Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

  1. #1

    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Posts
    308

    California Reconquista Alert NO ON PROPS 91, 92, 93

    Fabian Nunez was interviewed on ABC this morning. He is very excited about the initiatives below and feels voters will support them on Feb.5. None of these will be a benefit to U.S. citizens. The first two will result in higher taxes. The initiatives are ridiculous. They are designed for the illegals here and those to come. Let's not forget that California has the largest illegal population in the U.S., and L.A. is a sanctuary city with an illegal population that is second only to Mexico City, Mexico. The third one will allow them more time in office. Sorry about the second one, it would not line up.


    California Voter Guide
    http://www.voterguide.sos.ca.gov/title_ ... e_sum.html

    PROP 91
    TRANSPORTATION FUNDS.
    INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.

    Prohibits certain motor vehicle fuel sales and use taxes, that are earmarked for the Transportation Investment Fund, from being retained in the General Fund. Currently such taxes may be retained if Governor issues a proclamation, a special statute is enacted by a 2/3 vote of the Legislature, repayment occurs within three years, and certain other conditions are met.
    Requires repayment by 6/30/17 of such vehicle fuel taxes retained in General Fund from 7/1/03 to 6/30/08. Currently repayment is generally required by 6/30/16.
    Changes how and when General Fund borrowing of certain transportation funds is allowed.
    SUMMARY OF LEGISLATIVE ANALYST'S ESTIMATE OF NET STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT FISCAL IMPACT:
    Increases stability of state funding for highways, streets, and roads and may decrease stability of state funding for public transit. May reduce stability of certain local funds for public transit.


    PROP 92
    COMMUNITY COLLEGES. FUNDING. GOVERNANCE. FEES.
    INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT AND STATUTE.


    STATUTE.
    Establishes in state constitution a system of independent public community college districts and Board of Governors.
    · Generally, requires minimum levels of state funding for school districts and community college districts to be calculated separately, using different criteria and separately appropriated.
    · Allocates 10.46 percent of current Proposition 98 school funding maintenance factor to community colleges.
    · Sets community college fees at $15/unit per semester; limits future fee increases.
    · Provides formula for allocation by Legislature to community college districts that would not otherwise receive general fund revenues through community college apportionment.
    SUMMARY OF LEGISLATIVE ANALYST'S ESTIMATE OF NET STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT FISCAL IMPACT:
    · Increase in state spending on K–14 education from 2007–08 through 2009–10—averaging about $300 million per year, with unknown impacts annually thereafter.
    · Loss of student fee revenues to community colleges—potentially about $70 million annually.


    PROP 93
    LIMITS ON LEGISLATORS’ TERMS IN OFFICE.
    INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.
    Reduces the total amount of time a person may serve in the state legislature from 14 years to 12 years.

    Allows a person to serve a total of 12 years either in the Assembly, the Senate, or a combination of both.
    Provides a transition period to allow current members to serve a total of 12 consecutive years in the house in which they are currently serving, regardless of any prior service in another house.

    SUMMARY OF LEGISLATIVE ANALYST'S ESTIMATE OF NET STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT FISCAL IMPACT:
    This measure would have no direct fiscal effect on state or local governments.

  2. #2
    CaliforniaDreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Mexifornia
    Posts
    304
    If Nunez is for it, I'm definitely against it.

    Three great big fat NOS!!

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    283
    NO NO NO specially fr prop 93

    A very deceiving ad has been run
    on tv telling voters to vote yes on 93.

    I read somewhere that the only reason
    California got to move its primary to February
    was to accomodate those propositions to
    be on the ballot.

    How people like Nunes and his band of
    traitors get elected is beyond me.

    Californians.. wake up and do it now

  4. #4
    Senior Member alexcastro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    California
    Posts
    970
    I already voted by absentie. Of course of voted NO on all those measures!

  5. #5
    MW
    MW is offline
    Senior Member MW's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    25,608
    odiesback wrote:

    How people like Nunes and his band of
    traitors get elected is beyond me.
    Me too, and I don't even live in California!

    Unfortunately most of the problem is predicated by the ethnical makeup of the district.

    "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing" ** Edmund Burke**

    Support our FIGHT AGAINST illegal immigration & Amnesty by joining our E-mail Alerts athttps://eepurl.com/cktGTn

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,753
    Quote Originally Posted by MW
    odiesback wrote:

    How people like Nunes and his band of
    traitors get elected is beyond me.
    Me too, and I don't even live in California!

    Unfortunately most of the problem is predicated by the ethnical makeup of the district.
    And that is why it will be very hard to change it

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    somewhere in occupied Los Angeles
    Posts
    216
    Quote Originally Posted by odiesback
    How people like Nunes and his band of
    traitors get elected is beyond me.
    you know perfectly well how Nunez and the other mexican socialists get "elected" here in CA. massive voter fraud by illegals and their open-borders enablers. think about it. why do you think they always scream and wail whenever any voter photo ID laws are put forth?

    it's amazing - we have allowed so many enemies into our midst, that we now are collectively unable to require legal photo ID to take part in our most sacred honor of our citizenship. while the same proof is required to buy beer and get on a plane.

    America and Americans are incredibly weak. how did we get so weak? what are we going to do get strong again?

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •