How to Be a 10-Minute Legislator

By law, Californians are limited to 10 minutes in the voting booth. Civic-minded persons determined to abide by this obscure rule had better move fast Tuesday. Beyond picking a President, two senators and numerous legislators, they also will be asked to pass judgment on a baker’s dozen of public policy issues that would paralyze Sacramento for years.

From euthanasia to snack taxes, the proposition cupboard is well-stocked. Voters have been slow to focus on the measures, and experts suspect many will go the polls cold, with no preparation. That’s risky. Confuse the numbers this time, and a voter seeking to repeal a potato chips tax instead can cause the plug to be pulled on Granny.

What follows is one voter’s guide to the propositions. It is based on a day of research--more study time than most people can afford; not nearly enough to make intelligent decisions on 13 complicated proposals. Stumbling through the ballot arguments, I felt the frustration mount. Direct democracy is wonderful, but why pay lawmakers when they insist on leaving the work to us?

*

Prop. 155. School Facilities Bond Act. Somehow, bonds never seem like real money. Yes.

Prop. 156. Passenger Rail and Clean Air Bond Act. The $1-billion price tag causes a gulp, but again this is bond money and a sweet-sounding title. Yes.

Prop. 157. Toll Roads and Highways. A basic tenant of government-by-proposition: When in doubt, vote it out. I’ve read the ballot description five times and still don’t understand this one. No.

Prop. 158. Office of California Analyst. This is fallout from Prop. 140, the California initiative that limited legislative terms and mandated staff reductions. To lessen the number of staff cuts, Willie Brown and Assoc. want to slide the analyst out of the legislative budget and into an independent office. “The net impact . . . is unknown, but probably not significant,” is how the analyst herself analyzes this one. My analysis: It’s an end run. No.

Prop 159. Office of the Auditor General. See above. No.

Prop. 160. Property Tax Exemptions. Should spouses of military personnel who die on duty be exempted from property taxes? A better question might be: If the Legislature doesn’t have the courage to say no to families of fallen patriots, why should we? Yes.

Prop. 161. Physician-assisted death. This one somehow doesn’t feel right. I just don’t believe the government should establish rules by which sane people can kill themselves. It’s not about procedures or legalities, or being for or against life or death, pain or comfort. This is a moral question, beyond the realm of public business. No.

Prop. 162. Public Employees Retirement Systems. People who pay into this system want to prevent politicians from raiding it. Given the political lust for borrowing from the future to fund the present, I don’t blame them. Yes.

Prop. 163. Ends Taxation of Certain Food Products. The infamous snack tax. Last year everyone thought this was a wonderfully wacky way to balance the budget. This year, an election year, nobody wants to mention the T-word or defend the lowly snack tax. Well, I have little children. They have teeth. I’m all for it. No.

Prop. 164. Congressional Term Limits. This is a crude instrument, loaded with flaws: only a foolish state would hamstring its delegation in the race for Washington pork; there must be better ways to eject the lifers from Congress. A good argument, but not convincing. To defeat this measure is to tell Congress that business as usual is just fine. Thick heads require blunt tools. Yes.

Prop. 165. Budget Process. Welfare. Pete Wilson’s attempt to seize more power under the guise of welfare reform is a perfect expression of the cynicism that passes for leadership in his Administration. Should it succeed, he will have taken a long stride toward reelection. Fail, and we may be looking at the first one-term governor since Colbert Olson. No.

Prop. 166. Basic Health Care Coverage. If morality cannot be legislated, neither can common sense. Businesses too dumb to provide good health care are bound to lose, especially as the ability to attract top talent to smoggy, overpriced California becomes more crucial. Let the company with the best health plan win, but keep the state out of it. No.

Prop. 167. State Taxes. Remember Big Green, the environmental initiative that promised almost everything short of sweeter breath? It died because it was too big, too complicated, reached too far. This soak-the-rich-and-more measure is its economic cousin. No.

So there you have my picks. Now go make your own. It’s simple, really. You either are for schools, clean air, toll roads, bureaucrats, widows, Grandma, retirees, potato chips, incumbents, welfare moms, Pete Wilson, health and taxes. Or you are not.

And remember, 10 minutes.