Why I vote “no” on (almost) all California ballot propositions, even if I agree with them
Michael Levinson
35952

Hi there! I very much agree with your philosophy, but note that you may have accidentally misapplied it on some of the specific measures here. In some cases, if your goal is to let the legislature do its job, then you should vote yes.

Prop 58 was placed on the ballot by the legislature. That means it’s a law that passed a vote in the legislature already, but cannot be enacted directly because it conflicts with previous propositions. If you believe it should be the legislature’s job to make law, then you should vote “yes” here.

Prop 67, meanwhile, is a veto resolution. It was put on the ballot to undo a law the legislature already passed. If you vote “no”, you are voting to undo the law — which is what the petitioners wanted. A “yes” vote means you are voting to keep what the legislature already did. So if your goal is “no change”, then you need to vote “yes” here.

Prop 59 is advisory-only, so there’s no risk of binding the hands of the government — and arguably no benefit, either. Do whatever you want with this one.

You can tell proposition types apart by looking at Ballotpedia: https://ballotpedia.org/California_2016_ballot_propositions If the proposition type starts with “CI”, it is a Citizen Initiative (and probably horribly-written). If it starts with “LR”, it is “legislatively referred” — the legislature already voted in favor. “VR” means “veto resolution”, which is citizen-initiated but where you are voting to affirm something the legislature already did — a “no” vote vetoes the legislative action. “AQ” means “advisory question” aka “irrelevant, do what you want”.

Of course, you may have other opinions on the specifics of these propositions, but I just wanted to point out: if your goal is to avoid binding the hands of the government, “no” is not always the right answer.