California Initiatives

Prop. 215 is a big joke on the people of California. Anyone who voted for this proposition, which allows the so-called medical use of marijuana, is either a desperate pothead or was greatly misinformed.

Now that 215 has passed, we’ll see “patients” swarming like locusts to their nearest physician, getting their prescriptions (fake or real) and using them to grow pot for big, easy profits. The temptation will definitely be there.

I’m sorry to say the people of California were duped into passing 215 by those “heartbreaking” but misleading Prop. 215 TV ads.

DENNIS A. PIERCE

Los Angeles

While watching the election returns I could see why people feel, “Why vote?” All the news stations predicted the results. This is very upsetting to me because I feel the stations should wait till after the polls close nationwide to start their predicting.

Also I am upset, like others, about the fact there is going to be a lawsuit against Prop. 209. This gives voters the feeling that their vote does not mean a blessed thing. This situation also happened with Prop. 187.

I voted, but this really hit a nerve.

WAYNE MAROTTE

Torrance

Many thanks to the Cal State Northridge Student Senate for its unintended invaluable help in passing Prop. 209. Its transparent ploy of trying to paint all Prop. 209 supporters as racists by inviting David Duke to the campus “debate” obviously backfired.

The Student Senate strategy ranks right up there with that of the organizers of the 1994 anti-Prop. 187 march in Los Angeles in which marchers waved Mexican flags. If there are any psychology majors in the Student Senate, grade them “F”.

DONALD HIRT

Paso Robles

As a new Angeleno, arrived in 1994 from Chicago, I am mystified by California’s method of writing and enacting laws by ballot initiative. This bypasses republicanism, legislation by elected representatives. It contravenes Robert’s Rules of Order, which require that the legally complete form of a motion be presented for a vote, not an informally written statement of intent. (For example, I cannot believe that Prop. 187, which was ineptly written, resides on the books as it was voted upon.)

But most unbelievably, we subvert the democratic process when we allow moneyed interests to write initiatives, pay professional signature gatherers to enable initiatives to reach the ballot, and then pay for television commercials to garner the votes necessary for their enactment.

It’s supposed to be one voter one vote, not the most bucks the most votes--as it used to be in Chicago.

WILLIAM HOHRI

Lomita