Next month, Californians will be urged to go the polls to choose between an array of confusing ballot propositions. Call it what you will – Swiss democracy California style, direct government or an attempt to bypass a sometimes uncooperative legislature – the people of California don’t seem too enthusiastic about having to go to the polls again: 2005 was supposed to be a rest year before Arnold’s likely re-election bid in 2006, the year when the politicians might do their job instead of asking the voters to sort out their differences for them.
But regardless of what the voters think, the special election is happening and supporters of the various measures have been out flexing their muscles. And in some cases, their muscles are preternaturally large, even by the standards prevalent in Californian politics.
We get to pay for drug company profit margins that include an amazing amount of “marketing” built in! Even if that marketing includes influencing special elections.
Take the differing fortunes of the extremely similar yet critically different propositions 78 and 79.
Proposition 78 establishes a discount plan for prescription drugs. Under the measure, drug companies could choose whether to offer their pharmaceuticals at reduced prices to patients below a certain income threshold.
Proposition 79 is also a prescription drug discount programme. But under prop 79, the participation is obligatory, not voluntary. Should a company refuse to offer its drugs at a discount, its product might be struck off the state’s list of approved drug supplies.
Here’s the fun bit. Up to the end of last month, supporters of the two propositions had raised $82m to argue their cases. The backers of prop 79 had raised $1.8m, and spent the same amount, mainly getting the measure on to the ballot. (In fact, supporters of prop 79 had spent $36,000 more than they had raised.) Supporters of the measure include public service unions and consumer groups.
Opponents of prop 79, meanwhile, had spent $24m putting forward their arguments. These prodigious fundraisers, battling to keep the drug companies’ participation in discount prescription plans voluntary, go under the rather nifty name of Californians Against the Wrong Prescription – Sponsored by the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (that’s Phrma for short).
Over at proposition 78, it is a similar story. There, two groups run by Phrma have raised $55.8m and spent $46.3m. Their opponents have raised and spent, well, nothing.
While all of the donors to the measure backed by the consumer groups and unions are based in California, only 6% of those behind proposition 78 are based in the state.
Imagine what a difference the pharmaceutical companies could make if they put their $80m of campaign money to some constructive use.
What consturctive use do yo have in mind? Spend the money for research on drugs which activists will then demand for free?
Prop 77 – the redistricting reform – is probably the most important thing we as Californians will vote on in our lifetime.
Nearly all the members of our state (and federal) legislature come from safe seats, where they are guaranteed to be reelected. The incentive is to kowtow to the extremist base, right or left, that got you elected, rather than moving to the center and risking upseting them.
Putting the drawing of electoral districts into the hands of independent, retired judges may actually restore some competitiveness to our politics, where politicians have to appeal to the most number of voters, by moving to the center, compromising, and actually governing.
Governing involves solving problems, even if the solutions aren’t perfect, not screaming into the wind and treating our society’s problems like political footballs, punting them down the field from election to election.
This is the source of all the partisanship we see today. There is no incentive to be moderate, when you can win based solely on the votes of your most extreme supporters.
It’s hugely important, and no one seems to notice. Only a non-career-politician with some cajones would have the courage to take this power away from politicians, and he gets no credit whatsoever. We’re distracted by the new sacred cows, nurses, teachers, and firefighters.
Fuck the nurses, and the firefighters, and teachers. All they care about is their paychecks. Stop your goddamn bitching and get in line; we’ve all got problems. We want control of our government back, and that’s a lot more important than you.
People really believe there is health care in US?? Who are you and what are you smoking. Because I can’t afford our “World’s best health care”, but I would sure like to smoke whatever you are.
The big problem with health care is all the insurance companies. Not because they profit, but they make it easy for people to spend more money on health care. As more money is spent, price go up. One good solution is for the government to take away the health care tax deduction.
Ok, some of these comments have set my butt aflame. How self righteous, hypocritical, assholes can make some statements, as they have, and still miss the whole point of the story.
Civilization has to be built on fairness. Many times in history, your “Let them eat cake” attitude has led to massive civil unrest, rebellion, and revolutions. What gives you the unbridled right to tell people that they have no right to live? And who gave you the right to live? Is it money that gives you that right? Well what is going to happen when someone takes your money and leaves you in the same position as the masses you have been denying?
Here we have a democratic institution being hijacked. That is the problem. The subject matter is irrelevant. If democracy can be bought with money, or a gun, then it is not democracy. The forces opposing these democratic initiatives do not live there. And as we would no more allow Saudi Arabian or Korean money to warp our federal elections, this should not be allowed to happen either.
If you disagree with the proposition, then vote NO. It is spelled D-E-M-O-C-R-A-C-Y. It means the peoples will or a government of the people. Corporations do not come into that equation.
The votes are being bought. Because they have supplied the sole information people are allowed to see, there can be no honest thought or discussion; they have effectively silenced the opposition. The reason it happened is because the proponents have been so outspent by the out-of-state companies that they have no money left to counter the other’s propaganda.
I understand why you think this is fair. You support Bush and his illegal grab for power. It only stands to reason that you would support another illegal or immoral power grab too to further your agenda.