Voting in California 2024

 Ballots have been mailed to every California voter, and we already received the state and county voter information guides.  These are very helpful: the county guide tells exactly how, when, and where you can vote, listing every drop box and vote center ( the new term for polling place), and of course, in California you can also mail your ballot.  A guide of some sort is vital, as there are ten state propositions and two local measures to consider.  I’m listing some of them in categories:

Easy-Peasy  According to the Quick Reference Guide, Prop. 6 and Prop. 35 have *no* arguments against them! 😊 Prop. 6 changes the Calif. Constitution by eliminating involuntary servitude as punishment for crime.  Prop. 35 will make an already-existing tax on managed health care insurance plans permanent; the money is for MediCal (Medicaid) services.

It’s About Time!   I’m putting into this category Prop. 3, which will remove from the Calif. Constitution old language stating that marriage is only between a man and a woman--long after same-sex marriage has become legal nationwide.   And I personally think that Prop. 36 belongs here.  We have a huge problem with retail theft because of current law that makes stealing items worth less than $950 a misdemeanor.  For example, all four drugstores that I used to be able to easily reach by bicycle have closed because of theft!  Prop. 36 will increase punishment  (the specifics are in the Legislative Analysis section of the guide).

Look Who’s Talking!   Looking to see who supports and who opposes a measure is the method most of us employ most of the time.  Every proposition that will increase taxes is opposed by some taxpayers’ association, like a knee-jerk reaction.  In the Sac County booklet, Measure D is explained:  bonds would provide money for STEAM classes and school repairs; all the specific projects are listed in detail.  Only the Operations Director of the Sacramento Taxpayers Assoc. has signed the argument against it. 

What’s Going On Here?  Some propositions are more convoluted, and one really has to look further than the Quick Guide at the front.  Calif.’s current minimum wage is $16/hr., although it’s higher in some industries: fast food restaurants are required to pay workers at least $20/hr. (!)  Prop. 32  would raise the minimum wage to $18/hr. by 2026.  The Against argument states that “One person alone—a multimillionaire--wrote Prop. 32, spent millions getting it on the ballot… Even leading advocates for higher minimum wages urged him to pull it from the ballot.”  Well, that’s interesting; although, notice that the “against” list consists, predictably, of the Restaurant and Grocers Associations and the Chamber of Commerce.  So maybe this is a Look Who’s Talking…

    Then we have Props 33 and 34.  Under Prop. 33, local governments can enact rent control, unhindered by the state, because “based on the cost of living, we are the poorest state in America” and rent increases outstrip pay increases.  Supported by Democrats, teachers, nurses, veterans, and the AIDS Healthcare Foundation.  So no prob, right?  But the opponents assert that it’s “Funded by notorious slumlord” (quoting the L.A. Times) and that it’s a “Trojan Horse that overturns state affordable housing laws.”  Hmm.   Now look at Prop. 34, seemingly unrelated.  It requires certain health care providers to spend the revenues from the government’s discount prescription drug program on direct patient care. Which providers?  Ones that spent more than one hundred million dollars on things other than patient care, and that operate multi-family housing with 500 health and safety violations.  Sounds specific?  Indeed, the opponents call this “the Revenge Initiative,” asserting that its only purpose is to “prevent AIDS Healthcare Foundation from supporting rent control.”  So that is how Props 33 and 34 are related, and again, you might want to look at who is supporting or opposing each one, or read the legislative analysis. 

            Of course, there are many other sources of information about the propositions and candidates, namely on the websites of newspapers and those of radio and TV stations. 

Vice President Debate Notes Oct. 1, 2024

NOTES  VP debate of 10/1/24

 I admire so much the analysts who can watch/listen and make a cogent summary. 

Commentators agree that the debate was not at all important in determining who voters would choose; they observed (on TV, on radio, in newspaper) that it was very civilized, maybe too “nice,” and not substantive enough.   

It was noted that Vance talked over the two moderators; as they were both women, it made him appear the epitome of a “mansplainer.”  The reiterated points by Walz were that Trump’s plans are bad, Harris’s are good.  The reiterated points by Vance were that Harris had 3-1/2 years as Vice President and did not accomplish those goals. 

The debate followed the same pattern as the presidential debate a few weeks ago.   “CBS Evening News” anchor Norah O’Donnell and “Face the Nation” anchor Margaret Brennan moderated.  The questions were on the Israel situation, climate change, immigration, the economy, abortion, gun laws. housing, health care, families, democracy and the men’s personal qualifications.

 Q:  Would you support an Israeli pre-emptive strike on Iran?

            W:  Talked about Trump not being capable.  Said U.S. will support Israel. 

            V:   Introduced himself, told about his background, in case viewers did not know anything about him.  Trump delivered stability by establishing a deterrent.  Biden/Harris gave money to Iran, which it used to buy arms.  We should support our allies.

            W:  Trump pulled the program that was a coalition of nations.  When Iranian missiles fell near our troops, Trump called it a “headache.”

 Q:  What would you do to reduce climate change?

            V:  Young people are worried about”crazy weather patterns.”  People worry about carbon emissions.  The solution is to produce energy here, because we are the cleanest.  “Invest in American workers.”

            W:  Governors work together in a non-partisan way…   Trump joked about climate change.. Biden/Harris invested in jobs – solar energy.  Farmers know climate change is real.  We are producing more clean energy than ever.

            V:  Trump said we need more manufacturing in the U.S.  A lot of those solar panel components are made in China.

            W:  We produce more natural gas than ever. 

 Q:  Immigration.  Asked Vance to be specific about how so many would be deported, separation of families.

            V:  Kamala Harris undid Trump’s border policies… opened the floodgates.  Fentanyl was coming in at record levels…  We’ll start with the criminals… One million of them.  Then don’t let the immigrants work at less than minimum wage; if there’s no work, they’ll go home.

Q:  the children?

            V:  Three million children have been lost by the government…

            W:  Kamala Harris was the Attorney General of a border state…  We had a tough coalition bill, the border patrol wanted it, the Wall Street Journal wanted it, but Trump stopped it.  Trump had four years to “build a wall” which he said Mexico would pay for, but only 2% was built and Mexico paid nothing.

            V:  We already have “child separation.”  Chldren are being used as drug mules.  All Harris did as VP was to undo Trump’s actions.

            W:  Vance vilified legal immigrants…

            V:  Housing, schools are overwhelmed.  Anyone can apply online for legal status!

(he kept talking overtime, until moderators cut off the microphones)

 Q:    Economy

            W:  Kamala Harris’s plan would create three million new houses.   Trump’s tariffs would cause a 20% tax hike.  The wealthy need to pay their fair share.  Economists from the Wharton School of Finance criticized Trump’s plan. 

            [NOTE:  Trump graduated from U Penn’s famed Wharton School.  See this fascinating article:  https://www.phillymag.com/news/2019/09/14/donald-trump-at-wharton-university-of-pennsylvania/   ]

            V:  She had the opportunity and didn’t do those “great things.”  Instead the cost of living has gone up.  Those economists “have Ph.D.s but no common sense.”

             W:  Trump’s failure to listen to experts during Co-Vid led to a worse recession.  Donald Trump hasn’t paid taxes in fifteen years and he brags about it.

            V:  “Experts” said we should shift manufacturing to other countries.  Donald Trump said no,  bring it back to the U.S.   “Listen to common sense, not experts.”

            W:  Donald Trump created the largest deficit in our history…  Farmers need fair trade partners.

Q:  Your leadership qualities

            W:  “I’m a knucklehead at times, but I always work for my community.”  

 Q:  (to Vance) what you said in 2016 comparing Trump to Hitler, and in 2020 criticizin his economic record.

            V:  “I was wrong.  He delivered for the American people.”   Biden did one good thing, he continued some of Trump’s tarriffs.

 Q:    Your views on abortion

            W:  (recounts Texas woman’s experience)  Donald Trump put this into motion.  Project 2025 would have a registry…  After Roe was overturned, maternal mortality in Texas skyrocketed.

            V:  My party must get people’s trust back… Make it easier to afford to have a baby…  Give more options.  We have a big country—let voters make decisions in each state.

            W:  (Mentions a woman who died trying to get to another state for an abortion) You supported a national ban after fifteen weeks.  You’ve changed your position.

            V:  No, I never supported a national ban.  “So many young women would love to have families.”  We need to make child care more accessible.  (Accuses Minnesota of being pro-abortion.)

            W:  We’re not pro-abortion, we’re pro-freedom.  Minnesota has one of the lowest teen pregnancy rates. 

            V:  Under Minnesota law, a doctor isn’t required to help a baby survive after a botched abortion.  Kamala Harris wants to force nuns to provide abortions.

            W:  Don’t distort the law.  That’s not what it says.  Things worked best when Roe was the law. 

Q:  Gun violence.  Sen. Vance, you oppose most gun laws.

            V:  Details matter.  90% of gun violence is done with illegal firearms…  from the Mexican drug cartel…  Protect schools with increased security:  stronger doors and locks, more officers.

            W:  My 17-year-old grandson witnessed a shooting in a community center… Hunters understand the second amendment… Minnesota has enhanced Red Flag laws.  Finland has lots of guns but not school shootings.  “Do you want your school to look like a fort?”

            V:  (expressed sympathy and concern about the boy witnessing a shooting)  We have high rates of substance abuse, mental health probles, in big cities.  “We must arrest the bad guys.” 

            W:  I was in the NRA; they used to teach gun safety.  The number one firearm death in Minnesota is rural suicide.  Children get a gun and kill themselves.  “Sometimes it’s just the guns.”

 Q:   The housing shortage.  Will handing out money to homebuyers drive up prices?

            W:  (talks about what “home” means to people)  A Veteran’s Home Loan was great. 

            V:  An increase in illegal aliens drives up the prices of homes.  Harris should have gotten something down before, “not sit around.”  We have unused federal lands that can be used for homes.  “We should be kicking out illegal imigrants who are taking the houses.”

            W:  Which lands?  The protected federal lands?  They are protected for a reason…

 Q:  (to Vance) Do you have evidence that migrants are the problem?

            V:  We have evidence!  We are a country of builders, explorers… Harris wants to throw people in jail if they don’t do exactly what she says…  We should not give (money) away to people without the right to be here.

            W:  “Congress, not the Vice President, writes the rules about housing.”

 Q:  about Health Care and pre-existing conditions

            V:  Of course.  People would have private choice under Donald Trump.  Under Kamala Harris, prescription drugs rose.  If states can experiment…  Donald Trump could have destroyed Obamacare but he didn’t.

            W:  I come from a major medical state (mentions the Mayo Clinic, 3M, etc.)  Donald Trump’s plan was to repeal the ACA at once.  Only Sen. John McCain saved it.  Kamala Harris lowered Medicare drug prices.  What Vance is explaining is pre-ACA, letting the insurance companies decide who to insure.

            V:  Keep the regulations to protect pre-existing conditions. The problem was that young healthy people were leaving the ACA exchanages.

Q:  America is one of the few developed countries without national paid leave for babies and illness.

            W:  Big companies in Minnesota and California usually have a great leave system; but others don’t.  Donald Trump will give tax breaks to the wealthy…  Caregivers need more pay…

Q:  About election fraud.  Sen. Vance, would you challenge an election?

            V:  Donald Trump said protest peacefully in 2020.  I said, debate peacefully.  The threat to democracy is the threat of censorship.  Kamala Harris wants to wants to silence people who engage in misinformation.  I welcome Tulsi Gabbard and Robert F. Kennedy, Jr….

            W:  This is troubling.  Donald Trump said he didn’t lose the election.  The election was adjudicted. For the first time in American history a president denied the election.  This has got to stop.

            V:  “It’s really rich to say that Donald Trump is a threat to democracy.”   Trump was peaceful…  Hillary Clinton said that in 2016 the Russians bought Facebook ads…  “I don’t buy it that only Republicans have this problem.”

            W:  “Censorship is book banning.  We are miles apart on this. (to Vance):  “Did he lose the 2020 election?”

            V:  “I’m focused on the future!”  Kamala Harris wants to silence peole for speaking their minds.  Let’s argue and then decide.

            W:  It’s like yelling Fire in a crowded theater.  “Donald Trump lost the election.  Where is the firewall if Donald Trump knows he can do anything?”  (directly to audience)  “America, you’ve got a clear choice.”

 (Summary)

            W:  I’m surprised as anybody at this coalition from Dick Cheney to Taylor Swift and all sorts of people in between… “We all know who Donald Trump is—he told us…  Senator Vance told us he will stand with Donald Trump’s agenda.”  We don’t need to be afraid.  Kamala Harris is centering you at the heart of her agenda.

            V:  We didn’t talk about energy…  I remember when my grandma didn’t have enough money to turn on the heat at night…  Kamala Harris’s policies have made it harder… she’s had three and a half years!  We have the greatest country in the world but people can’t fulfill their dreams under the Democrats.

==     ==      ==

 CBS commentators: 

Vance was different than usual…  Vance repeatedly said that Kamala Harris should have done things before…  He seems to be that Donald Trump founded the ACA…  He was cordial and compassionate…

 MSNBC panel:

(Joy Reid, Rachel Maddow, Lawrence O’Donnell, Nicole Wallace, Chris Hayes    Alex Wagner)

Joy - When running for the Senate, Vance said that abortion should be banned nationally and women stopped from travelling for an abortion.    80% of solar panels actually come from the USA, you can Google it.

Vance is incredibly smooth…  all bland lies…    People (online) complain that Walz didn’t “knock Vance out.”

Rachel - Walz destroyed Vance on health care. 

Lawrence - Vance didn’t answer the question about whether Trump won! “He said words but didn’t answer the questions.”  No answer about separating families, no answer about the national debt.  No answer about where to seize federal lands.

Nicole – Vance kept speaking over the women moderators.

Lawrence – Norah O’Donnell did correct him on climate change being scientifically proven, and Vance complained that they were “fact-checking.”

Chris – You saw that Vance had the ability to talk to people who disagree.

(Video clip of Norah O’Donnell trying to get Vance to answer the question about the election results, and Vance saying “I’m focused on the future”)

Lawrence – Vance would say anything to get to Trump’s position on any topic.

-----

(in the “Spin Room” after the debate, where everyone stands around talking)

Alex W interviews Gov. Pritzer of Illinois, who says,
This election is about the survival of democracy.  He’s a slick debater, who kept shifting.  Walz speaks in a way that ordinary people can understand.”

Alex – Vance seemed very rehearsed, trying to be agreeable.

Gov. Pritzer – “He hasn’t ever held a job for more than two years.  He wants power.”

-----

(  ?)  - That wasn’t the Gov. Walz I’ve seen, or the JD Vance I’ve seen. 

Nicole – Yes, they were too mild.  There was no contrast.

Rachel – There was good contrast about guns in schools.  Is style a problem?  Is Walz not “punchy” enough?  Was it a strategy?

Joy – This debate won’t move many people.  There are a few who wanted “details.”  It was the Democractic bse who wanted a fistfight!  Walz gave specifics on policy.  He made people comfortable. 

(  ?) – Lots of people are undecided on whether or not to vote!

(in the Spin Room again)

Alex W.  with former Sen. Claire McCaskill

Claire:  Vance is a better liar than Donald Trump.  Most Americans don’t see the Vice President as having power to make policy. 

----

Poll after debate as to “who won”          42% Vance

                                                            41% Walz

                                                            17% tie

 

 

Paralympics 2024

 

I watched a portion of the Paralympics events, but there was of course far less coverage on TV than for the Olympics.   Cable channels CNBC and USA broadcast live from Paris in the morning (evening in Paris, that is). 

One quickly becomes aware that Paralympics events have numerous subcategories, due to the many types and degrees of disabilities among the athletes.  Eventually, I decided to look for a simple guide to categories.  Not as easy as one would think!  There’s a long history on Wikipedia of how categories have changed over the years.  I finally found a thorough but clear guide on Yahoo Sports, which also explains that “sometimes when there is not an event available for a particular classification, athletes are given the option of competing up a class with competitors who are less impaired.”

Here, as an example, are the classifications for Running and Jumping from the International Paralympic Committee.  (T = Track).

T11-13             Vision impairment

T20                  Intellectual impairment

T35-38             Co-ordination impairments (hypertonia, ataxia and athetosis)

T40-41            Short stature

T42-44            Lower limb competing without prosthesis affected by limb deficiency, leg length difference, impaired muscle power or impaired passive range of movement

T45-47            Upper limb/s affected by limb deficiency, impaired muscle power or impaired passive range of movement

T61-64             Lower limb/s competing with prosthesis affected by limb deficiency and leg length difference

 See what I mean?   There is also detailed information on the categories and how athletes are placed in the New York Times: https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5729340/2024/08/29/paralympic-games-classification-guide/

 

Now for the wheelchair races.   These are not wheelchairs you see on the street!

 

 I wondered about the people’s legs, and found this explanation from the British newspaper, The Telegraph:  “They are normally tucked under the chair very tightly for aerodynamic movement. They are almost in a kneeling position.”

 There was a good-sized crowd and the announcers were knowledgeable and thorough.  This was the Women’s T-53 800 m. final.   Winners were, in order, from Switzerland, Germany, and China.  I later learned that the winner, Catherine Debrunner, went on to win five golds, making her the most successful para-athletics athlete of these games.  When watching T-54 wheelchair racing, I thought the tricky thing is maneuvering one’s wheelchair to pass another racer; a few minutes later, an announcer made the same comment.  Winners were from Switzerland (setting a new record), China and USA.

Even though American TV is definitely going to focus on any American athletes who have a chance of winning a medal, the live programming I saw was very fair.  However, the NBC recap on Friday night, Sept. 6, was quite a different story:  it was Americans, Americans, Americans, until one wondered if any other nation won a medal!  I gave up watching, as it was so annoying.

While racing in any form is fairly easy to understand, other sports can look quite different.  Wheelchair Rugby, for instance.  The semi-final match between the U.S. and Britain featured four players on each side.  They were mostly men, but one of the U.S. players was a woman.  To score, the player possessing the ball wheels into the goal area (end zone?) and gently drops the ball onto the floor.  This happens often, so scores rise quickly and can go back and forth, making an exciting game.  As in regular rugby, players can fall over--but here, it means that their wheelchair has fallen over also; often a wheel has to be re-attached by aides before the person can continue playing. 

The two announcers, both women, informed us that the female player on the American side is a college professor, one of the British players has a Ph.D. in History, and another player has a master’s degree in Accounting from the U. of Arizona.  One American player has no sensation in his hands and must look to see if he is holding the ball.  The USA won this match and went on to  the finals, where they lost to Japan.  The final results were Japan, USA, Australia.  (Doesn’t it seem strange that England did not medal in rugby, of all things?!) 

 On to swimming.  In my opinion, swimming is boring to watch, no matter what type of athletes are competing.  The intrigue in these games is when you can see that athletes have an obvious disability and you wonder how they can do what they do.  (Swimming blind, for example--an announcer wondered how they stay in their lane.)  The favorite, and gold medalist,  in the 50 meter backstroke was Ally Challis, from Great Britain, who lost the lower parts of her arms and legs due to meningitis as a child.

Goal Ball is a unique sport.  Players sit three on a side, and one rolls the ball toward the other side’s net, while the three opponents try to block the ball.  The requirement is limited vision, and players wear blindfolds—I mean. “opaque eyeshades”-- to ensure that they all equal.    This sport was invented in 1946 to help with rehabilitation of wounded veterans.  Clever, yes, but not very interesting to watch.   In the end (matches I did not see), Japan won the men’s Gold and Turkey won the women’s Gold.

Watching the Women’s 100 meter breast stroke, SB7, I was puzzled by one of the national designations:  NPA.  Well, this stands for Neutral Paralympic Athletes.  These are the athletes from Russia and Belarus.  Those two countries are banned from the Olympics on account of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine (and Belarus’s support thereof), but individual athletes have been permitted to take part.  In this particular event, an NPA athlete, Mariia Pavlova,  broke the world record and won gold.  The silver went to a British girl, Iona Winnifrith, age—hold your breath—thirteen (13)!

 I happened upon the finals of the S5 50-meter butterfly.  The S5 category includes  “Swimmers with good use of arms, but no torso and leg movement. Also includes swimmers with some limb loss” as defined in the Sporting News.   It is quite something to see swimmers with no arms!   Chinese athletes swept the medals for this event, for the third time.  There’s a really nice homage to winner Guo Jincheng on a website called iscaninfo.com, but I’m unable to copy from that website (and even clicking anywhere on the page links one to some completely different site).

On September 5^th, I saw women’s Sitting Volleyball, the semi-final featuring the U.S. vs. Brazil.  At least this time, the announcers explained the categories:  BS1 = permanent amputee; BS2 = loss of strength and flexibility.  Many of the players were missing the lower part of one leg; some have two legs and can stand, or move on their knees.  The rules require players to be sitting whenever they touch the ball.  You do see a great variety in players at these games: one of the American women is hugely fat; one of the Brazilian women sported yellow eyelids and vivid crimson lips, a very strange look.  In the end, the USA edged out the Brazilians 25 to 22.

The swimming event 4 x 50 Medley, F5, was a relay with swimmers from many countries-- China, Japan, Ukraine, Italy, USA, etc.—and many body types.  In the end, the Chinese team came in first; the USA edged out Ukraine by half a second.  (I hate split second race decisions, whether in swimming or horse racing; I think at that point, it should just be a tie!) 

Even though I saw only a few events, I definitely recommend watching the Paralympic events, and will make more of an effort next time.