Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 20

Thread: California Propositions (Caution Political Thread)

  1. #1
    Beware of Prop 56. The commercials make it sound great. The legislators won't get paid if they can't balance the budget. Wow. How could you argue with that? reduces the number of votes needed to pass a budget down to 55%. Which would put the budget completely under democratic control!!!! No republican votes would be needed at all to pass a budget.
    Taxes would have to go up to support all the spending that would follow.
    Who supports it? All the state employees and teachers unions....good for them obviously.
    Read the fine print...:yuk:

  2. #2
    Ya know Jaime and I were watching that commercial and were wondering what the catch was....You're right! Read the fine print. Well looks like I've got some reading to do.

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    This prop is the biggest smokescreen ad spin I've seen in awhile. The ads I've heard don't even mention the change in % to pass stuff (which is the meat of the prop). If this one passes CA will be in bigger trouble than it is already. Can you say here comes the tax man?
    Unfortunately too many Californians vote on stuff at face value and from ads they hear and see so it won't surprise me at all if this one does pass just based on the ads. Great advertising for a bill that's not in the states best interest (only special interests). Buying bad law with money. Isn't that what politics is all about these days?

  4. #4
    Thankfully the governor has a line item veto to protect us from some of the crap that may make it through if this passes.
    They are doing a good job promoting it. I hope the truth gets out. Right now it takes a 2/3 majority to pass tax increases. IF 56 passes the democrats can pass whatever they want with plenty of room to spare.
    No on 56!! And yes on 57 and 58.

  5. #5
    The "No on 56" people need to wait until close to the election to get their mesage out because they don't have much money for advertising. The "Yes" people are saying the oil, insurance and tobacco cos. are behind the "No" campaign...I thought there was suppose to be truth in advertising. Lying pieces of shit.

  6. #6
    Not only does it lower the threshold for raising taxes the other "tough" provisions in it will encourage the legislature to take this easy way out and raise taxes just to pass budgets on time. It is a very sneaky and sleazy proposition that is being falsely represented. Of course, all one has to do is look at the legislators who drafted it and put it on the ballot to see why it is so sleazy...... Tel all your friends. No on 56!!! We cannot afford to depend on the Gov to veto the legisltures tax hikes, after all, if prop 56 was in effect one year ago we would have been hit with over 100 new tax hikes on everything from our autos to diapers.

  7. #7
    OH... I thought it said California Prostitution,sorry

  8. #8
    Originally posted by LUVNLIFE
    OH... I thought it said California Prostitution,sorry
    Then we would be for it....

  9. #9
    There was an article in the LA Times last year during the budget impasse that concerned the democrats in the legislature having a meeting in the Capitol building and discussing this very issue.
    Basically they were saying that the budget impasse was great for them, the dems, because it would make it easier to get the voters to pass a proposition lowering the votes required to pass new laws, read raise taxes.
    The interesting thing about this is that in the room in the Capitol building where this meeting was taking place, apparently they have these mircophones that are linked directly to speakers in everyones office. The rationale is that you can listen to the proceeding without actually being there.
    Well, for this meeting the mics were left on and everything the dems said was broadcast to everyone in the Capitol. So everyone heard the dems talking about how the budget impasse was great so they could lower the votes required to raise taxes. RAT BASTARDS!

  10. #10
    Yes, I remember that well. That meeting was led by Jackie Goldberg. Her basic statement was that they (the "Ca Progressives" ) should tank it and let the people "feel the pain" in order to gain political support for new tax increases etc..
    My opinion is that when a public servant intentionally turns on the public the way she so obviously has there should be jail time involved.....

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Cute Monday Funny (caution...political)
    By MsDrmr in forum Sandbar
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 10-16-2006, 01:26 PM
  2. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 11-02-2004, 05:22 PM
  3. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 11-02-2004, 09:30 AM
  4. Yep another political thread
    By spectratoad in forum Sandbar
    Replies: 42
    Last Post: 08-30-2004, 12:24 PM
  5. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 03-10-2004, 11:18 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts