Election season is coming up which means it is time for change. California is facing an interesting proposed changed. Proposition 7 is on the ballot this year which if voted into action will repeal the change from standard time to daylight savings time
Prop 7 states that the California State Legislature would allow to enact daylight saving time year round, which is the time California is on from the second sunday of March and the first Sunday of November, or what many people refer to as “spring forward.”
A yes vote on Prop 7 would allow for the legislature to change to DST, daylight saving time, year round. It would have to be approved by a vote of two-thirds of the California State Legislature.
Those in favor argue that changing the clocks twice a year is bad for people’s health because their internal clock and sleep schedule gets messed up. It has also been argued that extra daylight during the afternoons from November to March would allow for more productivity and allow people to do more things during the day.
A no vote would not allow for the state legislature to change the daylight saving time schedule. California would continue to switch between DST and standard time.
Those opposed argue that being that being on a seperate clock from most of the country half the year would be confusing and frustrating. It has also been argued that the dark mornings in the winter cause more car accidents when people are commuting to work and children are going to school.
While most states in the US acknowledge both DST and standard time there are a few states that do not, including Hawaii and Arizona.
While staying on one time zone year round works for Hawaii, it is a huge point of controversy in California. Hawaii is much closer to the equator so the days do not get much longer in the summer or much shorter in the winter.
Some people believe that permanent DST would not make sense in California since there is a big difference between the length of sunshine on summer days compared to winter days. Although permanent DST has been enacted before during WWII. President Franklin D. Roosevelt enacted DST nationwide in an effort to save energy, so it has been proven to work in California. Obviously, this was repealed.
The Express Editorial Board endorses a “no” vote on Proposition 7.
Proposition 10 finds itself between a rock and a hard place. Rent in California is high. So high that it has become a joke, with popular memes trending on twitter showing spaces with terrible living conditions and putting an abnormally high price tag on them.
California is enduring a housing crisis and there is no end on the horizon. A shortage of housing has raised prices for rent. Proposition 10 plans to have local governments adopt rent control ordinances.
The cost of rent in the Bay Area is over 1,800 dollars a month for a two bedroom apartment, that is nearly double the national average of 1,000 dollars a month. For college students looking to move out, once a price tag is seen, any hope is stomped out. And that is just one of the financial problems students have to deal with. Proposition 10 aims to fix the housing problem, but is it the correct answer?
The proposition plans to add rent control to the state. Real estate website RadPad puts the idea of rent control simply: “rent control laws determine when, why and by how much a landlord can increase rent.”
So, the solution is simple right? Vote yes on prop 10, rent prices go down. Plenty argue that the problem is more complicated than that. The argument against prop 10 is that the solution to the housing crisis, is to build more places for people to live. If rent control is added, local governments may have to increase costs. Up to tens of millions of dollars per year, which could affect money given to schools and construction jobs. Candidates in the 2018 election for governor both oppose prop 10, stating that adding rent control is not the answer to the housing problem.
Supporters of prop 10 believe that it will be a good way to lower living costs and protect tenants from crazy rent prices. Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti stated: “I’ve always believed that those who live closest to a given block or a street know what’s best. Local government should have control over their own city.”
Is the addition of rent control the best for California? No one can say for sure. Proposition 10 should not go unnoticed. It is one of the most important propositions on the ballot, especially affecting college students looking to move out and establish independence.
The Express Editorial Board endorses a “yes” vote on Proposition 10.
In 2008, voters approved Proposition 2 which banned pregnant animals who were being raised to be slaughtered to be confined in small spaces where they could not “turn around freely, lie down, stand up, and fully extend their limbs,” according to ballotpedia.org.
It went into effect in 2015.
Proposition 12 is an extension of Proposition 2 and would not go into effect until 2020. Voting yes on this proposition will ban the sale of meat and egg-laying animals who are being held in confined in a small space.
A vote yes would ban a calf from being confined in area less than 43 square feet, a pig in less than 24 square feet and egg-laying animals to be confined in anything less than one square foot.
If this proposition does get passed, starting in 2021, egg-laying animals would be able to live cage-free. Additionally, by the end of 2021, all farmers would have to be fully compliant.
If a farmer were to violate these requirements, the California Department of Food and Agriculture and the California Department of Public Health can give fines up to $1000.
Voting yes, will also amend California’s Health and Safety Code to add these new requirements.
A vote no, would oppose the ban and leave the requirements as is.
Some of the opponents of this proposition argued that a vote yes would “increase food prices and create meat and egg shortages,” according to ballotpedia.org
I think Californians should vote no on Proposition 12 and leave the requirements as is.
The animals are being raised to die, so why should they have a good life? It has been 10 years since voters approved Proposition 2. If the space requirements did not matter then, what makes them matter now?
This proposition is still vague. Although there is a minimum space requirement, there is no maximum. Since this proposition is driven by activist groups, there will most likely be a debate on the space requirements between the activists groups and the farmers.
A spokesman for the National Pork Producers Council, Jim Monroe said, “Livestock production practices should be left to those who are most informed about animal care — farmers — and not animal rights activists.”
Just like in 2008, farmers would have to get rid of their current cages to purchase new ones just to comply with this new law.
The Express Editorial Board endorses a “no” vote on Proposition 12 and leave the requirement as is.