guy.

    Proposition 50-Water Quality … Safe Drinking Water … and Coastal Wetlands Protection

    Vote No. Doesn’t any of this sound familiar to any of you? These guys have no shame whatsoever. Didn’t we just vote several billion in the last election for just that and another several billion in the election before that for the same thing? And they still keep coming back for more. How many times are we going to have to watch commercials with gurgling brooks and happy children at play before we finally start voting No on these Pork Barrel projects? Because that’s just what this one is.

    Proposition 51-Transportation, Distribution of Existing Motor Vehicle Taxes

    Vote No. It’s called the “Traffic Congestion Relief and Safe School Bus Trust Fund,” which certainly sounds like motherhood and apple pie. All it does is grab 30 percent of DMV taxes, forever, and gives it instead to a list of special projects, which the Legislature would never approve because the dollars come out of health and education. Approve this, and on the next ballot all the guys that lost the 30 percent monies are coming back with their own bond to get it back, plus some more.

    Proposition 52-Election Day Voter Registration

    Sure, vote Yes. Let’s make it easier to vote.

    County and School District Measures

    Unlike the state bond issues, which is almost all pork, the county and school bonds are a totally different situation. With the budget shortfalls in Sacramento, the counties, cities and school districts are being squeezed dry. Unless we agree to support them, which are needed local services, they’re going to be cutting back, or even some closing down.

    Proposition A-Earthquake and Fire Safety Bonds

    Definite Yes. Necessary to fix the Natural History Museum and other County Museums.

    Proposition B-Preservation of Trauma Centers and EMS; Bioterrorism Response

    Definite Yes. The person at that trauma center could be you. We’ve got to keep the trauma network alive and functioning.

    For the Santa Monica Community College District the Times endorses: Dorothy Ehrhart-Morrison, Bill Winslow, Carole Currey, Herb Roney.

    For the Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School District the Times endorses: Shane McCloud, Julia Brownley, Brenda Gottfried, Oscar De La Torre.

    Special Election Measure EE

    An emphatic Yes. This is probably the ballot proposition that impacts us the most directly, and personally. It’s an increase in the annual parcel tax and it will continue to keep our local schools first rate, which is essential to our society, our school-age children and their parents, and, most of all, to anyone who owns real estate because that’s one of the factors that keeps our property values up. This is a no-brainer.