The Liberty Guide to California’s Propositions

The November 8th ballot in California has a dizzyingly array of propositions and measures. To help out, we have created the liberty guide so you can easily tell what the best vote is for liberty. For the most part, the propositions on this ballet are absolutely atrocious, so read this guide carefully.

On every voting decision, we should ask ourselves a single question: Will this move us closer to Liberty or closer to tyranny?

It sounds extreme but these really are the two opposite ends of the spectrum. More specifically, asking if the issues align with the 5 principles of liberty:
1. Peace
2. Tolerance
3. Free markets
4. Limited government
5. Individual rights

…and most importantly the non-aggression principle. Too often people make decisions not based on a set of principles, but based on the topic or on emotions and so they often tend to be ideologically inconsistent.

The Liberty Vote:


Proposition 51 – NO – School bonds
Proposition 52 – NO – State fees on hospitals
Proposition 53 – YES – Voting on revenue bonds
Proposition 54 – YES – Legislative transparency
Proposition 55 – NO – Income tax hike extension
Proposition 56 – NO – Cigarette tax increase
Proposition 57 – YES – Parole for non-violent felons
Proposition 58 – NO – Changes in bilingual education methods
Proposition 59 – NO – Citizens United Repeal *
Proposition 60 – NO – Condoms required for adult film actors
Proposition 61 – NO – State prescription drug purchases
Proposition 62 – YES – End the Death Penalty in California
Proposition 63 – NO – Extensive new gun control measures
Proposition 64 – NO – Adult Use of Marijuana Act (AUMA) **
Proposition 65 – NO – Directs grocery bag money to wildlife fund
Proposition 66 – NO – Makes death penalty easier
Proposition 67 – NO – Grocery stores can’t provide plastic bags (referendum)

* PROP 59 EXPLANATION (Repealing Citizens United):
This is another one that required much more in-depth thought and analysis and we don’t think people are going to do it. They just see corporations as “evil” so repealing this seems to make sense, until you actually look at why the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the corporations. We don’t believe that “corporations are people” (as they ruled), only individuals are people, but we do believe corporations should be able to spend their money, as much money, wherever they choose. The government has no business telling any company where and how much money they can spend. In other words, we agree with the Supreme court’s decision that placing limitations on political spending is unconstitutional. However, it is a fact that corporations DO influence government and manipulate the system with money (aka. crony capitalism). This is where Bernie Sanders supporters are confused because this is only PART of the problem. The solution is not limiting how much money they can spend – “campaign finance” laws do nothing to address the real problem. That would be like trying to lose a lot of weight by eating the same fatty foods, just less of them. The only way to keep wealthy individuals – who are the biggest donors to super PACs – from attempting to influence the corporatist machine in Washington, is to take the power to control the economy away from the Federal government. If the government weren’t controlling every aspect of our lives and the economy (involved in everything from retirement to education to healthcare), businessmen and corporations would no longer have any reason to attempt to buy them off. That is one of the reasons we strongly believe in limiting the size, scope and power of the government. We feel overturning Citizens United is putting a Band-Aid on the problem and will do absolutely nothing to solve it. Big money (major corporations) WILL ALWAYS figure out a way to influence our political process, as long as they can get it to work for their benefit.

** PROP 64 EXPLANATION (Adult Use of Marijuana Act):
While we have been a strong supporter of ending drug prohibition, this proposition does more harm than good, damaging medical availability, and creating additional criminal offenses and regulations.

– Additional environmental regulations as Marijuana growers use water resources
– Expanding of local zoning restrictions for the growth of Marijuana
– Requires state license to grow. State govt also reserves the right to not give a license to a grower of a certain size to prevent monopoly forces.
– Taxes GROWTH. Yes they want to tax growing a plant! And they will take not on growing it but a 15% sales tax
– Strict packaging and labeling requirements
– New DUI regulations, although it’s not quite clear what those are yet
– Allows local govts to ban non-medical marijuana businesses
– Can’t sell marijuana if you sell alcohol or tobacco
– Cannot use marijuana in an unlicensed public place or any place with minors present.

Despite theft on an scale of enormous proportions ($6.5 trillion in 2015), we still managed to spend $600 BILLION (in 1 year) more than we stole. A step in the right direction is to REDUCE the size and scope of government, NOT expand it. This prop establishes yet another department, “Bureau of Marijuana Control”. The bill itself says it will consolidate medical and recreational marijuana into a single system. When this was done in Washington state medical marijuana got a lot more expensive, limiting access for people who desperately needed it. It also puts a new tax now on people who grow it for sale. You have to pay tax for growing a plant? There are 2 ends of the spectrum – freedom on one side and centralized control on the other. You either move closer to freedom or you move away from it. In this case, unfortunately it’s the latter. The link below is the bill with comments in RED made by a retired attorney from California. We suggest you all read at least some of it, before voting YES on prop 64. The prop does not just regulate non-medical marijuana. Here is the link to the bill with comments in red.

Darrell Castle (Constitution Party). We don’t agree with him on everything, but his primary political motive is to restrict the government’s role to its constitutionally enumerated powers, so he has our vote. Here’s an interview to learning more about him (start at 4:35).

Other State & Federal Offices
Since we have no other viable choices for federal offices, we are voting for the Republican candidates. Selecting neither candidate for US senate, since both are democrats.

Local Measures: (anything that raises taxes or increases our already bloated spending, is an automatic NO)
Measure A – NO – half cent local tax
Measure B – We don’t care about this as it is in Lilac Hills but good for them for getting the 67,000 signatures needed to put in on the ballet (after the city denied them)
Measure C – NO – Build a football stadium downtown (don’t you love democracy where other idiots get to take your money and use it to build a football stadium?)
Measure D – NO – tourism tax
Measure E – YES – amend charter
Measure F – NO – protection for city attorneys
Measure G – YES – Charter amendments
Measure H – YES – Charter amendments
Measure I – NO – Charter amendments
Measure J – NO – Charter amendments
Measure K – NO – Charter amendments (costs taxpayer more $)
Measure L – YES – November (when more people vote) instead of June
Measure M – NO – increase rent controlled housing (rent control is a total racket and doesn’t work)
Measure N – NO – Yet another tax — on recreational marijuana

Whatever you do on November 8th, please remember this:


Donald Trump Is No Lover of Liberty
Hillary Clinton: A Trail of Deceit

Facebook Comments

Leave a Reply