Comments by "Harry Stoddard" (@HarryS77) on "Progressive Guide For California Propositions 2016" video.

  1. I highly doubt Brown supports 53. Prop 53 is essentially Dean Cortopassi's way of shutting down Brown's tunnel project in the delta. Brown does oppose 51, because he claims it does not direct money to low income schools, leaving schools in more affluent communities free to drain the revenue. Maybe you meant that he opposes 51.
    6
  2. Looks like prop 64 arrived early for someone.
    2
  3. Jin Don't drag Sapolsky into your self-congratualtory delusions.
    2
  4. AMONAVIS! I'm not sure what to think of it. It seems like one of those props that I agree with in principle--more money for education--but the particulars don't seem all that convincing.
    1
  5. You can get high on tomatoes?!
    1
  6. Friday thirtythree 64 allows you to grow it in your own home.
    1
  7. Friday thirtythree Quote: "keeps it in the hands of the fat cats. Not in the hands of the people." The law allows you to grow it in your home for medical AND recreational use. Currently law does not. If the law kept pot in the "hands of the fat cats," we'd expect a ban on private cultivation. There isn't one. Moreover, there a five year ban on large scale cultivation licenses for the first five years. You may not think the law is perfect--no law will be--but it's a step in the right direction, something that can be improved on through future propositions, just as the legalization of medical marijuana was a step in the right direction.
    1
  8. That caught me off guard as well. The voter guide says that it just redirects money from the sale of bags to environmental programs rather than redounding to the grocer or whomever. But then she supports 67. One of the points in the rebuttal to 67 is that it doesn't provide provisions for redirecting monies from the sale of bags to the environment, which 65 does... Very odd.
    1
  9. She also didn't have one for 52. One the one hand 56 is clearly a regressive tax. Research shows that most smokers are low income. However, other research shows that low income groups are more sensitive to price increases, meaning that they would spend less overall on cigarettes.
    1