-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
California Propositions Discussion for 2020 Election
- Thread starter crienne
- Start date
That's some shit.
Here, 24 is no.
And here, 24 on is Yes. I'm not sure about that.KNOCK.LA put out an LA county guide that includes propositions, if you're looking for another progressive source:
The KNOCK.LA Los Angeles Progressive Voter Guide for the November 2020 General Election - Knock LA
Vote: it might be the last chance you get!knock-la.com
I think I'm picking No. 🤔
Just got my ballot and discovered this thread. JFC at some of these props!
Been seeing crazy ads all over the place full of disinformation too. Especially 22 where I can definitely see a lot of people checking the wrong box.
Shit just saw a prop 23 ad while typing this where some fake nurse begged us to vote yes because obviously they just desperately want dialysis patients to fuck off!
Been seeing crazy ads all over the place full of disinformation too. Especially 22 where I can definitely see a lot of people checking the wrong box.
Shit just saw a prop 23 ad while typing this where some fake nurse begged us to vote yes because obviously they just desperately want dialysis patients to fuck off!
22 isn't really a cut and dry as we usually make it seem on Era, honestly. I really feel like it's a case of short-term relief vs long-term betterment. Like, in the long run, companies absolutely should classify their workers as employees and provide benefits, but in the near term, there legitimately are plenty of contractors who like/need the gig economy the way it is.
Then you also mix in convenience vs long-term benefits that are nebulous for the average consumer, and then add all the money poured into getting it to pass, and I really think it'll pass.
Then you also mix in convenience vs long-term benefits that are nebulous for the average consumer, and then add all the money poured into getting it to pass, and I really think it'll pass.
Yeah but this doesn't fit it for true gig workers This is only for app gig which is far more extortionate
I agree, but there are also tons of these types of contractors. Plus, COVID kind of plays into their favor right now, too, because we are so dependent upon all delivery services while we all stay home.
What really irks me about the prop, if what I've seen is accurate, is the stipulation that it could only be overturned by a 7/8 majority vote in both state senate and assembly.
That's bullshit.
Used ballotpedia and pretty much went with the Dems on all the props. Fuck Uber, but they will probably win.
Even though I am voted no on it, I expect it will probably pass. It is absolutely sickening though that Uber, Lyft and Doordash will together put in over $180 million dollars to prevent themselves from having to treat their workers as employees with benefits.
If so I'm curious what the argument is from gig workers who want this to pass. Are they afraid that Uber and Lyft will leave the state and they won't have the option of doing those jobs, or do they actually prefer being classified as contractors even if it means not getting a living wage/benefits?
I think it's that, plus they like the flexibility of working (or not working) whenever they feel like it, for as long as they want. One distinct difference between a contractor and an employee is that the employer cannot tell the former what to do as long as the job gets done.
I've been using the below site as a guide on the propositions.
calmatters.org
This is what I think I'm going to go with for each of them.
14 - Yes
15 - No
16 - ?
17 - Yes
18 - Yes
19 - No?
20 - No
21 - No
22 - Yes
23 - No
24 - Yes
25 - No
I'm really not sure about 16. It just still sounds so confusing. Racism bad except when it isn't? I don't know.
And that property tax stuff is always so controversial. It sounds like it's between "screw the baby boomers because they had it too good for too long" and "raising taxes bad in this economy".
California Election 2020 Voter Guide
Your guide to the 12 ballot measures and key legislative and congressional races in California.
calmatters.org
This is what I think I'm going to go with for each of them.
14 - Yes
15 - No
16 - ?
17 - Yes
18 - Yes
19 - No?
20 - No
21 - No
22 - Yes
23 - No
24 - Yes
25 - No
I'm really not sure about 16. It just still sounds so confusing. Racism bad except when it isn't? I don't know.
And that property tax stuff is always so controversial. It sounds like it's between "screw the baby boomers because they had it too good for too long" and "raising taxes bad in this economy".
I voted no on 16.
AFAIK, it's throwing one minority under the bus for other minorities. No thanks.
California has a ton of Asian Americans. Outside of Hawaii, I don't think there's another state with so many of us.
If AA is brought back, white enrollment will fall a little, Asian enrollment will fall a LOT.
I'm not at all going to vote for that. Historically that's how AA has always rolled and no thanks. There's too many Asian Americans in California, this will affect a lot of them.
Asians are hardly a minority in the UC system and Fortune 500 companies in CA. In fact, they over-index in both while blacks under index in literally everything in CA. AA offers more equity to those who need it. Your acting as if Asians still won't over index with AA brought back. Case in point...look at all the ivy league schools in the US.
This as well I'm so confused now after reading this thread especially on 23
19 should be a hard No, imo. It's an extension of Prop 13 that makes it even shittier by allowing for three transfers while keeping that old tax rate. One of the problems with 13--aside from the obvious tax avoision stuff--is that it's so old that it almost exclusively advantages white generational wealth.
Here's where I am so far:
14. Yes
15. Yes
16. Yes (although I definitely see Pet's point about it, but I also believe a rising tide raises all boats)
17. Yes
18. Yes
19. No
20. No
21. Probably Yes
22. No
23.
24. No
25. Yes
21 is tricky because it's, again, short term vs. long term benefit. And 23 I really don't know.
Here's where I am so far:
14. Yes
15. Yes
16. Yes (although I definitely see Pet's point about it, but I also believe a rising tide raises all boats)
17. Yes
18. Yes
19. No
20. No
21. Probably Yes
22. No
23.
24. No
25. Yes
21 is tricky because it's, again, short term vs. long term benefit. And 23 I really don't know.
The advertising by DaVita and Uber and co. is ramping up, that's basically all I saw watching the news after the Lakers win last night.
I'm still conflicted on 23... you'd think they'd have a commercial where doctors speak out against it instead of the fear tactics of dialysis clinics shutting down (I still don't think they're going to shut any of them down).
19 really has nobody funding the "no" part?
I'm still conflicted on 23... you'd think they'd have a commercial where doctors speak out against it instead of the fear tactics of dialysis clinics shutting down (I still don't think they're going to shut any of them down).
19 really has nobody funding the "no" part?
Thanks for this! I usually look at who backs which side to help make decisions on the ones I'm not sure about. It's looking like I'm leaning Yes on 23 because of this.Saw this the other day, thought it was a nice little bit of info:
the last few times i've taken an uber or lyft, i was met with many remarks on how they desperately want 22 to pass. as someone who has been a part of the gig economy for nearly a decade and got the taste of a full time job before I was unceremoniously laid off 6 months in, I get it. it's not as one sided as a lot of people think.
Overindex? That's silly, there's an element of merit involved in higher education. It's not indexed to population.
No one protects Asian interests. We're a minority in the nation and there's absolutely no attention paid to us. Even the recent increase on attacks against Asian Americans is hardly a whisper anywhere. People forget Asian Americans are a minority that go through their fair amount of shit. If you look at Asian Americans and white Americans, Asian Americans are underpaid compared to their white counterparts.
In the Ivy system, Asian enrollment is already suppressed. It's filled by (relatively) under-qualified white people. The spots aren't going to other minorities.
I won't vote for a proposition that hurts one minority greatly, benefits white people the most, and only marginally benefits other minorities.
For example, I wouldn't vote for a law that would bring affect the NBA by lowering black players from 75% to 25% of the players, increasing white players from 20% to 45%, increasing Asian players from 0% to 10%, and increasing Latino from 5% to 20%.
Last edited:
Everything you just said applies to black people to a greater decree. If you think no one protects Asian interests....then I don't know what to tell you people about black people in america.
To jump in really quick here, this type of response hits quite hard and is representative of the problem she's talking about. There's this attitude that Asians aren't allowed to have problems because other groups have things worse. It is incredibly tiresome to hear this all the time.
This is basically where I landed at. Anytime something like this comes up it's almost always Asian Americans being told to shut up and take one for the team.
The thing about 22 is that a "no" wouldn't force all the contract workers to suddenly be employees. It would force Uber Lyft and other gig apps to better fit the 3 contractor criteria to maintain the contractor designation of workers.
AB 5 said:
California Proposition 22, App-Based Drivers as Contractors and Labor Policies Initiative (2020)
Ballotpedia: The Encyclopedia of American Politics
Voting yes exempts these apps from the requirements of AB 5 meaning they can have the control that one has over employees without the designation. If 22 doesn't pass those companies have to go back and put in better processes to give more freedom and control to the gig workers to get the contractor designation again as that is cheaper than providing employee benefits. If it passes they can constrict controls and workers still wont get benefits and the only way to go back would be with a 7/8 vote.
What I see happening if this passes is these apps will just become more controlling over their workers with no repercussions and there will be no going back until automation replaces it.
Hello Everyone, I just need to speak about Prop 25 because i am very passionate about this.
PLEASE VOTE NO ON Prop 25!!! I am a public defender and i can't tell you how bad this prop is going to be for my indigent clients. The ACLU recently switched to NO on 25 as have numerous other civil rights organizations.
Prop 25 will give judges almost unlimited discretion to incarcerate people pretrial. They are going to lean towards incarceration because it allows them to pressure defendants to give up their right to a defense and enter guilty pleas. It's really fucked up, but people will do anything to get out of custody, even when they are innocent. I can tell you first hand, these judges will absolutely use this leverage at every opportunity they get.
Prop 25 also lets judges set no bail holds, which result in MORE people incarcerated and MORE people pleading guilty with lifelong consequences. One of the greatest powers we have for plea-bargaining is the threat of taking a case to trial. It helps us avoid these life-long consequences for misdemeanor cases by allowing us to negotiate for pleas that will allow our clients to move forward with their lives.
Finally, Prop 25 uses risk-assessment to determine eligibility for release from pretrial custody. These risk assessments are almost always used to form profiles that disparately impact minorities and poor people and are usually based off race, poverty and age. It doesn't let people's individual cases be seen for themselves, but instead through "profiles" that can be total bullshit.
So PLEASE, vote no on Prop 25 and tell all your progressive friends to do the same. We all want to see an end to the current cash-bail system, but this is NOT that and instead is going to lead to even MORE injustice and take us steps back when a bunch of people are under the false impression that it's a step forward.
PLEASE VOTE NO ON Prop 25!!! I am a public defender and i can't tell you how bad this prop is going to be for my indigent clients. The ACLU recently switched to NO on 25 as have numerous other civil rights organizations.
Prop 25 will give judges almost unlimited discretion to incarcerate people pretrial. They are going to lean towards incarceration because it allows them to pressure defendants to give up their right to a defense and enter guilty pleas. It's really fucked up, but people will do anything to get out of custody, even when they are innocent. I can tell you first hand, these judges will absolutely use this leverage at every opportunity they get.
Prop 25 also lets judges set no bail holds, which result in MORE people incarcerated and MORE people pleading guilty with lifelong consequences. One of the greatest powers we have for plea-bargaining is the threat of taking a case to trial. It helps us avoid these life-long consequences for misdemeanor cases by allowing us to negotiate for pleas that will allow our clients to move forward with their lives.
Finally, Prop 25 uses risk-assessment to determine eligibility for release from pretrial custody. These risk assessments are almost always used to form profiles that disparately impact minorities and poor people and are usually based off race, poverty and age. It doesn't let people's individual cases be seen for themselves, but instead through "profiles" that can be total bullshit.
So PLEASE, vote no on Prop 25 and tell all your progressive friends to do the same. We all want to see an end to the current cash-bail system, but this is NOT that and instead is going to lead to even MORE injustice and take us steps back when a bunch of people are under the false impression that it's a step forward.
But this is the all lives matter argument in a nutshell. Of course minorities across america have issues but at this moment, black people's literal lives are worth nothing. So there are specific measures to address the lowest common denominator. Like...what is the makeup of black people at EA? And don't tell me there aren't enough qualified black professionals.
You are asking the wrong person here because I agree with you, generally, and already voted Yes on 16. I just wanted to point out to you why you argument isn't swaying people.
EDIT: Also, no, this is not an all lives matter argument at all. This issue directly pits one minority group against another.
Last edited:
Thanks for the thoughts. I was on the fence before, but now I'm heavily leaning towards no. Dumb question, can nurses or PAs work as well for meeting the requirement for having a physician on site?
Also apologies for the double post.
PA's and NP's can fulfill the requirement IIRC, but then there's the cost of hiring additional PA's and NP's to cover a dialysis clinic for up to six days per week that can cause a financial strain on clinics that are already struggling.
Whats the consensus on Prop 14? Seems the majority here say yes and DSA and Knock recommend no. 🤔
Question: Can my Dad drop off all of our votes for us at once?
Crap, I think I misunderstood that Proposition!
Reading comprehension was never my forte...
Crap, I think I misunderstood that Proposition!
Reading comprehension was never my forte...
Last edited:
The thing about 22 is that a "no" wouldn't force all the contract workers to suddenly be employees. It would force Uber Lyft and other gig apps to better fit the 3 contractor criteria to maintain the contractor designation of workers.
California Proposition 22, App-Based Drivers as Contractors and Labor Policies Initiative (2020)
Ballotpedia: The Encyclopedia of American Politicsballotpedia.org
Voting yes exempts these apps from the requirements of AB 5 meaning they can have the control that one has over employees without the designation. If 22 doesn't pass those companies have to go back and put in better processes to give more freedom and control to the gig workers to get the contractor designation again as that is cheaper than providing employee benefits. If it passes they can constrict controls and workers still wont get benefits and the only way to go back would be with a 7/8 vote.
What I see happening if this passes is these apps will just become more controlling over their workers with no repercussions and there will be no going back until automation replaces it.
I'm leaning towards 'no' for 22, but right now, especially during Covid where both drivers and recipients are relying on food delivery services, wouldn't this have poor short term consequences? For restaurants relying on affordable food delivery, wouldn't this jack up the cost of food delivery and hurt restaurants/small businesses? Also, switching classification from contractors to employees also means that the amount that they can make in one day will be capped. I know some drivers who grind and pull 12-18 hour shifts 7 days a week, and I imagine many of those who rely on it in that capacity will not see the same return, since I heavily doubt Uber or Postmates will be willing to shell out for overtime pay (and neither will the customer).
For those who utilize this for supplemental income or even full-time income, this will probably put a lot of the drivers who need the job out of work.
I put
24 - No. The law seems to be fine as is. No need for this questionable ammendment.
"Let's remove this shitty system, and replace it with a system that we've never had before, which seems pretty shitty, too!"
If it just removed bail, that would be fantastic. Ugh.
24 - No. The law seems to be fine as is. No need for this questionable ammendment.
25 is so weird.
"Let's remove this shitty system, and replace it with a system that we've never had before, which seems pretty shitty, too!"
If it just removed bail, that would be fantastic. Ugh.
Yup, prop 25 is unfortunately bullshit "reform" that's going to just make those already vulnerable to the perils of systemic racism even more helpless. I can't even begin to tell you how bad these Judges already are, and with this discretion They'd get from prop 25 you're going To get a lot more innocent people convicted for shit they didn't do because of judges using the leverage of their discretion to keep people in custody pretrial.
This might be the completely wrong place to ask this but maybe someone has some insight.
I live in the valley, and I dropped off my ballot in an official ballot drop box about a week ago.
My online ballot tracker has shown no update as far as being collected, received, counted, or anything like that.
Does anyone know how often or when ballots are collected from the drop off locations? Everything online points toward being daily or very routinely.
I live in the valley, and I dropped off my ballot in an official ballot drop box about a week ago.
My online ballot tracker has shown no update as far as being collected, received, counted, or anything like that.
Does anyone know how often or when ballots are collected from the drop off locations? Everything online points toward being daily or very routinely.