![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
The change in control of both houses of Congress is like a revolution in some respects. It has happened before, of course, but that doesn't make its results trivial. President Bush can still declare a national emergency and try to dissolve Congress if given the right excuse, but that's unlikely, and anyway, the new Democratic leadership in Congress is likely to fight back. The American Fascism Clock can probably be turned back to two or three minutes from midnight (Update: particularly considering this).
But two big changes in California failed to happen. The most revolutionary one first: With a few very limited exceptions, Proposition 89 would have made it "unlawful for any national or state bank or for any corporation . . . to make a contribution or expenditure in connection with the election of any candidate for elective state office." This sentence, in combination with some less-stringent limits on corporate ballot-measure spending, had the potential to break the back of big-money politics in this state.
Three quarters of voters opposed it, and it's not hard to see why: The measure's main purpose was to provide candidates for elected office the option to receive public campaign financing, and it would have used a small increase in taxes on corporations and banks to fund that financing. In effect, the government would charge corporations for the privilege of losing much of their political influence. It's only natural that they used that influence effectively to convince Californians that this was far too big a step. Next time, we need to try something smaller.
Proposition 87, the other major defeat, was a flawed but worthwhile initiative to increase oil-production taxes and use the revenue to support renewable energy. It would have needlessly added a few paragraphs to the already-bloated California constitution, and it had lots of vague language, and it probably would have indirectly led to increased gas prices. More expensive gas means poor people with cars can no longer afford to drive them, which is a very sad tradeoff at a time when environmentalists are touting plans to improve the economy through a boost to renewable industries. But then again, Prop. 87 would have supported such a boost, which is why the Apollo Alliance endorsed it. It got 45% of the votes, which does suggest that a similar measure could succeed in the future.
On the other hand, California did reject Proposition 90, a bill that would force government to pay rich people who might be harmed by changes in the law, particularly new environmental laws. And anti-environmental Congressman Richard Pombo, R-CA, was defeated. And lots of big bond measures, some of which may help the environment, were passed. Overall, it was a good day.
But as a poll worker, I was rather stressed out toward the end of the day, because our voting printers ran out of paper. That's right, due to the length of the ballot, California's new paper-trail requirement was working against us. We had three spare printers and no explicit authorization to use them (though we eventually did so anyway), and we used up our entire emergency supply of 48 paper ballots, and the amusing part is, somehow we got everyone through and finished earlier than usual...but other precincts were doubtless not so lucky. The Mercury News claims that issues like this were minor in California overall, but it seemed like a pretty big deal from where I was standing.
But two big changes in California failed to happen. The most revolutionary one first: With a few very limited exceptions, Proposition 89 would have made it "unlawful for any national or state bank or for any corporation . . . to make a contribution or expenditure in connection with the election of any candidate for elective state office." This sentence, in combination with some less-stringent limits on corporate ballot-measure spending, had the potential to break the back of big-money politics in this state.
Three quarters of voters opposed it, and it's not hard to see why: The measure's main purpose was to provide candidates for elected office the option to receive public campaign financing, and it would have used a small increase in taxes on corporations and banks to fund that financing. In effect, the government would charge corporations for the privilege of losing much of their political influence. It's only natural that they used that influence effectively to convince Californians that this was far too big a step. Next time, we need to try something smaller.
Proposition 87, the other major defeat, was a flawed but worthwhile initiative to increase oil-production taxes and use the revenue to support renewable energy. It would have needlessly added a few paragraphs to the already-bloated California constitution, and it had lots of vague language, and it probably would have indirectly led to increased gas prices. More expensive gas means poor people with cars can no longer afford to drive them, which is a very sad tradeoff at a time when environmentalists are touting plans to improve the economy through a boost to renewable industries. But then again, Prop. 87 would have supported such a boost, which is why the Apollo Alliance endorsed it. It got 45% of the votes, which does suggest that a similar measure could succeed in the future.
On the other hand, California did reject Proposition 90, a bill that would force government to pay rich people who might be harmed by changes in the law, particularly new environmental laws. And anti-environmental Congressman Richard Pombo, R-CA, was defeated. And lots of big bond measures, some of which may help the environment, were passed. Overall, it was a good day.
But as a poll worker, I was rather stressed out toward the end of the day, because our voting printers ran out of paper. That's right, due to the length of the ballot, California's new paper-trail requirement was working against us. We had three spare printers and no explicit authorization to use them (though we eventually did so anyway), and we used up our entire emergency supply of 48 paper ballots, and the amusing part is, somehow we got everyone through and finished earlier than usual...but other precincts were doubtless not so lucky. The Mercury News claims that issues like this were minor in California overall, but it seemed like a pretty big deal from where I was standing.
