This is a summary of the Daily Bruin Editorial Board’s
endorsements for the Nov. 2 election. There are a staggering amount
of ballot issues ““ some carrying significant fiscal and
social implications. These endorsements are a step toward making
your decisions.
President: John Kerry.His moderate and reasoned
positions will bring dignity back to American politics. Unlike
President Bush, he does not reduce the world to a “with us or
against us,” black-and-white conflict.
Proposition 1A: Yes. Carefully crafted by state
leaders, 1A is an important measure that will prevent state
government from raiding funds from local governments. It will
improve health care, emergency services and other local government
functions.
Proposition 59: Yes. Government records and
meetings should be open to the public. This simple amendment adds
this fundamental right to the state constitution.
Proposition 60: No.This measure does nothing
more than lock California into an already broken primary
system.
Proposition 60A: No. This measure would force
the state to use money from the sale of surplus property to pay off
the Proposition 57 bond. It will unnecessarily tie the hands of the
Legislature.
Proposition 61: Yes.Funding child health care
should be a priority of the state. This measure would benefit
children’s hospitals, especially those on UC campuses.
Proposition 62: No. Proposition 62 would create
a “modified blanket primary” which could make it harder
for third parties to compete and could even create a situation
where only two Democrats or two Republicans are on the ballot.
Proposition 63: No. This targeted tax-and-spend
measure would force the state to spend hundreds of millions every
year on mental health care. It would fund this spending by levying
a discriminatory 1 percent tax on those earning more than $1
million. Arbitrary taxes, especially those imposed by voters on
voters, set a bad precedent.
Proposition 64: Yes. By requiring lawsuits
against companies to prove harm, the number of unfounded and
damaging suits could dramatically be reduced. Consumers don’t
lose the right to sue when justified, and businesses can stop
fearing baseless lawsuits.
Proposition 65:No. Proposition 65 is
essentially an older version of Proposition 1A and is no longer
supported by the leaders who created the 1A compromise. Voters
shouldn’t support it either.
Proposition 66: Yes.The Three-Strikes law needs
reform. Third strikes should be serious or violent if the state is
going to lock them up for a lengthy and costly prison sentence.
Proposition 67:No. A telephone surcharge is the
wrong way to raise funds for the health care system. Additionally,
it leaves open the possibility of an unlimited surcharge on cell
phones and business lines. The state should find another way to
fund health care.
Proposition 68: No. This dishonest proposition
would likely open the door to new and non-tribal casinos in the
state. Keep gambling in Las Vegas.
Proposition 69: No. The state already collects
DNA from violent offenders and does not need to expand its
collection. The measure also lacks privacy safeguards for those
arrested but not charged or convicted of a crime. DNA is not
analogous to fingerprints, and the state shouldn’t be the
guardians of this private information.
Proposition 70: No. The governor and the
Legislature are already working on new compacts with tribal
casinos. This proposition would undermine their efforts and expand
gambling in the state without many enforceable safeguards.
Proposition 71: Yes. Stem cell research is an
important frontier in medical research. This $3 billion bond for
stem cell research will help attract some of the best researchers
to California.
Proposition 72: Yes. Large and medium-sized
businesses should provide health care coverage to their workers.
Such coverage will help the state’s heath care crisis and
contains reasonable provisions.