More On The Ballot Measures

Topic(s): me,politics
2006-11-01 01:42:08 PST

There are so many stupid measures on the 2006 ballot! I can't believe it. One common motif among several is "disaster preparedness." How many measures do we need for disaster preparedness?

Measure 1E ("Disaster Preparedness And Flood Prevention") is listed at a $4.09 billion. Measure 84 ("Water Quality. Flood Control. Natural Resource Protection.") is listed at $5.388 billion.

Measure 89 ("Public Financing Of Political Campaigns") is the most ridiculous.

I'm guessing most of the measures won't pass, which is good. However, the larger issue is that some of them do pass! Then once they're in the legislative books, they're never removed. That is to say, government spending only goes in one direction (up).

What I'd like to see is this: measures that pass, but are found to be ineffective after a predetermined period of time should be removed from the books. The problem here being most measures, if not all of them, offer no method of measuring their effectiveness.

How exactly would one measure disaster preparedness and flood prevention? Preparedness is a relative term that can't be measured until the disaster being prepared for occurs.

Well, there are some measurables that we could set. I'd like to see something in the measure that states a long list of objectives, one of which might be:

In the event of a mangitude 7.0 earthquake striking downtown San Francisco, this measure will ensure 50% of those losing their home have temporary housing within 5 days and 100% of those affected have safe drinking water.

But of course, most measures' objectives aren't clearly stated because most measures aren't intended to do much more than line the pockets of those who sponsored the measures.

Another measure on the ballot is measure 88 ("Education Funding"). Didn't we boost education funding just two years ago (Proposition J)? You'd be hard pressed to find someone who is opposed to funding education. Therefore the measure will most likely pass.

But how much of measure 88's rake benefits the students? Again, that should be a measurable listed as part of the measure. If the measure states its measurable as just 25% of the rake benefitting the student, then the measure would almost certainly fail.

Well, that's my rant on 2006's ballot measures. Perhaps I'll write about the election next.

name:
email:
url:
response: