Article View: misc.activism.progressive
Article #4047ENDORSEMENTS: San Francisco Green Party
From: Jym Dyer
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 00:00
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 00:00
51 lines
3270 bytes
3270 bytes
=o= Below are the San Francisco Green Party's endorsements
for the upcoming election. As a staunch proponent of the
Green value of direct grassroots democracy, I'm listing the
propositions before the candidates; and in keeping with the
Green values of decentralization and community-based economics,
I'm listing the candidates in order from local to national.
Yep, the big surprise President/Vice President endorsement is
listed last!
<_Jym_>
=============8<=============Cut-Here=============8<=============
Prop A -- YES -- Sustainable housing.
Prop B -- NO -- No parking garage in Golden Gate Park.
Prop C -- YES -- Decent pensions for city retirees.
Prop D -- YES -- Decent pensions for firefighters.
Prop E -- NO -- Don't end civil service.
Prop F -- YES -- Raise supervisors' salaries from $24,000/year.
Prop G -- YES -- Support district elections.
Prog H -- YES -- Support preference voting.
Prop I -- NO -- Police and fire personnel grab.
Prop J -- NO -- No taxi company giveaways.
Prop 204 -- NO -- Bonds to support mediocre water projects.
Prop 205 -- NO -- Not another prison, please!
Prop 206 -- No Position
Prop 207 -- No Position
Prop 208 -- YES -- Campaign finance reform.
Prop 209 -- NO! -- Don't end affirmative action.
Prop 210 -- YES -- Raise the minimum wage.
Prop 211 -- YES -- Protect your right to have your day in court.
Prop 212 -- No Position (But see NOTE below.)
Prop 213 -- NO -- Limitation of recovery for uninsured drivers.
Prop 214 -- YES -- Health care reform.
Prop 215 -- YES -- Medical use of marijuana.
Prop 216 -- YES -- Health care reform.
Prop 217 -- YES -- Stop the tax cut for the rich.
Prop 218 -- NO -- Don't eliminate more local services.
BART Board -- Tom Radulovich
Board of Education -- Larry Kisinger
Vice President of the United States -- Winona La Duke
President of the United States -- Ralph Nader
=============>8=============Cut-Here=============>8=============
NOTE: I find it a bit incomplete for the S.F. Green Party to
support 208 but to have "no position" on 212. The main reason
they support 208 is that it doesn't have the flaws that 212
has, which could in some cases weaken campaign finance reform.
However, if 212 receives more votes than 208, the flaws could
override provisions in 208. It seems to me that to really
support 208, you've got to oppose 212. -- Jym
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<Jym.13Oct1996.2220@igc.org>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!unknown!not-for-mailShow Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: fb58e,dd8d1cf717d88066,start X-Google-Attributes: gidfb58e,public X-Google-Thread: 102fd5,dd8d1cf717d88066,start X-Google-Attributes: gid102fd5,public X-Google-Thread: 110a63,dd8d1cf717d88066,start X-Google-Attributes: gid110a63,public X-Google-Thread: f7bbd,dd8d1cf717d88066,start X-Google-Attributes: gidf7bbd,public X-Google-Thread: 10df74,dd8d1cf717d88066,start X-Google-Attributes: gid10df74,public From: Jym Dyer <jym@igc.org> Subject: ENDORSEMENTS: San Francisco Green Party Date: 1996/10/14 Message-ID: <Jym.13Oct1996.2220@igc.org> X-Deja-AN: 189256677 distribution: ca followup-to: alt.politics.greens,ca.environment,ba.politics organization: The Group W Bench keywords: environment newsgroups: misc.activism.progressive,talk.environment,alt.politics.greens,ca.environment,ba.politics