CA Prop 82 is flawed, and a bad choice - Vote NO

Originally Posted By Darkbeer

<a href="http://vote.ss.ca.gov/Returns/prop/mapR082.htm" target="_blank">http://vote.ss.ca.gov/Returns/
prop/mapR082.htm</a>

Interesting to note...

For Prop 82, only 3 counties have it winning at the time of this post...

Alameda, Imperial and Sierra...

The one county I find interesting, San Francisco County has it being defeated by 58% to 42%. (Gee, I wonder if that has to do with the fact there are less kids than the average in the county...)

Compare that to Prop. 81...

<a href="http://vote.ss.ca.gov/Returns/prop/mapR081.htm" target="_blank">http://vote.ss.ca.gov/Returns/
prop/mapR081.htm</a>

San Francisco County has Prop. 81 winning by 66% to 34%.....

So why did so many San Franciscans vote against Preschool, but for Libraries?

 

Originally Posted By berol

Because SF libraries are dumping grounds for preschoolers! (SF County voted for both. <a href="http://vote.ss.ca.gov/Returns/prop/38.htm" target="_blank">http://vote.ss.ca.gov/Returns/
prop/38.htm</a> )

 

Originally Posted By xrayvision

Because San Fran's socioeconomic demographic would be directly affected by the proposed "wealthy tax" to pay for statewide preschool education. And as Darkbeer mentioned, San Fran has a lower ratio of pre-school aged children per capita than most California counties. More San Fran citizens would benefit from better libraries, which also fits into their elite socialization for supporting icons of higher culture (ie libraries, museums, theaters, the arts, renowned universities, upscale cuisine and architecture). Statewide pre-school doesn't carry enough prestige ...unless it's run by Stanford/Cal and has a waiting list.

 

Originally Posted By berol

I feel so ignored! *sucks thumb and holds blankie*

 

Originally Posted By jonvn

Ha...

Glad both props lost. I didn't like either one.

 

Originally Posted By Darkbeer

<a href="http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20060607/news_1ed7middle1.html" target="_blank">http://www.signonsandiego.com/
uniontrib/20060607/news_1ed7middle1.html</a>

>>Californians are asked to vote so frequently on deceptive and/or poorly drafted initiatives that it's no surprise some clunkers make it into law. But yesterday voters got matters right in rejecting Proposition 82.

The “preschool for all†initiative – which would have increased the number of 4-year-olds in preschool by all of 6 percentage points at an annual cost of $2.4 billion – was sold with a greatest hits of stupid consultant tricks. But support for the proposal gradually fell apart after revelations involving its sponsor, filmmaker-children's activist Rob Reiner. It turned out that First 5, the state agency Reiner chaired, spent $23 million on ads touting “preschool for all†at the same time “preschool for all†petition signatures were being gathered.

The good news is that even though Reiner's deeply flawed measure was rejected, there's still plenty of interest in helping disadvantaged kids. That was the original goal of Proposition 82's drafters before it turned into a grab bag of payoffs to various powerful groups. This interest is reflected in such innovative efforts as Orange County's devoting nine employees to nothing but the task of signing up eligible low-income children for state health insurance programs; 11,000 kids have been enrolled since July.

There's a pretty big kitty of money available to help pay for such efforts – at First 5. The agency established by Reiner's previous initiative has spent $230 million on advertising and public relations consultants since it was established in 1999. The Legislature has talked about fixing First 5. Forcing the agency to spend its money directly on helping kids would be a great first step. <<

 

Originally Posted By berol

Sometimes I wish it was harder to put props on the ballot, but the real problem is having a state constitution that's more like a set of laws. (tho that kind of const. is good, too) I rarely vote for initiative props anymore.