Elections Nov 2010 - San Diego Props, Governor & US Senate

In my previous blog I made my recommendations for the state-wide propositions. Here I address the local San Diego Props and also the race for Governor and the US Senate seat.

Local Props:

Prop A, Allow open bidding for local construction projects: This is a hard one to take a stand on. The contention is that by opening up government infrastructure projects to all contractors, the cost will come down. The opposition contends that part of the cost reduction comes from the lifting of several requirements such as health care, job training, etc. I can't really decide who the good guys are, but I am going with the benefits of increased competition. Vote YES.

Prop B, Add a good cause requirement for firing Deputy DAs: Hard to argue with this one, except that it may saddle a newly elected DA with some stubborn relic from the past administration. Still, I recommend a YES vote.

Prop C, Remove the I-56/I-5 interchange requirement for Pacific Highlands Ranch: On the surface, this seems to a largely local measure - 12 years ago, Prop M authorized this development under the condition that its completion be coincident with that of the I-56/I-5 interchange (56W to 5N & 5S to 56E), which is currently not scheduled for at least 2020. This stalls a number of neighborhood improvements in this development. Sounds unfair, especially since the developer is going to cover all the costs, but me thinks that they knew this when they put Prop M on the ballot. Also, why take away any pressure to complete said interchange? I hate the current arrangement! So, I am going selfish on this one: Vote NO.

Prop D, Temporary (5 year) half cent increase in sales tax: All the bugaboos are being trotted out for this one: fire protection will disappear, there will no more police, etc, etc. But, it also has the support of the Chamber of Commerce! Its hard to argue that the city is losing money from the State, but could the city's finances be better managed? The tax increase is contingent on a long string of financial reforms and some of them sound pretty good. Maybe I am being suckered in, but I am recommending a YES vote.

OK, now for the anticlimax - my recommendations for Ca Governor and US Senate seat. For anyone who knows my politics, it will come as no surprise that I am recommending Jerry Brown over Meg Whittman and Barbara Boxer over Carly Fiorina. I'd like to think that my reasoning is not entirely partisan: In the case of Meg Whittman, it came down to my opinion that she is not going to be effective in Sacramento. The Ca Governor is subject to endless restrictions and navigating the minefield of a Democratic controlled legislature is likely to prove too much for a political ingenue. If not anything else, Brown knows Sacramento and can hardly be worse than the "Governator" has been. I am also tired of all these business types who want to run government like "a business." The government is not a business.
As for Fiorina, I have never been impressed by her abilities as an executive - she took over a revered and storied technology giant - HP - and almost ran it to the ground. She spent a ton of money on showy employee get togethers and alienated the engineering rank and file. Her personal rise may be inspiring, but I don't find any reason to assume that she would be any more effective in Washington than she was at HP.

As for the Tea Party and the national scene - well, that will need another post.