Monthly Archives: October 2012

Dr. Pitcher Tells You How to Vote

This time it’s personal.

That’s right, the upcoming election features more stuff that affects me personally than any previous election.  So I am going to tell you how I’m voting (and how I’d like you to vote) on these issues.  I could try to convince you with logical arguments, with appeals to compassion for others, even with numbers and charts and graphs.  I’m not going to do that.  Chances are, if you’re reading this blog, you know me, and maybe you’re even my friend.  So I’m going to tell you how these issues affect me, and maybe that will convince you.


President: Barak Obama

Mitt Romney is an ass.  Let me say that again: MITT ROMNEY IS AN ASS.  Why?  Because he vetoed my COLA, that’s why!  When I was a professor at the University of Massachusetts Boston and Romney was governor of Massachusetts, the state legislature approved a COLA (Cost Of Living Adjustment) salary increase of a few percent for University of Massachusetts faculty.  Romney vetoed it.  I will never forget how he tried to deal with a bad budget situation by screwing over underpaid and overworked college faculty.  If he tried that in Massachusetts, what’s to stop him trying something similar as president?  I will never forget the Mitt Romney vetoed my COLA.  Neither should you.  Vote for Barak Obama.


California Proposition 30: Yes

This is simple: help keep California’s community colleges open.  Help keep higher education available for everyone.  Help me keep my job.  I know Prop. 30 raises taxes a bit, particularly on the wealthy, but public education in California needs your help.  Why yes on Prop. 30 and not on Prop. 38?  Simply because community colleges will not see any of the additional revenue raised by Prop. 38!  Again, help me keep my job.  Vote yes on Prop. 30.


California Proposition 32: No

I agree with the principle of campaign finance reform, but Prop. 32 unequally affects union members.  Prohibiting campaign contributions for both corporations and unions seems equal enough, but it’s the prohibition on using payroll deductions that’s the problem.  Prohibiting payroll deductions (used for political purposes—nice and vague, isn’t it?) unequally affects unions and their members.  Corporations aren’t going to use payroll deductions from employees to make campaign contributions—they’ll just use other funds (profits, etc.)!  And the language of the proposition is a riot too: it’s not payroll deduction, it’s “the inherently coercive means of payroll deduction.”  WTF?!  Payroll deduction is a convenience, not coercion.  Prop. 32 is another case of trying to trick California voters into voting for inherently biased legislation.  Let me keep paying my union dues via payroll deduction.  Vote no on Prop. 32.


California Proposition 38: No

Only one of either Prop. 30 or Prop. 38 can pass.  Prop. 30 helps community colleges, Prop. 38 doesn’t.  Prop. 38 also levies a more severe tax than Prop. 30.  Don’t raise taxes too much, but help me keep my job.  Vote no on Prop. 38 (and yes on Prop. 30).


Other California Propositions

Here’s how I’m voting on some of the other California propositions, even though they don’t have as immediate an effect on me.

Prop. 31: No.  Too confusing, with unknown potential effects.

Prop. 33: No.  More false claims about potentially lower insurance.

Prop. 34: Yes.  Abolish the death penalty in California, if only to save the state money.

Prop. 35: Yes.

Prop. 36: Yes.

Prop. 37: No.  Too many exemptions.  Reading the text of the proposition I discovered that foods for sale to restaurants would be exempt from the labeling requirements!

Prop.  39: I actually haven’t decided yet.  Probably no.

Prop. 40: Yes.  The presence of this proposition on the ballot was merely to delay implementation of the state senate districts approved by the Citizens Redistricting Commission.


Filed under Politics, Wayne