CA: Ballot Measures for November 8 Special Election

BoifromTroy has a summary of Arnold's positions on the eight ballot measures voters will face on the November 8 special election ("Arnold's folly"). I have put links to the full text of each of the ballot measures (in PDF format) from the Secretary of State's office. The bottom line is that the Governor has called for the expenditure of more than 40 million dollars to have a statewide special election in 2005, seven months before there is a statewide election already scheduled for June 2006. I say that the presumption should be against all these ballot measures.

Ballot Measure (Brief Title) Governor MadProfessah
Proposition 73 (parental notification) : YES NO
Proposition 74 (delay teacher tenure)  : YES NO
Proposition 75 (union dues change)   : YES NO
Proposition 76 (school spending cap) : YES NO
Proposition 77 (redistricting)       : YES NO
Proposition 78 (Pharma's Rx drug plan)  : YES NO
Proposition 79 (discount Rx drug plan)  : NO YES
Proposition 80 (electricity regulation) : NO NO

So, I don't disagree with the Governor 100% of the time, just 87.5% (7 out of 8).
I find it very disturbing that the Governor is supporting Proposition 78 which is really just a fake initiative sponsored by big pharmaceutical companies to try and confuse voters with Proposition 79, which is a real discount prescription drug plan and includes prohibitions on drug profiteering. Also, Proposition 77 sounds like a good idea (I agree the legislature shouldn't be drawing it's own voting district boundaries) but I disagree with the notion of handing this power to "retired judges." I think best solution is a non-partisan commision of experts jointly selected by the Governor and Legislature. However, there's no way that California should do a non-partisan reidistricting before populous red states like Texas and Florida have. Proposition 77, the so-called "Live Within Our Means" act would modify the Proposition 98 funding formula for schools. It would also impose a cap on the rate of increase of government spending which would end up devastating many many social programs on which the most needy Californians rely. Just Vote No!