Archived: EGP June 8, 2010 Statewide Primary Ballot Recommendations

1

California voters will be faced with a number of important issues on the June 8, 2010 Primary Election ballot. Although voters are usually only allowed to vote for their political party’s nominee for statewide offices, and the numerous state and assembly seats up for grabs, this year, in a change of course, Decline to State” or “Non-Partisan/Unaffiliated” voters are being allowed to vote on either the Democrats’ or Republicans’ primary ballot.

The change, no doubt, is a recognition of the ever-growing number of voters who prefer to not be identified or affiliated with a particular political party, and who are now exhibiting a growing influence on elections both here in the state and across the country.

Voters will also be asked to vote on five separate ballot propositions. Eastern Group Publications this week begins our Ballot Recommendations:

Proposition 15—California Fair Elections Act
Repeals the ban on public funding of political campaigns. Allows candidates for Secretary of State to qualify for a public funded grant if they limit spending and private contributions. Candidates receiving grants would be limited to spending money beyond grant amount.
—Vote Yes

Proposition 16—Imposes New Two-Thirds Voter Approval Requirement for Local Public Electricity Providers Initiative Constitutional Amendment.
This initiative has an unknown impact on state and local government costs and revenues. We believe the voters should always have the right to vote on government actions.
—Vote Yes

Proposition 17—Allows Auto Insurance Companies to Base Their Prices in Part on a Driver’s History of Continuous Insurance Coverage.
We should be encouraging all drivers to buy auto insurance. This proposition will raise the cost for driver’s who have not had insurance in the past, or who may have had a lapse in coverage but are seeking to get insured. The long recession, job losses and housing crisis have placed a financial strain on many individuals and families, in some cases forcing them to go without auto insurance for a time. While we like that voters will be able to take this credit to another insurance carrier, the benefit does not outweigh the unfair financial burden that will be placed on those with less than a perfect insurance coverage history.  Coverage should remain based on criteria now being used. Lets not add new barriers such as new charges.
—Vote No

Posted - Copyright © 2022 Eastern Group Publications, Inc.

Share.
Print This Post Print This Post

1 Comment

  1. John Geesman, former California Energy Commissioner, 2002-08 on

    You should have read Prop. 16 more closely. You’re right, the voters should always have the right to vote on government actions — and they do under current law. What Prop. 16 does is REDUCE the margin which an incumbent for-profit electric utility needs to win at an election to block competition to 33%. Current law, and democratic principle, requires 50% +1. If we make it even more difficult for customers to have competitive choices, electricity rates are bound to go up. And all the money for those Prop. 16 television ads is coming from PG&E, the Northern California monopoly. Don’t you smell a skunk? Vote NO on 16.

Leave A Reply

Comments are intended to further discussion on the article topic. EGPNews reserves the right to not publish, edit or remove comments that contain vulgarities, foul language, personal attacks, racists, sexist, homophobic or other offensive terminology or that contain solicitations, spam, or that threaten harm of any sort. EGPNews will not approve comments that call for or applaud the death, injury or illness of any person, regardless of their public status. Questions regarding this policy should be e-mailed to service@egpnews.com.