@mcc I just looked up Question 5 and, oh no… it's the Gann Limit. One of California's worst ideas.

For folks wondering why it's bad: If state expenses increase faster than the prescribed limit (say, because of population growth, or dismantling of Federal programs, etc.), the state budget *cannot* adapt to that reality. Things have to be cut, *even if the state can afford it*.

As a lifelong Californian, I second your recommendation. Hell No on question 5.

@mcc
My voting:
Q1 - update public records law - yes
Q2 - public defender collective bargaining - yes (go unions!)
Q3 - top two ballot - no (ranked choice in parties)
Q4 - same day voter registration- yes
Q5 - limit state revenue collection limits - no
Q6 - conservation fund - yes
Q7 - allow family house on 5000sqft lot - no (lots of nuance to consider)
Q8 - repeal recreational MJ sales - no
Q9 - keep gun laws (no roll back) - yes

@mcc "I have lived in your future. And it is called CALIFORNIA." would be a great opening line for a novel

Let me explain the TOP-TWO PRIMARY, which Question 3 introduces.

"First Past the Post" is broken. Most of the lines on my ballot have only a Democrat running and no one else. That's silly. There are lots of ways to fix it— ranked voting, approval voting— and we should pick one.

"Top Two" is the *only* worse thing. It makes the split vote problem *worse*. It means rather than getting to vote your conscience in the primary, you have to vote strategically in the primary *and* the general.

(2/3)