Nov 3, 2020 Presidential

Federal

State

Local

Superior Court Judges

A: Health, Homelessness, Parks, and Streets Bond

B: Department of Sanitation and Streets, Sanitation and Streets Commission, and Public Works Commission

C: Removing Citizenship Requirements for Members of City Bodies

D: Sheriff Oversight

E: Police Staffing

F: Business Tax Overhaul

G: Youth Voting in Local Elections

H: Neighborhood Commercial Districts and City Permitting

Loosen Zoning and Permitting Rules

for

in a dense and vibrant city, we should invite more activity and not restrict it; if you want a dead quiet town, you should go elsewhere

response: this will result in chaos!

against

Subtopic

looser permitting process will help small business

for

allowing businesses to easier expand operations to streets will mean they can be operational sooner

against

residents that don't want more activities or want more say in those activities should be considered more carefully

response: NIMBYISM!!

requires reviews be done in <30 days

for

Will help during the pandemic when time is of the essence

against

Rushes the process without regards to the stakeholders and community members

I: Real Estate Transfer Tax

J: Parcel Tax for SFUSD

K: Affordable Housing Authorization

L: Business Tax Based on Comparison of Top Executive's Pay to Employee's Pay

RR: Caltrains Sales Tax

16: Affirmative Action in CA

Affected Populations

For

The beneficiaries are those groups that are underrepresented in higher education, etc.

Against

This is an injustice to asian and white communities who work hard to study and do extracurricular activities and try their best to be good smart capable citizens in their communities. THeir parents as well, sacrifice a lot for them to be able to go to the good schools and reap the benefits. As we know, some parents sacrifice literally everything.

Not all whites and asians are wealthy; their families can benefit from their children succeeding at the more competitive universities and landing the better jobs.

Methods of Increasing Diversity

For

Step 1 is to allow to account for race- the goal is equality of opportunity, and equity. The methods used are mainly identifiers in applications and probably a quota-like system for underrepresented populations.

quotas are still going to be prohibited

Against

There are other methods to increase diversity - targeted geographical neighborhood recruitment, etc; they shouldn't use quota systems

Diversity as a Goal

For

The notion that if a heterogeneous(multi ethnic) society were equal, you would find a equal distribution of races across wealth groups, professions, neighborhoods, etc. It doesn't take million dollar studies to tell us that this is not the case. All someone has to know is that in the case of black people, their ancestry can be traced from the violent subjugation of africans to be used as property, to know that this population and the generations to follow is probably not as well off as the white folks.

The same can be said for all ethnic groups who did not have the generational benefit of inheriting previous wealth, in addition to the hoops that the dominating class put up in order to further secure their wealth. Indeed, all one has to think of is their racist parents or grandparents to know that people sucked, and these tribal notions probably had some consequences.

Rebuttal: This artificial equality is ridiculous - diversity should not be a goal of government - government should only do minimal things, not try to correct some aspect of the past.

Against

Diversity should not be a goal. We should be color blind - and treat everyone on their merits. Over time, things will sort themselves out if we simply treat each individual with respect and as we would treat them any one else.

Rebuttal: This does not take into account the past treatment of underrepresented populations - justice demands that an wrong be made right by actions. To ignore the generational disadvantages is

That Society Does not Owe Certain Populations Anything/ Generational Wrongs do not Carry Over

For

Anyone that has studied the injustices that certain populations have undergone by governments, and has been able to get a glimpse of the terror inflicted must believe that such actions cannot be swept under the rug, as people suggest. And short of a discussion on reparations, we have to address the effects that the injustice has caused. I can offer a crappy analogy: your elder brother has beat up this kid and the kid is still bleeding. Even before talking about bringing your brother to justice, we should take care of the victim's wounds, instead of leaving them to suffer.

So the idea that society owes these groups something is a conversation we've not yet considered. We're merely discussing how to stem the bleeding.

Against

Why can't we all move on as a society. We all know slavery was wrong, but now anyone who puts their mind to it can achieve what they want.

Gender Equality/Equity

For

Need stats on gender gap

Women are underrepresented in business - this would allow the state to award contracts to women run organizations and businesses

Against

Subtopic

Equal Oppurtunity

For

Equality does not mean Equity: The competition for college admissions, contracts, jobs, are not equal for different population groups. Certain groups have it much harder - lack of resources growing up, etc. Equity, on the other hand, is leveling the playing field and accounting for differences to bring about a more equal result: For instance, if you have a seeing student and a blind student, equality is giving them both regular textbooks. Obviously the blind student cannot read the text. Equity is giving the seeing student a standard textbook and the blind student a braille textbook.

Against

Allowing the government to discriminate based on race, etc, is an affront to equal oppurtunity, as it skews the competition in favor of those less qualified, and against those more qualified but part of a certain ethnic group. To be specific - asians and whites and males are being discrimated upon because they are not a 'preferred race'

Subtopic

Wealth Redistribution

For

This would boost communities that have traditionally been underrepresented, hopefully starting a virtuous cycle that will result in more equitable wealth across society

Against

we should not seek to redistribute wealth under any circumstances

Reducing the Quality of Programs

For

Against

Allowing less 'capable' students and workers results in worse results for academia, medicine, law, etc. The quality of work will be decreased; lower standards, etc

rebuttal: black communities feel better with black doctors, better healthcare results, despite the doctor's potentially lower MCAT score

Rebuttal: it's just for admission, not for the tests; does not reduce the rigor of the programs

Constitutionality; Strict Scrutiny

For

Race as a small factor, but not as a defining factor

Not allowing race to determine acceptance or rejection, but as a factor was ruled ok cuz "The Court held that this plan is narrowly tailored enough to satisfy strict scrutiny because the "program is flexible enough to ensure that each applicant is evaluated as an individual and not in a way that makes race or ethnicity the defining feature of the application . . ."

the state has a compelling interest in infringing upon some named rights; the state must show that the policy is narrowly tailored to achieve certain objectives

it's clear that the inequities of society is an objective that must be rectified. the numbers are too plain and the history too clear to deny

Against

The Policy is Divisive; It pits races against each other

For

we must look to the better and rational angels of our nature in realizing that the reconciliation of generational injustice is what will result in real steps toward equity between races. Equality (or at least no more significantly handicap) in wealth and representation is the surest step to removing the racial divide.

have we ever tried asking racists to not be racist?

response: in light of people's moral shortcomings, we have to consider the environments that create and encourage or discourage certain opinions - We can and should worry about the perceptions that people have of policies...

we can't depend on or expect people to change their ways. we should look for policies that aren't divisive...

the bigger issue is the competition for prestigious schools. the premises are that better schools = better quality education and/or better paychecks.

Better quality education

try to bring up the quality of other institutions - perhaps the government can incentivize faculty and professors from top ivy leagues to other universities - double their salaries; it should be worth for the big boost in the quality of education and students across the nation

Better paychecks

honestly if you're smart enough to compete for ivy league schools, you're going to be okay getting your education from another institution - go to another school, be successful, contribute to create more quality institutions so there isn't this bottleneck

More research on academia/education policy needed

Against

This creates disdain between racial groups, if we all sign up to believe that we all have equal chances to succeed, we can start acting like a post-racial society.

response: problem with this is that certain groups are stuck in vicious cycles that must be broken with decisive action, to prevent real pain. Speaking from a privileged group, it's easy to argue to ignore or dismiss inequities. Demanding equality always feel oppression to privileged groups...

17: Parolees Voting Restoration

Giving Parolees the right to vote

For

It's good for society if we are able to include marginalized groups

Against

These are criminals that this prop wishes to give the right to vote, something they have lost due to their own devices

Parole does not equal total freedom

For

We should be actively trying to include ostracized members of society and this is a good chance to perhaps prevent them from going back to a life of crime

Against

This is a premature action with consequences, for example what if we spend all this money to get the their right to vote only to go back to jail

Increased Government Spending (voter registrations, ballots, etc)

For

Stimulates Economic Activity

Against

Unnecessary spending by the government could lead to inflation

18: Youth Voting in Primaries

19: Allowing the transfer of taxable value to any other primary residence in the State

20: Restricts Parole for non violent offenders, expands list of offenses that qualify for this program, makes certain theft crimes felonies, requires DNA collection

21: Expands Local Government Authority to Enact Rent Control

22: Gig Worker's Employment Classification - Keep Uber/Lyft (~500k) Drivers as Independent Contractors

23: Authorizes State Regulation of Kidney Dialysis Clinics - Minimum Staffing, State approval for reduction of services, reventing payment discrimination

Necessity

for

this will prevent malpractice and mistakes

against

there really isn't a problem in the dialysis clinics - no one has gotten hurt yet, this is not worth the cost and burden

response: the whole idea is to prevent the preventable problems that will happen when the nurses need a doc and they can't find one - people are going to ask, why wasn't it required in the first place?

how many

increased cost of operations may lead to closures

for

there is no

against

Subtopic

24: Consumer Privacy Laws

25: Referendum on the Use of Risk Assessment Bail

For (arguments in favor of proposition)

The cost is miniscule compared to the benefit

It will save people money from all the accidents we have going on with inexperienced drivers, not to mention the property damage, etc.

Against (arguments against)

This will raise property taxes by an 200$/year for homes worth 400k. That is a big burden

Citation needed

The tax is unfair because it only taxes property owners, not renters who also drive

Questions for further research: What is the ratio of property owners to renters who drive?

For

It is the government's responsibility to account for the mistakes and shortcomings of individuals

Against

We've been driving for decades without liscencing and it's been fine! The dead folks are the bad drivers and it's the survival of the fittest

Rebuttal: People are dying due to the 'bad drivers - people who were only minding their own business. This is unfair and every life lost is an injustice that should not exist in a civilized society.

Applicability of Law

for

apparently : 80% of current benefits apply to just 8% of property holders

exempts small businesses $3million

against

it should exempt 5 mil or less! (arguing that it 3 mil is still too small...)

Alleged loss of Tax Revenue

For

Folks are using current rules to their advantage, this law would change it

current law disincentives the proper sale of comm + ind property because people don't want to be reassessed; this measure would do away with that perverse incentive, and allow the free market to work more efficiently

Subtopic

Tax revenue must be increased to provide

CA lowest ratio of teacher to class size, etc

Against

Subtopic

Increased Tax Revenue

For

think of the children, think of the roads

https://www.lincolninst.edu/sites/default/files/pubfiles/50-state-property-tax-comparison-for-2017-full_1.pdf

CA is indeed on the lower end of tax rates in the nation - though the amount of tax

Against

the taxes are too high, this will stifle competition, hurt businesses, raise rents, make it harder to do business

Subtopic

can't we tax other things?

Subtopic

Applicability of Law

for

apparently : 80% of current benefits apply to just 8% of property holders

exempts small businesses $3million

against

it should exempt 5 mil or less! (arguing that it 3 mil is still too small...)

Alleged loss of Tax Revenue

For

Folks are using current rules to their advantage, this law would change it

current law disincentives the proper sale of comm + ind property because people don't want to be reassessed; this measure would do away with that perverse incentive, and allow the free market to work more efficiently

Subtopic

Tax revenue must be increased to provide

CA lowest ratio of teacher to class size, etc

Against

Subtopic

Increased Tax Revenue

For

think of the children, think of the roads

https://www.lincolninst.edu/sites/default/files/pubfiles/50-state-property-tax-comparison-for-2017-full_1.pdf

CA is indeed on the lower end of tax rates in the nation - though the amount of tax

Against

the taxes are too high, this will stifle competition, hurt businesses, raise rents, make it harder to do business

Subtopic

can't we tax other things?

Subtopic

not currently - employment is the current method of earning a decent life

Tenants of Rent controlled units will be able to spend more of their money in their communities

Landlords will have their profits cut

For

Kids are being kicked from schools if they are evicted from their housing. Families aren't able to keep up with rising rents

Seniors and veterans struggle with high rents, therefore not enough left for other needs such as medical care and sustenance.

Prop exempts single-family homeowners who own 1 or less homes. Only affects those in the home rental business

Preserves affordable housing for those that need it and encourages the construction of new homes for others, leading to affordable housing for all.

Landlords are guaranteed profit. More just for small mom-pop landlords and renters don't need to pay as much, win-win situation.

Against

Doesn't provide plans for how to solve overall housing shortage

Forces landlords to follow regulations set by unelected boards, reduces the autonomy of landlords over their property

Extreme rent control measures result in an avg reduction of up to 20% ($115,000 CA Avg).

Citation: MIT
https://economics.mit.edu/files/9760

Prop actually doesn't provide protection for these groups, No provisions for lowered rents

Doesn't allow for homeowners to match market price even after tenants move out, places unnaturally restrictive regulations on landlords

???

Support from both sides of the aisle

Democrats and Republicans agree Prop. 21 will make the crisis worse. Opponents include: California Council for Affordable Housing • Disabled American Veterans, Dept. of California • California Housing Consortium • Vietnam Veterans of America, California State Council • California Chamber of Commerce

for

this makes the punishment of certain crimes more serious, as it should be

against

harshness of punishment might not deter crime;

it doesnt make sense to make non violent crimes violent... when they're not violent

response: it's about the severity of the crime

for

which multiple studies show helps solve more serious and violent crimes like rape, robbery and murder

Need Citation

against

privacy concerns; lack of trust in state to use such things ethically

for

Subtopic

against

Backers of Prop. 20 are trying to scare you into rolling back effective criminal justice reforms you just passed, to spend tens of millions of your taxpayer dollars on prisons.

California already has lengthy sentences and strict punishment for serious and violent crime.

Increased state and local correctional costs likely in the tens of millions of dollars annually, primarily related to increases in county jail populations and levels of community supervision

Increased state and local court-related costs of that could be more than several million dollars annually

Increased state and local law enforcement costs not likely to be more than a few million dollars annually related to collecting and processing DNA samples

Prisons are not the rehabilitation centers they are meant to be

Crime victims, law enforcement leaders as well as budget and rehabilitation experts oppose Prop. 20 because it wastes tens of millions on prisons while cutting rehabilitation programs and support for crime victims.

Need citation

Budget cuts to actual rehabilitation centers for incorporating

Taking money out of our budget for other things that might be more necessary

School-to-prison pipeline

punishable of up to 3 years (county), and life or death penalty (State)