Other races - House, Senate etc

FatherTed

Lieberman and Dodd are not up for election in my state, CT, but my House District CT-04 is an interesting race. Chris Shays(R) is the only Republican member of the House in all of New England and narrowly won in 2006. I like the guy, met him a few times at some local civic events. But there is a good chance he could lose to the Democratic challenger this time round.

The general consensus is that the Democrats will pick up a few seats in the House and a number of Senate seats in VA, AK, NM as well as a few close races in NC, NH, CO & OR

Otacon

Thinking out loud here, but could this mean Obama truly is the 'Change' candidate?

What I mean is, if Obama wants to making sweeping reforms to any number of areas, having a Democratic majority in both Senate and the House could make it a lot easier for them to pass.

McCain possibly will be held up at every turn...

Manic Moran

Depends on what you want changed. I don't want radical new governmental policies, but I wouldn't mind some ethics changes.

As for the Other Stuff... I've only received my State guide so far, which is just State-level propositions. I expect my County ballot to have the various House/Senate races and local initiatives.

California Prop 1:
High Speed Rail networks for California. Some $10bn in bonds (Total cost over 30 years $19.5bn, after interest) to partially fund a link from Sacramento and San Francisco down to Los Angeles/LA. Total cost of the plan is somewhere on the order of $70bn.

I like trains. I really do. I like fast ones too. But without finding out where the rest of the funding is coming from, I'm a little reluctant to authorise the expense of a $10bn partial funding. Further, as one of the arguments against points out, the major problem isn't getting from San Francisco to Los Angeles, it's getting to work every day. I-5 is rarely packed. I-880 to my work is.

Prop 2:
An Animal Rights proposition. Basically banning battery farming, requiring them to be provided room to move around. Estimated several millions of dollars of business lost to places like Mexico, but the hens can flap.

I might as well vote for it. A couple of million isn't all that much.

Prop 3
Children's hospital funding. For construction, rebuilding and re-equipping of hospitals.
$1bn in bonds, plus another $1bn in interest over 30 years.

I'll probably vote against this one. It's the sort of thing which should come out of the regular budget.

Prop 4
Will mandate a 48-hour waiting period and parental notification before abortion for a minor. This is the third time this has come up, this time they've put a caveat in it in the case of parental abuse, a different adult must be notified.

I must ponder upon this one, I can see arguments on both sides.

Prop 5.
Nonviolent Drug Offenses, sentencing, parole and rehabilitation.
Allocates $450mil to expand treatment programs. Limits court authority to incarcerate offenders who commit certain drug crimes, break treatment rules, or violate parole.

Going to vote against this one. Whilst I'm not really against treatment plans, I do object to the limitations on what courts can decide.

Prop 6.
Police and Law Enforcement Funding, Criminal Penalties and Laws.
Requires a minimum of $1bn of State-funded law enforcement spending. (Note that City and County also fund their own programs). Has about 30 changes in the Criminal Code.

I'm sortof in the middle on this one. I can see the advantages to all the money, and support increased policing expenses, but I'm wary of mandating budget expenses like that and trying the legislature's hands.

Prop 7
Renewable Energy. Requires government-owned utilities to generate 20% of their power renewably by 2010, the same standard currently in force for private companies. 40% for both by 2020, 50% by 2025.

Voting against this one. I think the requirements are too high for the time period allowed. They're better off with the credits for consumers who incorporate renewable power themselves, I think, such as solar panels.

Prop 8
Constitutional Ammendment to define marriage as between a man and a woman. One of the big-ticket items this year, after the recent Supreme Court case authorising it. Gavin Newsom's introduction to the State, which is relevant as he is looking for the Governorship next year.
Very interesting background to this one. The question was posed in a referendum a couple of years ago, and almost 2/3 voted that they preferred the 'traditional' view of marriage, which was enacted into law However, it was not a Constitutional referendum, and the Courts did not find it binding, instead deferring to the 'Equal rights' viewpoint which is in the Constitution. This would redress that difference if it passed.

I'm voting against. I don't like gay marriage as a concept, but my belief in the supremacy of equal rights is stronger.

Prop 9
Criminal Justice System, Victim's rights, parole Constitutional ammendment.
Generally receiving bi-partisan support, it Constitutionally guarantees victims of crime the right to partake in the court proceedings and payment of restitution from the offender. Also some minor changes to the parole laws.

Voting for. I'm all for victims rights in criminal cases.

Prop 10
Alternative Fuel Vehicles and renewable energy bonds.
Authorises $5bn in bond sales ($10bn total over 30 years) for a range of programs such as credits for consumers who buy alternative fuel vehicles and research in renewable energy.

I'm thinking against on this one. Petrol costs already provide an economic incentive, combined with the various other incentives such as not paying tolls and using the carpool lane.

Prop 11
Redistricting Ammendment.
Under the current system, the legislature draws the various boundaries for the State government. Ammendment would create a non-legislature multi-lateral citizen's commission. Does not affect US House of Represenatatives boundaries.

Not just 'yes', but 'hell yes!' California is one of the most gerrymandered places on Earth. (Initiative put on the ballot by petition, incidently...). Enough of the 'safe seats.' Arnie was moving this way last year, before dropping it as part of a deal to get something else through. Glad to see it back on.

Prop 12
Veteran's Bonds.
Just under $1bn in bonds to fund loans for veterans to purchase farms and houses.

Yes on this one. Though the State has to pay an additional 900mil in interest, the vets also have to pay the loans back with interest, so the overall costs are less than initial impressions.

I'll get back when I find a county ballot.

NTM

Overheal

I have no idea what or how to get this info for SC but I'll play with cali for a minute

Manic Moran wrote: »

California Prop 1:
High Speed Rail networks for California. Some $10bn in bonds (Total cost over 30 years $19.5bn, after interest) to partially fund a link from Sacramento and San Francisco down to Los Angeles/LA. Total cost of the plan is somewhere on the order of $70bn.

The Gay Railroad to Nowhere? Sorry, couldn't resist.

Prop 2:
An Animal Rights proposition. Basically banning battery farming, requiring them to be provided room to move around. Estimated several millions of dollars of business lost to places like Mexico, but the hens can flap.

I might as well vote for it. A couple of million isn't all that much.

Research also shows free range animals produce higher quality meat. nyom nyom

Prop 3
Children's hospital funding. For construction, rebuilding and re-equipping of hospitals.
$1bn in bonds, plus another $1bn in interest over 30 years.

I'll probably vote against this one. It's the sort of thing which should come out of the regular budget.

Regular budget handles wages and bandages, not Hospital Wings and MRIs. Besides, its for the children!

Prop 4
Will mandate a 48-hour waiting period and parental notification before abortion for a minor. This is the third time this has come up, this time they've put a caveat in it in the case of parental abuse, a different adult must be notified.

I must ponder upon this one, I can see arguments on both sides.

..................pass.

Prop 5.
Nonviolent Drug Offenses, sentencing, parole and rehabilitation.
Allocates $450mil to expand treatment programs. Limits court authority to incarcerate offenders who commit certain drug crimes, break treatment rules, or violate parole.

Going to vote against this one. Whilst I'm not really against treatment plans, I do object to the limitations on what courts can decide.

I'd vote for it. Too much tax goes to incarcerating potheads alongside pedophiles and serial killers.

Prop 6.
Police and Law Enforcement Funding, Criminal Penalties and Laws.
Requires a minimum of $1bn of State-funded law enforcement spending. (Note that City and County also fund their own programs). Has about 30 changes in the Criminal Code.

I'm sortof in the middle on this one. I can see the advantages to all the money, and support increased policing expenses, but I'm wary of mandating budget expenses like that and trying the legislature's hands.

same

Prop 7
Renewable Energy. Requires government-owned utilities to generate 20% of their power renewably by 2010, the same standard currently in force for private companies. 40% for both by 2020, 50% by 2025.

Voting against this one. I think the requirements are too high for the time period allowed. They're better off with the credits for consumers who incorporate renewable power themselves, I think, such as solar panels.

Consumer credits are fine but the cost of residential renewables is still ridiculous. One guy on the radio last month phoned in talking about how he got an estimate to run a wind generator in his house: he wouldn't see a return on the investment until well past 2025.

I'm up for the same idea Ireland has going though: let private enterprise create these renewable energies. If anything shouldnt the gov't be steppinng back from controlling the energy market?

Prop 8
Constitutional Ammendment to define marriage as between a man and a woman. One of the big-ticket items this year, after the recent Supreme Court case authorising it. Gavin Newsom's introduction to the State, which is relevant as he is looking for the Governorship next year.
Very interesting background to this one. The question was posed in a referendum a couple of years ago, and almost 2/3 voted that they preferred the 'traditional' view of marriage, which was enacted into law However, it was not a Constitutional referendum, and the Courts did not find it binding, instead deferring to the 'Equal rights' viewpoint which is in the Constitution. This would redress that difference if it passed.

I'm voting against. I don't like gay marriage as a concept, but my belief in the supremacy of equal rights is stronger.

I also don't see where or why this would fit into the constitution. Its America: freedom, bitch. If I want to marry my Girlfriend's dog to my dog, then damnit I will (this happens, far too often)

Prop 9
Criminal Justice System, Victim's rights, parole Constitutional ammendment.
Generally receiving bi-partisan support, it Constitutionally guarantees victims of crime the right to partake in the court proceedings and payment of restitution from the offender. Also some minor changes to the parole laws.

Voting for. I'm all for victims rights in criminal cases.

same

Prop 10
Alternative Fuel Vehicles and renewable energy bonds.
Authorises $5bn in bond sales ($10bn total over 30 years) for a range of programs such as credits for consumers who buy alternative fuel vehicles and research in renewable energy.

I'm thinking against on this one. Petrol costs already provide an economic incentive, combined with the various other incentives such as not paying tolls and using the carpool lane.

agreed

Prop 11
Redistricting Ammendment.
Under the current system, the legislature draws the various boundaries for the State government. Ammendment would create a non-legislature multi-lateral citizen's commission. Does not affect US House of Represenatatives boundaries.

Not just 'yes', but 'hell yes!' California is one of the most gerrymandered places on Earth. (Initiative put on the ballot by petition, incidently...). Enough of the 'safe seats.' Arnie was moving this way last year, before dropping it as part of a deal to get something else through. Glad to see it back on.

wait, what?

Prop 12
Veteran's Bonds.
Just under $1bn in bonds to fund loans for veterans to purchase farms and houses.

Yes on this one. Though the State has to pay an additional 900mil in interest, the vets also have to pay the loans back with interest, so the overall costs are less than initial impressions.

That and anything that helps out a vet also acts as incentive for anyone to enlist. Armed Forces have had to respond to dwindling enlistment rates in the last few years - I wonder why.

Manic Moran

Too much tax goes to incarcerating potheads alongside pedophiles and serial killers.

Nothing wrong with sending them to treatment, but if I'm reading my guide correctly, the limitations on what the court can do will result that if the offender decides to simply skip the treatment, the courts have no option but to send him to treatment.

I also don't see where or why this would fit into the constitution.

It would be an interesting issue, the CA Constitution at odds with the Federal one. However, CA would not be the first to have a 'man and woman' requirement in its Constitution, so one must ask as to what challenges have cropped up in other States.

wait, what?

Back in 2000 or so, in a great example of bi-partisanship and working together, the elected representatives of the two parties decided that they wanted to make sure that they kept their jobs, so California is heavily gerrymandered into safe D and R seats. Just look at CA's 38th Congressional district, for example.



Of course, with safe seats, the elected representatives don't have to worry about being mainstream, and can thus pander to various special interest groups.

The Governator threatened about two years ago to change the redistricting laws to something which took the power out of the hands of the legislators. After all, what legislator would change the rules to allow a greater chance of his being voted out of office? However, as part of a drug deal to get another pet Arnie issue through, he dropped the issue. Looks like enough voters got their signatures on to get it onto the ballot in the end anyway. Arnie is partially funding this, to the tune of $2.5million.

The only problem is that this proposal only affects State-level appointments, not Congress. However... baby steps.

NTM

Overheal

ah. isnt that what was going on in NI for a while with voter districts?

Our man in Havana

Indeed. You are 100% correct. Thru gerrymandering for years there was a unionist council in Londonderry which was 90% nationalist.

Manic Moran

My county ballot has arrived. As I'm in unincorporated Santa Clara, I don't get a city ballot.

I had actually typed out a much longer post than this one, but the computer ate it.

The two big propositions right now are the gay marriage and the redistricting. It seems likely the gay marriage ban will pass. Numerous couples are moving their nuptuals forward in order to be married before then. I have no idea what their legal status will be after the ban passes. The supporters of gay marriage are not doing themselves any favours with their in-your-face attitude, the recent incident of a field trip by a bunch of first-graders to a gay wedding has rather galvanised opposition.

The Governator has also been pushing the redistricting, including funneling some of his own funds towards the campaign. The resistance is being led by the current Senate Leader Pro-Temp, Don Perata. He is arguing against on the basis that the proposition would grant powers to a group of anonymous Joes who nobody really knows. I can't see how that's any worse than letting the people in charge make decisions over who gets to say if they're doing a good job. Now, it turns out that this sort of proposition has been tried a few times before. A half-dozen times before. Failed every time. However, there's an important difference: All the previous times would have included redistricting for US Congress positions. As a result, all the Congresscritters, led by SF's Pelosi who obviously wouldn't like to loose all those 'guaranteed' seats in the House, but of both sides, threw their hefty financial weight in with the State legislators, as all their jobs would have been on the line. The cunning move of divide and conquer might actually work in this case, as the Congresscritters have their own problems to deal with and are less worried about the State level issues which no longer concern them.

Going down the ballot sheet, the first choice is the Presidential one. Obama's name is top of the list, then the Libertarian, then McCain, then the rest. (Peace and Freedom Party? What's wrong with Monster Raving Looney Party with Green Teeth? They should set up an American branch). Positioning is done, to the best of my knowledge, by random lot.

Next one down is for my congresscritter in the House. Current D incumbent in a D area is highly unlikely to lose against the Republican candidate (a woman who was a CEO of a silicon valley startup and a few other such over-stated positions), or the Libertarian candidate, a software engineer with a post-grad from MIT, but some bizarre answers to questions on his position over at Votesmart.org.

State Senate and Assembly is more or less similar. D incumbents going up against anything from technology writers through accountants. Got to love lower-level politics.

No election for Sheriff this year, sadly, but we do get to appoint a Superior court judge. Both applicants (amazingly) are qualified for the position.

Another election we have next month is for a position on the Board of Education. Again, both applicants actually have some form of qualification in the education system.

Four Measures are on the county ballot.
Measure A is the sale of $840m of bonds to fund the rebuilding of one of the major local hospitals. It currently does not meet earthquake code, and will be partially closed by the State if not rectified. While they're at it, they'll also expand a bit. It's a fair bit of money, and the interest will be paid for by a 1.3% increase in property tax. In my case, that's about $150 a year. An interesting dilemma: The hospital is needed, but it's not a small tax hike.

Measure B is the BART Measure. A 1/8 % increase in sales tax to be levvied in order to fund an extension from Fremont through San Jose and up to Santa Clara to link up with the CalTrain station there. This would give San Jose useful public rail links to both East and West bay. Tax would be levvied only in the case that matching funds from Fed/State be provided sufficient to complete the job. (The High Speed Rail prop should have had this caveat on it). Santa Clara already has pretty much the highest sales tax in the nation, at some 8.5%. On the plus side, the BART link would be very useful (particularly for the students at the local universities who would have BART stops right there). On the down side, even the supporters of the measure have admitted this week that the figures on total expense that they've been using are outdated and the real costs are liable to be higher.

Measure C and D are kindof odd. Both refer to the local public transport organisation, VTA. (Valley Transportation Authority).
C is an 'Advisory vote.' Basically a referendum that has no legal authority and is not binding, it's just a sensing to see whether or not the VTA is on the right track. It is put on there becaue when VTA was set up, a law was passed saying that sensing should be received from the voters every six years. However, on the face of it, the measure is so vague as to be utterly pointless. In effect it asks "Should VTA continue to plan and implement improvements to the public transportation system?" It doesn't ask about any specifics of the improvements, and though there is a plan on the VTA web page right now, it's outdated and due to be reconfigured the month after the vote.

Measure D is related to Measure C. It proposes to abandon the every-six-years sensing vote as a useless expense, and replace it with an advisory comission of some sort, without going into any great details as to how. Personally, I think this comission will prove to be even more expensive than the ink of the ballot sheet it's supposed to replace.

As a final aside, mail-in voting is at some 70%, with an expected voter turnout of 80%. This has resulted in a lot of polling stations being cancelled, as they would be underused. As you can imagine, the 30% of voters who will not be using a mail-in ballot are not happy at this. I don't blame them. I'm in a mandatory mail-in precinct, because there are so few registered voters in it, and even I choose to swing by a polling station and deliver the ballot in person on the day.

NTM

brianthebard

Overheal wrote: »

ah. isnt that what was going on in NI for a while with voter districts?

Bond-007 wrote: »

Indeed. You are 100% correct. Thru gerrymandering for years there was a unionist council in Londonderry which was 90% nationalist.

Almost certain it was an American convention first though. Will check.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerrymandering

As I thought. The term was coined after someone exclaimed that the redrawn district looked like a salamander.

Black Swan

Predictions?

• The Democrats add to their majority in the US House of Representatives.
• The Democrats break the 49-49 tie in the US Senate, gaining 5 or 6 seats to win a clear majority in the US Senate.

Reason? "It's the economy stupid!" (famous quote) The party that occupies the Oval Office (Republican G.W. Bush or "W" in the film released today) during economic meltdowns, typically loses seats in the House and Senate during elections.

If the Democrats also win the presidency, as did the Republicans some time ago, the American people will suffer the consequences of one party rule, lacking checks and balances.

turgon

Blue_Lagoon wrote: »

If the Democrats also win the presidency, as did the Republicans some time ago, the American people will suffer the consequences of one party rule, lacking checks and balances.

Like Ireland is all the time, unfortunately.

BTW, any links to any websites that would describe all the referendums and elections ye all have in America etc

Manic Moran

Ooof.. I doubt it. We have a stupid amount of ballot measures, down to members of the water works board. Such a website would be ginormous, you'd need to look down to the level of individual city and county ballots.

NTM

Black Swan

turgon wrote: »

BTW, any links to any websites that would describe all the referendums and elections ye all have in America etc

There is no central databank that I am aware of, given the complexity and vast numbers of candidates and issues in this general election at the city, unincorporated, precinct, district, county, state, national, District of Columbia, and territorial (Porto Rico, Guam, etc.) levels for a total population of over 300 million people. I doubt that all measures are online for many of the smaller towns and townships throughout the country.

SteveS

California sure loves ballot initiatives. We only get 3 or 4 here in Michigan every election. I usually don't like them because, for the most part, they are just special interest groups trying to circumvent the legislative process. Granted, that isn't always a bad thing, but the winner is usually the side that spends the most money.

Black Swan

SteveS wrote: »

California sure loves ballot initiatives.

Indeed! The 2008 general election booklet is full of them. Methinks that California was the first state out of the 50 to pass an initiative? Jarvis, a major land developer, helped pass Proposition 13 in the early 1980's, that put a cap on California real estate tax? Obviously, it spoke to his land development special interests?

SteveS

Ballotpedia has a list of ballot initiatives in the US.

FatherTed

My ballot:

http://www.norwalkct.org/TownClerk/election2008/district142.pdf

Manic Moran

San Francisco's always good for a fun one or two.

This time around, Prop K almost decriminalises prostitution. It will then place it into some bizarre limbo state of "not legal, but you won't get arrested or prosecuted for it by San Francisco Police Dept or the City DA" by preventing SFPD from using its resources to investigate and prosecute prostitution crimes.
This proposition would not be binding on the County Sheriff's Dept (who, to be fair, basically just lets SFPD run things), or the CHP, the State police force, who rarely is found on SF streets as they also let SFPD run things.

The other amusing one that I know of is Prop V. A couple of years ago, the city's Board of Education decided to jump on the Anti-Military bandwagon by banning JROTC from schools. Unfortunately, they couldn't come up with an alternative option which would provide the same sort of effect for kids, so JROTC has sort-of been hanging on life support in the meantime, and will eventually phase out next summer. In the intervening time, the kids hit the streets, and got enough petitions to put a prop on the ballot sheet to retain it.

This is causing the board, who are up for re-election, some angst. Usually nobody gives a hoot about Board of Education elections, and generally they're trouble-free. Now they're in the news. Worse, two of them are running for City Supervisor positions (The council that runs the city) and they probably don't need the negative attention. The problem for them is that it seems that the only people who support removing JROTC as an option for the kids are the people in charge. The teachers like it, the kids like it, the parents like it, and the data supports it as a program with positive effects on kids which is really about as non-military-related as you can get other than the name and green uniforms.

You'd have thought they'd have learned after the USS Iowa backlash. Even Dianne Feinstein said that San Francisco had lost the plot.

NTM

Our man in Havana

This proposition would not be binding on the County Sheriff's Dept (who, to be fair, basically just lets SFPD run things), or the CHP, the State police force, who rarely is found on SF streets as they also let SFPD run things.

But isn't the city and county of SF the same thing? Do the CHP have jurisdiction within the City and County of SF?

Manic Moran

The borders of the city of SF and county of SF are the same, but the County Sheriff's Dept and SFPD are separate and distinct organisations. Obviously SFPD is a a lot larger, with SFSD having 840 sworn peace officers and SFPD breaking 2,000. SFSD also runs the county jails, which takes a lot of its officers off the streets, and performs other functions such as warrant servings and extraditions from other counties which further takes its deputies off the beat. Hence if you see a peace officer in San Francisco, it's hands-down more likely to be SFPD.

Do the CHP have jurisdiction within the City and County of SF?

Yes, for two reasons. Firstly, they are the State police force. (Indeed, they merged California State Police into CHP in 1995.) CHP is a bit of misnomer, they perform anything from bodyguarding State dignitaries through being the investigating authority against County or City police forces in addition to their more public role of cruising the freeways and sitting on speed trap duty. However, in order to cover areas which are rarely patrolled by lower-level forces, they tend to stay away from areas which have a strong local police presence, such as cities.

Secondly, any sworn peace officer in California has legal powers of his position anywhere in the State. Even university police. It may not be their normal beat, and a cop from LAPD probably will not wish to step on SFPD's toes, but if they have a mind or reason to, they may carry out their law enforcement duties outside of their 'home turf.'

NTM

Manic Moran

Apparently the longest State-level ballot sheet is Colorado's

http://www.broomfield.org/elections/voter_inquiry/ballotstyle/2.pdf

A whole bunch of State initiatives, and 16 parties vying for the Presidency. Got to love some of the party names.

NTM

Trojan

Jaysus, how about right-casing some of those all-caps amendments... I know people are hardly gonna read them, but that doubly ensures it. Are they trying to sneak something by?

brianthebard

Manic Moran wrote: »

Apparently the longest State-level ballot sheet is Colorado's

http://www.broomfield.org/elections/voter_inquiry/ballotstyle/2.pdf

A whole bunch of State initiatives, and 16 parties vying for the Presidency. Got to love some of the party names.

NTM

http://www.bostontea.us/platform

Well I think we know who has the best slogan of the campaign anyways....

Manic Moran

Something has happened which has turned the gay marriage ammendment into a much shakier proposition:

A pollster actually asked the right question.

Up until now, the pollsters have generally been asking "Are you going to vote? Do you support gay marriage?" and presuming that if you say you are going to vote, and do not support gay marriage, that you will vote in favour of the ban on gay marriage.

However, it seems that one pollster has recently started asking "Are you going to vote? Do you support gay marriage? Are you going to vote in favour of the ban on gay marriage?" Turns out that about 20% of those polled are saying "I don't support gay marriage, but I'm not going to ammend the Constitution to prohibit it"

Important lesson there, I think.

NTM

bnt

I didn't realise that Al Franken was running for Senate. He's from New York, but is running in Minnesota, for the Minnesota Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party. WSJ story here. I expect the election campaign will be fair and balanced, eh?

Manic Moran

http://cbs5.com/local/proposition.8.vandalism.2.849921.html

The fight over Prop 8 is getting a little out of hand. Stealing signs is kindof par for the course, but this overdoes it.

NTM

Overheal

So when I go to check my registration online, it has my information but says i have no prvisional or absentee ballot. need i be concerned?

Our man in Havana

Call your county clerk and ask.

FatherTed

FatherTed wrote: »

Lieberman and Dodd are not up for election in my state, CT, but my House District CT-04 is an interesting race. Chris Shays(R) is the only Republican member of the House in all of New England and narrowly won in 2006. I like the guy, met him a few times at some local civic events. But there is a good chance he could lose to the Democratic challenger this time round.

The general consensus is that the Democrats will pick up a few seats in the House and a number of Senate seats in VA, AK, NM as well as a few close races in NC, NH, CO & OR

In the end, Shays after 22 years in Congress was beaten by the Dem by 9,000 votes. The last Republican member of the House in all of New England is gone.

Manic Moran

No great surprises in CA in the US House or Senate

My prefered candidate for judge didn't win. Oh well.

I don't think I even voted on the Board of Education.

The county hospitals will get their retrofit, BART gets its funding, VTA gets to continue to plan public transport, and a commission will be set up to replace the six-yearly-vote.

The bond for high speed trains passed, as did the 'humane' treatment of food.
The children's hospital bond also passed, but the pre-abortion notification requirement for minors did not. The sentencing guidelines for drug offenses passed, but the mandatory minimum expenses for law enforcement did not. The two environmental ballots failed, but the ban on gay marriage did not. That's a controversial one. Victims rights passed, redistricting passed (Thank Christ) and the veterans bonds passed.

NTM

Overheal

I threw random votes in for the school board tbh. Voted on a measure to raise the legal age of consent from 14 to 16, and a measure to sell alcohol on sundays. hooray! Also something about a measure to allow State Pension Funds to be invested in the stock market... I figured what the hell.