Election Day is 7 days away and this time you will see 13 statewide propositions on the ballot. Our political expert, Eddie Truong wants to share abreakdown of these propositions with you so you can vote informed this year!
ARGUMENT FOR: Caltrain is an essential part of the Bay Area's transportation network but we're at risk of losing it due to COVID-19. The pandemic won't last forever and cars will return to our freeways. Imagine how much worse it will be if we don't have Caltrain keeping millions of cars off our roads every year. Measure RR will provide dedicated revenue for Caltrain so it can triple its ridership, taking the equivalent of two additional lanes of traffic off our freeways, and invest in cleaner and quieter electric trains. Fewer cars on our roads means less pollution in the air we breathe. Yes on Measure RR will keep Caltrain thriving and our air cleaner and healthier.
• 40% of Caltrain riders make less than $100k a year, and 50% of that demographic make less than $50k a year.
• Measure RR will support 16,000 good-paying jobs across San Francisco, San Mateo, and Santa Clara County.
• Measure RR will allow Caltrain to have its 50% discount on fares for low-income riders permanent.
ARGUMENT FOR: Universities, nonprofits and other research groups need more funding to continue this vital medical research. The $3 billion in funding provided by Prop 71 in 2004 has been depleted.
ARGUMENT AGAINST: There isn't enough oversight on how the money will be spent.
ARGUMENT AGAINST: The massive tax increase will prompt companies to flee
California at a time when businesses are already struggling. The commercial
property tax increase would also drive up the cost of living.
ARGUMENT FOR:Repealing the constitutional amendment would allow California's public institutions to work toward greater diversity. Plus, federal law preventing discrimination still stands.
ARGUMENT AGAINST: Discrimination is bad whether it benefits historically underprivileged groups or not.
ARGUMENT FOR:The change would restore voting rights to a disenfranchised group of people that have fully completed their prison sentences and are reintegrating into society.
ARGUMENT AGAINST: People on parole are still being closely monitored and haven't had their full rights to freedom restored; voting should fall under that category.
ARGUMENT FOR: Young people who are legally allowed to participate in general elections should be able to participate in that full electoral cycle.
ARGUMENT AGAINST: Seventeen year old’s are legally children and therefore too young to vote.
ARGUMENT FOR: Empty nesters aren't putting homes on the market to downsize because they fear paying higher taxes on a new house. It also closes a loophole that allows wealthy people to pass on homes to children who use them as rental properties.
ARGUMENT AGAINST: According to the Mercury News/East Bay Times editorial board, the proposition allows wealthy homeowners to continue reaping the benefits of Prop 13. Plus, revenue from property taxes should not be automatically earmarked for fire suppression.
ARGUMENT FOR: The proposition gives prosecutors the discretion to pursue harsher sentences in retail crimes.
ARGUMENT AGAINST: The change in crime classification would lead to over-sentencing of nonviolent crimes and contribute to overcrowding in prisons.
ARGUMENT AGAINST: More rent control could worsen the housing crisis by reducing private builders' profit incentive to build more housing.
ARGUMENT FOR: Classifying drivers as employees, as is law under AB5, would make these services more expensive and could potentially cause the loss of 1 million jobs in CA. Supporters say that drivers prefer flexibility and choosing when they would like to work.
ARGUMENT FOR: The increased regulations will make clinics safer for patients and make sure patients with any insurance will be treated equally.
ARGUMENT AGAINST: The increased regulations would make care more costly for and less available to patients.
ARGUMENT FOR: Supporters say that the law would give people with privacy concerns more control over where and how their data is used.
ARGUMENT AGAINST: Opponents say that the long and wonky ballot initiative contains several loopholes and provisions that actually weaken consumer protections (in some cases) compared to existing California law.
ARGUMENT FOR: Supporters say that SB 10 creates a system that is fairer to everyone accused of crimes and the bail bonds businesses is only putting the issue on the ballot to try and continue profiting off the cash bail system.
ARGUMENT AGAINST: Opponents say that the new risk assessment system is also flawed as it still leaves room for racial bias, so it is not a good replacement for California's longstanding cash bail system.