MEASURE V: Direct election of county supervisors
Yes.If an Orange County supervisor abandons his/her seat midterm, the California governor selects a replacement. Measure V would change that, creating a county charter allowing for the direct election of the replacement supervisor. Of course, Third District Supervisor Todd Spitzer placed the measure on the ballot because he'll almost certainly win his race for the 71st Assembly District seat in November. If Measure V passes, the predominantly anti-airport voters of the Third District will be able to select Spitzer's replacement. If it fails, residents will be at the mercy of Governor Gray Davis, who will turn to local Democrats, like pro-airport stalwarts Loretta Sanchez and Wylie Aitkin, to help him name a successor.
If you like this story, consider signing up for our email newsletters.
SHOW ME HOW
You have successfully signed up for your selected newsletter(s) - please keep an eye on your mailbox, we're movin' in!
MEASURE W: The Great Park Yes. It's as simple as this: if Measure W passes, the county closes its El Toro International Airport planning office, and we need never hear of a commercial airport there again. If it fails, the county could begin demolition and construction within a year. PROPOSITION 40: Clean water Yes. Well, yeah, it does seem as if there's an environmental-bond issue like this on the ballot in every election. But this $2.6 billion version ought to be passed—if only to fill the gaps created by Bush/Cheney at the federal level. PROPOSITION 41: Voting modernization Yes. Because of a certain southern state that really screwed the pooch during the 2000 U.S. presidential election—they don't call it FloriDUH for nothing—we now have to vote on things like Prop. 41, which provides for $200 million in bonds to pay for "modern voting equipment." Of course, since Orange County still uses an old punch-card voting system like Florida's, even if you do vote "yes" on Prop. 41, there's a chance it won't get counted. PROPOSITION 42: Transportation improvement Yes. This would force state government to use the taxes we pay at the gasoline pump on the very things for which those taxes were created: transportation improvements. Seems fair enough. But opponents fear other essential programs will suffer if transportation funds can no longer be raided by governors and state legislators. Too bad. It's about time politicians in Sacramento took responsibility for their funding choices. If we don't have the money to do everything that needs to be done, cut spending and/or raise taxes. Just don't sneak around draining sources that Californians dedicated to specific purposes. PROPOSITION 43: Your vote counts Yes. This measure declares that if you vote, then the state should count that vote. If the state doesn't count your vote, then why bother? Basically, Prop. 43 is another no-brainer brought to us by the good people of FloriDUH.
PROPOSITION 44: Chiropractors No.Should chiropractors—who are already licensed by an association—have to endure state regulation also? Damn it, Jim, we're an alternative rag, not a doctor. But after a Weekly staffer's back went out, he called his primary physician and couldn't get an appointment. So he went to a chiropractor, who relieved the pain in one visit. Then the staffer's M.D. called back and told him to come in immediately. He politely explained he was now fine, but the doctor, who didn't believe in chiropractors, insisted our employee endure months of grueling physical therapy. Now his back is worse. Vote a big, fat NO! on Prop. 44. PROPOSITION 45: Circumventing term limits No. If Prop. 45 passes, legislators facing the end of their limited term can gather petition signatures and get on the ballot for another four years. What elected official won't be able to get enough signatures? Look, if special interests like the California Nurses Association, the Congress of California Seniors and the California Professional Firefighters—the main backers of Prop. 45—want to dump term limits, then they should come up with a measure that dumps term limits. Tricking the voters with bogus promises of "protecting" term limits isn't the way.