by C. T. Weber, Peace and Freedom Party candidate for Lieutenant Governor 

My friends, California is in a crisis!  The last two Governors, one Democrat and one Republican have been unable to get us out of this mess.  Our budget deficit has now reached some $20 billion.  Polls show that over 2/3 of the Californians, are disgusted with both the Democratic and Republican Parties and want to form another party.  But election laws make it very difficult if not impossible to set up a new party that can compete on an equal footing with the two established parties, and people instinctively know this.  Most voters feel that they must vote for the lesser evil or they will get the greater evil.  Thus we vote over and over again for the same politicians and hope for different results.  I am reminded that Dr Benjamin Spock once said that as long as we vote for the lesser evil we will still have evil.   It doesn’t have to be that way. 

For example, the various parties and constituencies could be represented in the state legislature and the U. S. House of Representatives in direct proportion to the votes they received in the general election.  This could be accomplished by creating districts where we would elect several members or representatives from each district.  In a 10 member district parties would receive one seat for every 10% of the vote.  Thus, if a party were to get 50% of the vote it would get 5 seats and if a party or an independent candidate were to get 10% of the vote that party or independent candidate would get one seat.  That would protect majorities and allow a voice to the minorities. Everyone’s vote would count towards a winning candidate.   That is a win/win situation.  

There is no such thing as a free lunch in America.  Everything costs money.  Services costs money.  If we want services we must pay for them.  At the federal level two useless invasions and occupations have taken billions of dollars away from needed services here at home.  The failure of major financial institutions and auto industry lead to unprecedented bail outs which included huge bonuses for those who had created the failures in the first place.  The burst of the housing bubble lead to thousands of foreclosures as people lost their homes.  

California is a big state and we spend a lot of money.  Yet California spends less per capita than almost any other state.  Only 15% of our $100,000,000 budget is discretionary.  We could cut every discretionary program and still not have a balanced budget.  With a budget deficit looming at 20% of the budget, taxes must be raised just to break even. We spend more money when we contract out government jobs to the private sector than when government employees do the job themselves and it’s a job they do better.  My position is to save millions of dollars by not contracting government jobs to the private sector where ever feasible.  We could also save billions of dollars if we substituted treatment and education rather than imprisonment of non-violent drug offenders.  This would greatly reduce the prison and as a result we could close down prisons where feasible.   If the higher tax rates were restored to what they were under Reagan, another billion dollar would be added to the general fund.  If a split level property tax was enacted, so homeowners would have lower taxes and big corporations would have to pay their fair share we could reduce the budget gap even further.  If we taxed the oil that is extracted from our soil just like they do in Alaska and Texas, we could  see the light at the end of the tunnel.  And in November we should support and vote for the proposition that taxes a legalized marijuana.  That would produce another billion dollars and together these revenue enhancing programs could balance our budget and save our services.

My name is C. T. Weber and I am the Peace and Freedom Party candidate for Lieutenant Governor of California.  I have an undergraduate degree in History and a master’s in Public Administration, both from California State University Long Beach.  I worked for 16 years with the California Public Utilities Commission, where I took peace officer training, and served as a special agent in charge of the San Diego District office.  I spent another six years with the California Highway Patrol working as a Government Analyst in Sacramento. 

I spent over 20 years as a union organizer and elected officer.  I was elected four times to the California State Employees Association Board of Directors.  I was elected to a number of SEIU Local 1000 positions, such as district labor council secretary/treasurer, chief steward, and president.  I served on the SEIU Local 1000 State Council and was a delegate to Sacramento Central Labor Council.

I want to spend a little time talking about some bad propositions on your  June 8, 2010 direct primary ballot.  If passed, Prop 14 would reduce your choices in future general elections, PG&E’s Prop 16 would allow 1/3 of the voters to prevent 2/3 of the voters from forming a public utility, and Mercury’s Prop 17 would allow insurance companies to raise auto insurance rates.                            

In 2003, we had an election similar to what Prop 14 would create.  There were 135 candidates on the ballot plus 28  qualified write-in candidates for one office, Governor.  Under Prop 14 general election write-in votes would not be counted.  No runoff was allowed in 2003.  Under Prop 14, a runoff election  would be required even if a candidate had received a majority vote in the primary.  If passed, Proposition 14 would cost the taxpayers more money to run the primary election because there would be more ballot cards to print and mail and more money would be needed for the extra hours worked.  This blanket style primary would also cost candidates more money because they would need to reach twice as many voters.  The candidates would either need to have deep pockets themselves or would need to be beholding to someone with deep pockets.

Proposition 14 would also dramatically change the way that general elections are held.  It would limit voters' choices to only two.   General elections are more important, no they are much more important than primary elections, because general elections are where the final decisions are made on who gets elected. General elections are also much larger elections as to the numbers of voters who turn out and vote.  So, why would anyone support Proposition 14, that proponents say may improve, if indeed you think this is an improvement, the smaller, less significant primary election when it reduces voters’ choices in the more important, much larger general election?  Prop 14 would reduce voters’ choices from six candidates, maybe seven if an independent candidate also qualifies, who are on the general election ballots to only two candidates. Independent candidates would no longer be allowed to qualify for the much larger, much more important general election ballots. It would be highly unlikely that a candidate of one of the smaller parties would make the much larger, much more important general election ballots. Write-in votes in the general elections would no longer be counted.  Do not limit your choices in the much larger, much more important general elections.

  

On June 8, 2010 - Vote No on Prop 14!