| Go
Back
January 18,
2002 Alert #1
SPECIAL PRIMARY ELECTION EDITION
March 5, 2002 Ballot Propositions
The positions listed below represent the decisions of the Board
of Directors of California Church IMPACT. While Board members come
from various member denominations, their views do not necessarily
represent their denomination’s position on specific recommendations.
Proposition
40 is a $2.6 billion bond measure proposed by the State
Legislature which would enable habitat protection, recreation land
acquisitions, clean water projects, air pollution control activity,
and similar environmental protection measures across the state.
Supporters suggest that California is under-spending to
protect public health and safety. California voters approved a similar
bond measure in March 2000 and these funds have already been expended.
Proposition 40 will allow the state’s environmental work to
continue.
Opponents argue that California is facing huge budget deficits
and can ill-afford more indebtedness
.
The California Church IMPACT Board recommends a “YES”
vote on Proposition 40, and believes Californians must
continue to be good stewards of God’s creation by investing
in these critical environmental protection measures.
Proposition 41 is a $200 million bond measure proposed
by the State Legislature which will enable California counties to
modernize their voting equipment. A local match of $1 for every
$3 of state funds is required under this measure.
Supporters argue that the results the 2002 Florida general
election reveal that our antiquated voting equipment is ill-suited
to assure an accurate count of votes that are cast.
Opponents suggest that Proposition 41 is another debt on the
taxpayers of this state that we cannot afford in these uncertain
economic times.
The California Church IMPACT Board recommends a “YES”
vote on Proposition 41 in order to assure that our election
procedures are as fair and accurate as possible.
Proposition 42 is a legislative constitutional
amendment which would mandate that General Fund revenues from sales
taxes on automobile fuel be spent on transportation projects, regardless
of other state and local funding needs.
Supporters believe that taxes raised through the sale of motor
vehicle fuel should be earmarked for state and local transportation
purposes, such as road safety, and mass transit projects.
Opponents believe that the State Legislature needs maximum
flexibility in using this source of revenue to meet many other pressing
needs, such as education, health care and public safety.
The California Church IMPACT Board recommends a “NO”
vote on Proposition 42. During the current fiscal year,
California is facing a $12 billion shortfall, with programs affecting
the most vulnerable in line for significant budget reductions. Proposition
42 will unnecessarily tie the hands of the State Legislature in
meeting critical human needs.
Proposition 43 is a legislative constitutional
amendment which would declare the right of each voter to have his
or her vote counted. No such provision exists in the state constitution.
In addition, this measure would authorize county elections officials
to ask the court for an extension of a post-election deadline to
allow additional time to count votes, if needed.
Supporters suggest that the right to vote is a fundamental
right in the United States and should be explicitly guaranteed in
the California Constitution.
Opponents believe this measure doesn’t go far enough.
They hold that real election reform will only come when California
decides to publicly finance campaigns for state offices.
The California Church IMPACT Board recommends a “YES”
vote on Proposition 43. California needs an expression
of the right to have each vote counted in its Constitution. This
measure also provides important clarifications when election disputes
arise.
Proposition 44 is a legislative initiative amendment which
would revise various provisions of the law regulating chiropractors
in California. Under this measure, The Board of Chiropractic Examiners
would be required to revoke a chiropractor’s license for 10
years upon his or her conviction of various criminal offenses, including
insurance fraud. The legislature has revised laws applicable to
other medical providers involved in the submission of insurance
claims. Since the laws regulating chiropractors were first passed
by the voters as an initiative, proposed changes in this law require
the voters to approve such changes.
Supporters believe that insurance fraud creates high insurance
premiums for all insured Californians, and that chiropractors should
be subject to the same rules as other practitioners.
Opponents believe that chiropractors who commit fraud should
be required to pay back their victims, and must be able to earn
a living to do so. Therefore, opponents believe license revocation
is not the answer to fraud.
The California Church IMPACT Board makes “NO RECOMMENDATION”
on Proposition 44 because this measure falls outside the
purview of its work.
Proposition 45 is an initiative constitutional amendment
which would allow 20% of the voters in an Assembly or State Senate
district to submit petition signatures in order to permit their
incumbent legislator to run for re-election and serve a maximum
of four years beyond their term provided for in the state constitution.
Under current law, Assemblymembers are limited to three 2-year terms
and State Senators to two 4-year terms.
Supporters argue that Proposition 45 does not end term
limits but instead gives voters the option to extend the term of
their own lawmakers for four additional years.
Opponents believe that Proposition 45 is being proposed
by incumbent legislators who don’t want to leave office. Proposition
45, opponents suggest, will essentially kill term limits.
The California Church IMPACT Board recommends a “YES”
vote on Proposition 45. The IMPACT Board has always opposed
term limits, believing that such limits can subvert the will of
the voters (who may want to re-elect an incumbent beyond the current
term limits). Term limits have resulted in rapid turnover of legislators
and important institutional memory is being lost.
Election Resources for your Congregation
The California Council of Churches offers several useful resources
to your congregation as your prepare to educate church members about
the upcoming ballot propositions. Go to our joint website at www.calchurches.org
and click on the “What’s Hot” section of the menu
bar. Scroll down to:
- 10 Things
Your Congregation Can Do Before the Election
- Organizing
an Adult Education Forum on the Ballot Propositions
- Conducting
a Voter Registration Drive & Get Out the Vote Campaign
- Holding a
Candidate Forum
Here you will find a step-by-step process to equip members of your
congregation to be good citizens. If you’ve missed the opportunity
to focus on the March primary, consider planning a series of activities
leading up to the November general election. SAVE THE DATE
Legislative Issues Briefing in Sacramento
Tuesday, March 19, 2002 9:00 a.m. – 3:00 p.m.
Leave No Child Behind, co-sponsored by the California Council of
Churches and the Children’s Defense Fund
Keynote Speaker
Angela Blackwell Glover,
Executive Director, PolicyLink
And Vice President, Children’s Defense Fund
|
