Californian's back casinos, not colleges.

[Xithras]

I guess it goes to show that voters really don't pay attention to the measures, and simply cast their ballots for whomever has the glitziest commercials.

Please explain your logic to me if you voted FOR casinos and AGAINST education. I really don't get it.

[Cant trust em]

1. I can't believe 92 lost

and it wasn't even close. 70% of California college students attend a community college. I was one of them. This is a sad day.

[bemildred]

4. That pissed me off too, first good ballot prop in ages. nt

[itsrobert]

2. I guess I lost on everything yesterday

I voted against Casinos and for college. Also to keep the road funds for the roads.

[Sequoia]

3. Of course the casinos had to win

Since Ahnold said a few years back how the state was being ripped off. People don't have money to gamble as it is. I, for one, will NOT use any of them. I don't even care for stupid Las Vegas.

[Retrograde]

5. I voted no on 92

Why? Because it takes one more degree of freedom out of the state budget. By saying "this pile of money is for X, that pile is for Y" we lose the ability to make flexible decisions as the current situation requires. That's why I voted No on the transportation bill as well.

Taking a step back, I think the level of detail for state funding should not be on the ballot at all. It started 30 years ago with Prop. 13, and the result is the fiscal mess we're currently in. The budget is supposed to be the job of the state legislatures: let them do their jobs and stop leaving the writing of legislation to any group who has the motivation and organization to get their pet proposition on the ballot. And if they're not doing their jobs, vote them out.

I thought long and hard about the gambling propositions. I opposed the original Indian casino proposition some years ago (on the grounds that if the state wanted legalized gambling it should allow anyone to open a casino), and was even tempted to vote Yes on 2 of them and No on the others, but eventually voted Yes just to put a temporary fix on the current state budget problem. Everybody wants to fund their own interests - education, public transportation, parks, pensions - and no one wants to touch the current tax structures, so the money has to come from someplace.

[Xithras]

6. But it really didn't.

When Californian's passed proposition 98 many years ago, we did so to ensure that our school funding was maintained at certain minimum levels. We decided that education was one area we didn't want to compromise in. The problem with it is that 98 set K-14 funding levels based on K-12 enrollment. CC's get 10% of Prop 98 funds, and K-12 gets the other 90%. This may have made sense when it was drafted, but nowadays its a huge issue. K-12 enrollment is flat while CC enrollment is skyrocketing. Since K-12 enrollment is flat, the CC's don't get ANY additional funds to educate that influx of new students. Enrollment climbs, but funding stays flat.

92 would have simply unlocked CC funding from the current K-12 enrollment numbers and simply based it on need.

When you say that you don't want to take freedom away from the state budget in this instance, you're actually saying that you want the state to have the ability to further slash an educational system that's already operating $250 million a year beneath the levels it actually needs to fund the students it has today.

[Kajsa]

8. Aye, there's the rub, Xithras.

"92 would have simply unlocked CC funding from the current K-12 enrollment numbers and simply based it on need.".


The CTA was opposed to 92. I'm sure that played a part in its demise.

:grr:

I'm a teacher ( substitute) and voted enthusiastically FOR 92!

[Joe Bacon]

7. Hey, it's money that matters!

People still want that fantasy of winning at the million dollar slot machine!

[Juneboarder]

9. I voted YES on 92 and NO on 94-97...

I can't believe that the opposite was passed! It's disappointing to see the lack of support for our higher education; it's not like we, as a country, can brag about how smart we are, when in actuality, there are many 3rd world countries that have surpassed us in education.