As a working journalist who has covered LA County politics for the last year, I officially endorse sitting President Joe Biden this election cycle. Beating former President Donald Trump is key in protecting the semblance of democracy that we have left as his racist rhetoric and narcissistic leadership has given way to a new fascist Republican party.
Incumbent presidents holding office have a higher chance of winning. Biden also has a record of beating Trump with his promise of a less chaotic White House and a stable world economy. That is why you should vote for Joe Bi– Wait, he dropped out? Shit.
I disassociate whenever I hear about the presidential race because both candidates do not hold my values as a progressive. However, a Californian’s vote for president does not matter as it will go to the democratic president no matter what — Vice President Kamala Harris. But, the bid for the highest office isn’t the only question on the ballot.
Local propositions and measures are some of the most important questions to take your time and answer properly. With so many on the ballot and not enough attention paid to them, you may feel scared to vote for a proposition that you don’t know enough about.
I have been covering LA County politics since summer and have covered some of these propositions or the overarching topics these aim to solve. Here are the propositions and measures I do and don’t endorse and why:
Voting to improve civil rights
Civil rights are on the ballot and it is up to our vote to protect them. I’m going to start with one of the most important ones to vote against, but has a lot of support.
Prop 36 brings back disproven “crime solutions.” Vote No.
This proposition brings back Bill Clinton’s “three strikes” policy that overcrowded prisons, costing American citizens billions, as well as disproportionately disenfranchising black and brown communities in California. More specifically, those who have two prior drug or theft convictions under $950 can be pressed with felony charges; stealing a bag of chips at a Subway counts. Punishment does not solve systemic problems like crime, solutions do.
Prop 36 is unfortunately popular as astroturfed news outlets and social media accounts have played up an “organized crime” outrage that does not exist in reality. The problem this proposition wants to solve is “smash-and-grab” crimes by punishing thieves, but overcrowding prisons do not prevent crime.
This is a Republican-led effort that would rebuild California’s slave labor population and slash millions from victims of violent crime and mental health programs. Vote No and tell your friends and family too.
Prop 6 ends slavery in California. Vote Yes.
Yes, slavery is still legal in America and protected under California’s and America’s Constitution. This slavery loophole allows prisoners to be used for slave labor, making $1 an hour for fighting wildfires. Prop 6 would amend California’s constitution to finally ban involuntary servitude — slavery — to be used to punish crimes.
As most of us all know, Black and Brown communities are disproportionately targeted by police, thus subjecting those same communities to prisons where they are forced to do slave labor for outrageously low wages. Democracy Now uncovered incarcerated firefighters that worked a violating 24-hour shift to fight an active wildfire.
This also brings the 13th amendment loophole in America’s constitution to the California voter’s attention. This is the same loophole that California has — involuntary servitude is allowed as punishment in prisons. Malta Justice Initiative claims corporations use slave labor legally such as McDonald’s and Wendy’s for processing their beef patties. This fact brings the logical next question, how are their combo meals still an outrageous $18 when they literally use slave labor?
Yes on Prop 3 to protect LGBTQ marriages.
It inshrines gay marriage into California’s constitution, giving an additional layer of protection to LGBTQ Californians if the fickle Supreme Court were to overturn Obergefell v. Hodges. This is a very simple yes vote because all it does is put inclusive language into the constitution — no cons.
LA County’s Measure G for more representation. Vote Yes.
This expands the amount of Board of Supervisors from five to nine and we will finally have an elected County Executive. Having only five supes that represent 10 million residents makes some communities feel left out of the conversation. This is especially true for those who live in unincorporated areas like Rowland Heights, who rely on supes for local leadership.
The main opposition for this measure is that it would be expensive and it would “politicize” the C.E.O position. This argument is stupid because the position now is also inherently “political” because supervisors need to be elected anyway. Lets get more people in office with our perspectives.
Alleviate the housing crisis with your vote.
California is facing a housing crisis and to alleviate this, we must build more affordable housing — not abandoned luxury compendiums. However, affordable housing faces local pushback from Not In My BackYard activists, called NIMBYs, who tirelessly work to stop developments to ensure their property value stays increasing. This issue is at the center of most voter’s attention and billions of dollars involved. Vote carefully.
Untangling Prop 33’s complicated mess. Vote Yes.
With over $170 million contributing to both campaigns asking voters to vote yes or no, this proposition is the most highly contentious prop on the ballot this election. The ungodly amount of money in messaging has diluted what the proposition will do, repeal Costa-Hawkins — the state ban on local rent control measures.
This war is between two sides, real estate developers that want to profitably build and Micheal Weinstein, the head of the controversial AIDS Healthcare Foundation. LA Times detailed how AHF’s homeless shelters had “squalid conditions” for residence and one resident said it felt safer to be on the streets than living in their shelters. Residents shot guns in the halls, noticeable black mold painted the walls and an elevator malfunction led a blind resident to fall down the shaft.
There are even more controversies surrounding the AHF that I don’t have the time or energy to get to.
The AHF heavily funds the Yes on Prop 33 with a whopping $24 million to the campaign. At first glance, an AIDS foundation funding a proposition on housing may seem confusing, but in an opinion article, the AHF says “housing is the number one social determinant of health.” They also detail the AHF’s history in providing housing to neglected AIDS patients.
OK, back to Prop 33 and who endorses each side. Tenant coalitions, labor unions, progressive organizations and the AHF support Prop 33, business associations, real-estate developers and newspapers — that are mostly funded by real-estate developers — say no on 33.
The ideological war stems on what solution we want to focus on to solve the housing crisis — build more affordable housing or make housing affordable. The campaign for no on Prop 33 convinces voters — and me before hours of head scratching — that these two are mutually exclusive. They say that if Costa-Hawkins were to be repealed, local governments that tend to have a disproportionate amount of NIMBY activists, would set impossible rent control restrictions on developments to effectively stop affordable housing from being built.
CalMatters says this claim from No on Prop 33 is false in an incredibly helpful fact check article. The claim from No on 33 that “A city would be able to create the economic conditions to basically ignore those laws and requirements” is false because California courts have held that are provably unreasonable, like a $1 a month rend, is unconstitutional.
The article that convinced me the most on Prop 33 is an opinion published by The Hill. The author states that we need rent control in local governments so that the affordable housing built today will stay affordable in the future. We are facing the brunt of not having rent control — single family houses built in the 70s were laughably affordable, but now it’s a dream that passes the American dream.
After reading this article, I checked who the author was. It was Micheal Weinstien, the president of the fucking AHF. I had to step outside to get some fresh air.
Prop 5 gives bonds to build affordable housing. Vote Yes.
This is voting for more voting— what a true democracy we live in. Voting yes would allow for local bonds to be placed on affordable housing projects and public infrastructures that you can vote for. This is a way to balance out NIMBY voices with local votes, as their voices are obnoxiously loud but still in the minority.
If we can fund more housing developments and support housing, this proposition can be a step in the right direction to alleviate the homelessness crisis. Tearing down encampments and ripping away unhoused people from their personal belongings will not.
Raise the minimum wage again with Prop 32. Vote Yes.
This will raise the wages for those who work at establishments with more than 26 employees immediately to $17 and to $18 on New Years. A living wage is $27 for one adult with no children in California according to MIT.
Voting Yes for Prop 32 will not solve the overarching problem of the exploitation of the working class, but it will immediately alleviate the financial pressures of some. The only negative is it would hurt the feelings of a small business owner — an unforgivable sin.
Yes on Measure A to fund affordable housing.
This will replace the Measure H sales tax of 0.25% from 2017 for “homelessness prevention” to a 0.5% sales tax with a more specific purpose. The revenue will go to a range of different programs to address LA County’s homelessness crisis that both the LA supervisors and LA Mayor Karen Bass have focused on for the past few years.
With leadership focusing on the issue, funding their initiatives is important now to show that the people want this societal problem to be solved.
Fund your schools this November.
These two ballot questions will fund our schools. Education is important and we should invest as much money as possible into giving kids the tools they need to learn.
Prop 2 funds schools. Vote Yes.
This would give K-12 public schools, charter schools and community colleges in California a lump sum general obligation bond of $10 billion to improve the health and safety conditions of classrooms. This money can also be used to upgrade classrooms to modernize school facilities.
An investment in education is a must to build an equitable society and this proposition is a step in the right direction. The real kicker is that all California education groups also support this proposition and the opponent is singular — Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association.
Who is Howard Jarvis and how can someone be singularly opposed to investing in our kids?
Measure V for Mt. SAC. Vote Yes.
This is a $750 million bond paid for by home-owning residents that would fund current and future construction projects for Mt. SAC. If this is not passed, it would “financially hurt Mt. SAC a lot,” according to SAC Media.
One of the main projects that needs to be funded by this bond is the Technology and Health building that will be the largest building on any California community college campus. Opposition says that Mt. SAC has a money management problem, saying that other small school districts use way less money when renovating their campuses.
Most home-owners hate this measure because they have to pay more. Luckily, I don’t own a home and will likely never own one, so I would like to thank the the United Walnut Taxpayers in paying this one forward for me.
