President & Vice-President: Barack Obama & Joe Biden
— Solid platform, sound plans, inspiring leader who can bring us together.
U.S. State Representative: Nancy Pelosi
— I want her to take a stronger stance against the war, but need an experienced leader in the House.
State Senator: Mark Leno
— Very pleased with his work.
Member State Assembly, District 13: Tom Ammiano
— Generally pleased with his work.
Member Board of Education: Barbara "Bobbi" Lopez, Sandra Lee Fewer, Rachel Norton, H. Brown
— Combination of statements (I like H. Brown's idea of training kids for emergency response preparedness rather than pointless P.E.) and endorsements.
Judge of the Superior Court, seat #12: Gerardo Sandoval
— Have heard bad things about opponent & have voted for Sandoval in the past without regret.
Member, Community College Board: Mary T. Hernandez, Steve Ngo, Natalie Berg, Milton Marks
— Again, combination of statements & endorsements.
BART Director: Tom Radulovich
— Keep up the good work.
1A – Yes
— We need to build more non-car infrastructure
2 – Yes
— Cruelty isn't necessary in food production. Don't buy the argument that it's too expensive to be decent.
3 – No
— Past bond funds still available. Some concerns over percentage of money going to private hospitals.
4 – No no no
— Mother's rights over her body come before the "rights" of some lump of cells. Fetuses are not citizens.
Would I like to see fewer unwanted pregnancies, absolutely yes. Do I think making abortion more difficult to obtain decreases unwanted pregnancies, absolutely not.
5 – Yes
— Treatment works better than punishment and it's cheaper.
6 – No
— Locking up a specific portion of the budget for a specific cause is generally a bad plan.
7 – No
— When Environmental Defense, the League of Conservation Voters, Natural Resources Defense Council, Sierra Club, Union of Concerned Scientists, AND PG&E agree something is a bad idea, it's a bad idea.
8 – No no no
— Don't build prejudice into the state constitution. (See my comments on this below).
9 – No
— As someone I trust deeply with direct experience of Victim Witness programs told me: the voice of the victim is already pretty well protected in our justice system. We don't need non-objective opinions leading to over-imprisonment.
10 – No
— Appears to heavily favor one service provider (key backer of the proposition, surprise surprise) and doesn't even require that the fleet established with these funds remain in California.
11 – No
— As much as redistricting may be needed, this is not the proposition to do it. It does not have any safeguards to ensure that the commission it would establish actually represents the electoral mix of the state.
12 – Yes
— A good bond act with costs covered by those benefiting from it.
City & County Propositions:
A – Yes
— A major quake is just too probable and the benefit of this work too clear to delay it.
B – No
— Again, as with State Proposition 6, a fixed set aside is unappealing.
C – No
— This should be covered by other conflict of interest rules. The argument "why should a fireman be prohibited from serving on the environment board?" is compelling.
D – Yes
— This is a good area to continue developing.
E – Yes
— Consistency with established best practices is a good thing.
F – Yes
— Elections are expensive so let's get people involved in these local decisions when they're already drawn to vote on state & national issues.
G – Yes
— Yes, this seems perfectly reasonable.
H – Yes
— Imperfect, but I can't say I trust PG&E's environmental or cost decisions over what's proposed here.
I – Yes
— Seems reasonable & no arguments against submitted.
J – Yes
— Surprised this doesn't already exist; unconvinced by all the developers & landlords arguing against it.
K – Yes
— Oh this was a very tough one, but the public health arguments are incredibly strong, particularly the evidence from New Zealand. I would prefer that it explicitly shifted efforts from prosecuting prostitutes to prosecuting human trafficking or other abuses. Frankly, I'll be surprised if it passes, so I expect votes for K are more of an indication of priorities to SFPD.
L – Yes
— I am unconvinced that the opponents to the Community Justice Center are driven by more than being in opposition to Gavin Newsom. Quit grandstanding, Daly.
M – Yes
— Only landlords oppose this measure attempting to stop abuses by landlords. *cough* Well that's pretty easy to decide on.
N – Yes
— I do not believe measure opponent Michela Alioto-Pier has my best financial interests at heart; I'm not nearly rich enough to be part of her base.
O – Yes
— This is one of those "has to go by the voters but its just a best practice change" as I read it.
P – No
— Sorry, Gavin, we agree on quite a few things, but I'm with the huge crowd opposing this change.
Q – Yes
— No brainer; no opposing argument.
R – No
— This is a frivolous, unhelpful measure and I'm sorry to see it made the ballot. Now is the time for us to find common ground with those who supported George W. Bush and help them understand how his policies were damaging to them. This mockery doesn't help. It's also unkind to those who perform this important city service.
S – Yes
— A nice rational approach. After that starry-eyed "let's turn Alcatraz into a peace center" measure C earlier this year, we definitely need dreamers to balance their ideas with how they'll be funded before we vote on them.
T – Yes
— Treatment services reduce city costs relating to substance abusers.
U – No
— I oppose this war and further troop deployment to Iraq, but don't think our representatives in Congress should be told, for example, that they should oppose an otherwise good plan because it includes a minor deployment.
V – No
— Military recruitment in high schools is just revolting.
Member Board of Supervisors District 5: Ross Mirkarimi
— Seems to be doing a good job. I like my neighborhood!