Monday, October 20, 2014

Vote YES On NO (My Handy Dandy 2014 Voter's Guide)


I never neglect voting because it is a RESPONSIBILITY of every patriotic American.   As the saying goes, VOTE EARLY, VOTE OFTEN.  And that's what I will be doing.  This year I will be casting about eleven ballots in the 2014 California election.

How do I do that? You might wonder!  Well there are people, in my family and in my sphere of influence, who always ask me to tell them how they should vote.  This year another friend asked me and he will be advising four others who look to him for guidance.   So there you have it; I will provide each of them copies of my sample ballot and they will cast my votes eleven times.

But I am going to do something a little differently for this election; I am going to tell you right here, in this blog post, how I make decisions on initiatives, and for whom I will vote in political offices.  So for any of you who might need some simple, straight-forward, no-nonsense direction, here it is.

By way of introduction, let me openly declare, I AM A CONSERVATIVE.  That word means things and I take it seriously.  My conservative political views are formed (and informed) by my Biblio-centric Christian worldview.  So before I even open the voter guide, I know that I will approach the initiatives with a great deal of conservative skepticism.

 Whatever It Is, I'm Against It.

We have TOO MANY LAWS.  I don’t know how we ever lost the idea that politicians are elected representatives and are sent to Sacramento or Washington to “represent” us.  But they call themselves lawmakers and they act as though writing new legislation is their primary duty.

Some laws are good and a few are necessary but most laws are redundant, burdensome, punitive, intellectually insulting, immoral, or unconstitutional, and they rob us of our resources and diminish our freedoms.  So my automatic default attitude for every initiative is NO; Whatever it is, I'm against it.  And from that point it is up to those who write these propositions to convince me, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that the initiative is both good and necessary.   After all, it is not necessarily good to vote for laws just because they seem to be good; I believe it is my patriotic duty, in most cases, to vote NO in order to preserve our freedoms and guard against the tyranny of out-of-control bureaucracies. 

I do occasionally peruse the arguments and rebuttals mainly because I enjoy classical debates.  I note who is making the arguments and I also look at the endorsements.  I want to know who is proposing and defending it and I want to know who is against it.  Frankly, whenever I see positions that are argued or favored by unions (like the teacher’s union), it is almost certain to be an automatic NO because, like I said before, I AM A CONSERVATIVE. 

In this election cycle I have seen at least a couple initiatives that are favored and endorsed by Governor Jerry Brown.  Really?  Jerry Brown?  Moonbeam?  Doesn’t anyone remember his first term back in his pot-smoking days when NOT ONE SINGLE INCH OF NEW HIGHWAY CONSTRUCTION occurred during his entire eight-year tenure?   He didn’t like cars but I digress. 

The point is, initiatives that are proposed by, endorsed by, supported by, or otherwise marketed by liberal people or left-wing organizations are certain to trigger my NO vote and, in California, that pretty much includes MOST of them.   However, I would vote yes on an initiative to outlaw abortion on demand or to outlaw queer marriages because I AM A CONSERVATIVE.


Proposition 2 -The Budget Stabilization Account.  It requires an increase in spending so we can pay our bills.  How does that work at your house?  I don’t know why we fall for this kind of voodoo economics over and over again.  How many laws do we have to pass to tell the government to exercise fiscal responsibility and pay their obligations first?  How many set-asides will they ignore?  How many lock boxes will they rob?  How many times have we been promised that new taxing and spending initiatives are going to be safe-guarded and are guaranteed to only be used for their intended purposes?  The B. S. Account is B.S. and, besides, they can’t even tell us how much it’s going to cost.  NO on B.S.

Proposition 45   As if the country wasn’t damaged enough with the passage of the illegal, unconstitutional, anti-free market expansion of socialism called the Affordable Care Act, now California wants to double down on Obamacare.  Don’t we have enough of government control and regulation in our healthcare and insurance?  I don’t want more of their meddling; I want less.  In the free market private sector, the market controls prices and improves the quality of services.  When government controls, prices go up and quality is diminished.  And besides, to further insult your intelligence, the state is estimating that the increased cost for this initiative is ONLY in the low millions of dollars.  NO.

Proposition 46    This proposition is endorsed by Nancy (“we have to pass the law before we can see what’s in it”)Pelosi.  Need I say more?  This initiative has nothing to do with drug testing doctors; it is a ruse for another huge expansion of government AND will increase money for trial lawyers by raising the cap on pain and suffering damages.   This is great for attorneys and sure to result in higher insurance premiums.  NO

Proposition 47   This “Get Out Of Jail Free Card” relaxes criminal sentences and penalties. Liberals act as if we reclassify felonies as just infractions, we won’t have so many felons.   California already has the very unpopular Prison Realignment Act that has deposited thousands of felons back onto the streets of our communities.   NO

Proposition 48   The state can’t even manage its own business.     It amazes me how liberals are so often conflicted and contradictory of their own ideologies.  They say they want equal opportunities in the marketplace and then they proceed to meddle in the private sector by picking winners and losers.  If gambling is legal for some, it should be legal for all.  Why is it legal for only redskins and not for yellowskins, blackskins, and whiteskins (and even purple penguins, for that matter) to compete in the marketplace?  It should be no surprise that my vote for this proposition is in support of the constitutional ideas of freedom and equal opportunity under the law.  I vote YES.

In the Governors race, I wish the Republican were more conservative but he's not.  Neel Kashkari voted twice for Obamacare and I struggle with that.  But the alternate is Jerry Brown.   That’s the same Jerry Brown who wants a high-speed rail system (The Brown Streak) that is estimated to cost upwards of 80 billion dollars.   By the way, the only sensible position on that is NO and is clearly evident in the description of the project;  “The NO sense Governor of a NO sense State with NO money wants to build a NO good bullet train system to go from NOwhere to NO place and that NObody will ever use.”  

So, for the office of Governor, I will hold my nose and vote for Neel Kashkari.

As for the rest of the elected offices, it is almost too simple.  I find it necessary to vote a straight party ticket in the general election whenever there are only two candidates.  In California, the land of fruits, nuts, and flakes; the second most liberal state in the union, MY DEFAULT VOTE IS ALWAYS FOR THE REPUBLICAN.   

It’s not that all republicans are conservatives  They’re not and some of them are the kinds of questionable characters that my Mom wouldn't let me play with.   It’s just that Democrats in California are pretty much all lefties.  They are like the ever-growing monster plant in the movie, “Little Shop of Horrors.” They have insatiable appetites that demand more and bigger government, more regulations, more money, more power, more control, and more, MORE, MORE.   

And the more they take, the less freedom we have.  So when I go into that voting booth, you can know how I intend to vote.  Remember, I AM A CONSERVATIVE and I am just doing my part to help protect you from your government.


Ralph M. Petersen 

No comments: