Issue link: https://www.epageflip.net/i/747615
ATAGLANCE A brisk look at California's torrent of ballot measures Proposition58:Bilingualeducation Swept up by anti-im- migrant politics nearly 20 years ago, California voters approved an initiative that required schoolchildren be taught almost exclusively in English. The measure trig - gered anger in some immi- grant communities, where it was viewed as an attack on multiculturalism. Now that the children of immigrants have assumed significant power in the state Capitol, they are calling on Califor - nians to re-examine the de- cisionthatreducedbilingual education in public schools. Whatwoulditdo? Prop. 58 would remove re- strictions voters put in place in 1998 with Prop. 227. It wouldallowpublicschoolsto decide how to teach English learners — choosing among English-only, bilingual or other types of programs. It would also open the door for native English speakers to learn a second language. What would it cost the government? The state legislative ana- lyst found no notable fiscal effect on school districts or state government. Why is it on the ballot? The Legislature put Prop. 58 on the ballot; State Sen. Ricardo Lara, D-Bell Gar- dens, is spearheading the initiative. What supporters say Prop. 58 removes de- cades-old barriers to stu- dent learning and allows educators to use a vari- ety of teaching methods to help the approximately one-fifth of California stu- dents who are not native English speakers. Schools also could more easily pro- vide programs for native English speakers in a sec- ond language, readying them for the global econ- omy. What opponents say The current system is working, with more Califor- nia Latinos gaining admis- sion to college and universi- ties. Prop. 58 will force chil- dren back into Spanish-only i nstruction, which will hin- der their ability to quickly learn English and prosper as adults. Proposition 59: Campaign money The U.S. Supreme Court decision known as Citizens United has become a polit- ical flashpoint for Ameri- cans turned off by the bil- lions of dollars spent to s way elections. The 2010 ruling allowed unions and corporations to spend unlimited amounts on political campaigns. It paved the way for the prev - alence of "super-PACs," groups that spend huge sums on ads supporting or opposing candidates — and do so legally, so long as the politicians have no direct involvement in their efforts. What would it do? Not much, in the short term at least. Prop. 59 is an advisory measure — it's an opportunity for Califor- nians to give their opin- io n bu t it d oe sn 't d ir ec tl y cha nge any laws. The measure asks if vot- ers want California's elected officials to take steps to amend the U.S. Constitu- tion to overturn Citizens United. Amending the Consti- tution is a lengthy process that generally requires, among other things, sup- port from at least 38 states nationwide. What would it cost state government? Nothing. Why is it on the ballot? The Legislature's Demo- cratic majority placed Prop. 59 on the ballot after lobby- ing by groups that oppose both Citizens United and th e pr ev al en ce o f mo ne y in politics. It was originally supposed to be on the bal- lot in 2014, but was delayed b y a lawsuit challenging whether lawmakers can ask voters to weigh in on non- binding measures. The Cali- fornia Supreme Court ruled a dvisory questions are per- missible. What supporters say As one piece of a pas- sionate nationwide move- ment, this measure takes a step toward undercut- ting big-money politics. Similar measures have al- ready passed in Montana and Colorado, and vot- ers in the state of Wash- ington face one in Novem- ber. Even if these nonbind- ing measures don't lead to a Constitutional amend- ment, approval of Prop. 59 could influence Supreme Court justices in the future if they reconsidered Citi- zens United. What opponents say The measure doesn't ac- tually do anything but clog the ballot and potentially confuse voters. Citizens United isn't the only rul- ing that governs campaign finance issues — and over- turning it would still al- low a lot of money to gush through the political sys- tem, including campaign spending by wealthy indi- viduals, and corporate and union donations directly to politicians. Proposition 60: Condoms in films This is the rare ballot measure that requires you to think about sex. Because here in California — home to a $9 billion pornography industry — that most per - sonal of acts is also a jobs issue and a public health concern. Four years ago, Los An- geles County voters ap- proved a measure requir- ing adult film performers to use condoms. The long- time AIDS activist who pushed that measure has taken his fight statewide with Prop. 60. What would it do? Prop. 60 would require porn actors to use condoms when filming intercourse. It would create a sys - tem for people to make complaints and file law- suits if they see a sex scene that does not include a condom. It would require that adult film producers pay for performers' vaccinations, testing and medical exams related to sexual health. What would it cost state government? Additional regulations on adult film production would cost more than $1 million annually. In addition, state and lo- cal tax revenue would prob- ably drop by several mil- lion dollars a year if pro- ductions move out of state o r go underground to evade the condom mandate. Why is it on the ballot? The Los Angeles-based AIDS Healthcare Founda- tion put Prop. 60 on the ballot after failing to per- suade the Legislature to pass a statewide condom requirement What supporters say State law already re- quires adult performers to use condoms on the job, but they are exposed to dis- ease because the provision is rarely enforced. Prop. 60 strengthens ex- isting law by adding new enforcement mechanisms that protect workers in the porn industry. What opponents say Viewers don't want to watch sex involving con- doms, so porn producers will leave California or go underground if this mea- sure passes. The state's adult film in- dustry already minimizes disease transmission by fre- quently testing performers. This measure would lead to new lawsuits. Proposition 61: Prescription drugs Many Americans are an- gry about rising pharma- ceutical prices and politi- cians have taken notice. Presidential candidates this year debated how to contain costs, and Califor- nia lawmakers proposed fixes that never passed out of the statehouse. Drug prices are a big deal not only for consumers who are forced to pay more for prescriptions but also for the state government. State government spends billions on medi - cation for public employ- ees, retirees, prisoners and other people on pub- lic health plans. What would it do? Prop. 61 would cap the amount the state pays for prescription drugs — gen- erally prohibiting the state from paying any more for drugs than the lowest price paid by the U.S. De- partment of Veterans Af- fairs, which pays the low- est prices in the nation. What would it cost? Prop. 61 could save the state some money, but it's hard to say for certain. If drug makers re- sponded to the measure by raising prices for the Department of Veterans Affairs, that would negate any potential savings to the state. Because the drug market reaction is unpre- dictable, the state's legis- lative analysts concluded that the fiscal impact is unknown. Why is it on the ballot? The AIDS Healthcare Foundation in Los Angeles — which runs pharmacies and health clinics around the world — paid to put Prop. 61 on the ballot. What supporters say Prop. 61 will rein in soar- ing drug prices and fights back against pharmaceu- tical companies that reap profit from people's ill- nesses. What opponents say It would limit prices only for people in certain government health plans, but could make medica- tion more expensive for others—especially veterans — if drug companies hike prices to make up the dif- ference. Propositions 62 and 66: Death penalty Whether for or against the death penalty, both sides agree the criminal justice system isn't work- ing. Since the 1978 passage of the death penalty in California, 15 of the 930 individuals who received a death sentence have been executed. Another 103 have died prior to be - ing executed, 64 have had sentences reduced by the courts while 748 remain in prison. The numbers illus- trate the lengthy time in- mates spend both waiting f or court-appointed attor- neys and for their cases to be heard, as well as an ex- haustive appeals process intended to protect the in- nocent. Meanwhile, California has not carried out an ex- ecution since 2006 because of legal issues surrounding the state's lethal injection procedures. What would they do? The dueling campaigns of Propositions 62 and 66 seek to address California's broken death penalty sys- tem—but in two very dif- ferent ways. Prop. 62 would a bolish the death pen- alty, and all current death row inmates would be re- sentenced to life in prison without parole. Prop. 66 attempts to reform capital punishment by shortening the time of legal challenges. It would also allow the state to house condemned men outside San Quentin, cur - rently the only prison that has a death row for men. What would they cost the government? Prop. 62 would save the state and counties around $150 million a year, with fewer costs related to pris- ons, murder trials and le- gal challenges to death s entences, according to the state legislative analyst. Under Prop. 66, the cost to state courts for processing legal challenges to death sentences is unknown. The measure could save tens of millions a year in prison costs. Why are both of them on the ballot? Former "M*A*S*H" ac- tor Mike Farrell authored Proposition 62, and he has amassed celebrity support to abolish what critics de- scribe as a failed system that doesn't protect the in- nocent. Former NFL player Kermit Alexander — whose mother, sister and two nephews were murdered by a man now on death row— filed Prop. 66, the compet - ing measure to expedite the death penalty process, and gained the support of law Proposition 63: Gun control Even though Califor- nia has some of the tough- est gun restrictions in the country, political will in- tensified this year to pass even stiffer laws. Moti- vated in part by the De- cember shooting in San Bernardino that left 14 people dead, Democrats in the Legislature advanced several gun control bills, many of which were signed into law. All the while, Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom was leading the effort to put Prop. 63 before voters. The newly passed laws overlap with two of the six gun- control policies included in this measure. What would it do? The two parts of Prop.63 that are similar to newly- approved state laws are provisions that would re- quire criminal background checks for people purchas- ing ammunition and pro- hibit possession of large- capacity magazines (those that hold more than 10 bul- lets). Other pieces of Prop. 63 would make new require- ments for reporting lost or stolen firearms and ammu- nition to authorities; pro- hibit people from pos- sessing firearms if they're c onvicted of stealing a fire- arm; establish new ways for authorities to remove gu ns f ro m pe op le w ho are prohibited from own- ing them; change theft of a gun worth $950 or less from a misdemeanor to a felony; strengthen the national criminal back- ground check system by re- quiring the state to share information about people who are prohibited from owning firearms. What would it cost the government? Tens of millions of dol- lars a year related to new processes for removing firearms from people who are not allowed to own them because they've been convicted of a crime. Mil - lions of dollars annually to regulate ammunition sales and jail those facing stiffer penalties for certain gun crimes. Whyisitontheballot? Newsom, who is run- ning for governor in 2018, put forth Prop. 63 after consulting with the Law Center to Prevent Gun Vi- olence in San Francisco. Proposition 64: Legalizing marijuana The push for marijuana legalization is on the bal- lot in at least nine states this November, with Cali- fornia's Prop. 64 the most watched. Although four other states previously have legalized recreational pot, a vote by the nation's most populous state is likely to put pressure on Congress and the federal government to revisit the federal ban on marijuana. What would it do? Prop. 64 would allow people 21 and older to grow up to six pot plants at home, possess up to an ounce of marijuana and use it for recreational pur - poses. It would allow the state, as well as cities and counties, to regulate and tax the growing and sale of nonmedical marijuana. What would it cost the government? It all depends on how state and local govern- ments choose to regu- late and tax marijuana, w hether the federal gov- ernment enforces fed- eral marijuana laws, and the price and use of mar- ijuana. Thestate'slegislativean- alyst concluded that taxes generated could eventually reach more than $1 billion a year. Local and state gov- ernments also could save t ens of millions of dol- lars a year in jail costs because marijuana use would no longer be a state crime. Whyisitontheballot? Legalization advo- cates are trying again af- ter California voters shot down their last initiative to sanction marijuana in 2010. This time they've got an influx of cash from technology moguls and political heft from Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom. Propositions 65 and 67: Plastic bags How you carry your groceries home from the store may seem like a triv- ial subject, but it's the fo- cus of two rival measures on the California ballot that pit environmental- ists against the plastic in- dustry. More than 150 Cali- fornia communities have banned flimsy plastic shopping bags, blaming them for a host of prob- lems — from choking wildlife to damaging mu- nicipal waste systems. But that's led to varying shop- ping bag policies around the state, which causes problems for large retail- ers. State lawmakers in 2014 passed a bill to put the same rules in place across California: ban- ning thin plastic grocery b ags and charging shop- pers a dime for paper or heavy-duty plastic. The goal is to encourage Cali- fornians to bring reusable bags when they shop. But the plastic industry is put- ting up a fight. What would they do? Prop. 67 supports the 2014 ban signed into law by Gov. Jerry Brown, and authorizes retailers to charge shoppers 10 cents for other carryout bags—a fee the stores get to keep. Prop. 65 would redirect the bag fee money to an environmental fund ad - ministered by the state Wildlife Conservation Board. If both measures pass, Prop. 65 would only be en- acted if it receives more v otes than Prop. 67. If vot- ers reject Prop. 67, then Prop 65 does not apply. What's the cost to the government? A plastic bag ban wouldn't mean much fi- nancially for state and lo- cal governments, the state legislative analyst found. If Prop. 65 passes, tens of millions of dollars a year could flow into environ- mental programs. Why are both of them on the ballot? Both were placed on the ballot by plastic bag man- ufacturers. After Brown signed the plastic bag ban two years ago, the plastics industry exercised a pro- vision in the state Consti- tution that allows a popu- lar vote on a law before it t akes effect — that became Prop. 67. The same compa- nies also crafted Prop. 65 to take money generated by the bag fee away from retailers and move it in- stead into an environmen- tal fund. SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 5, 2016 REDBLUFFDAILYNEWS.COM |NEWS | 7 A