Endorsements 2016

The following are the Official Endorsements for the General Election in November 2016.


PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES

Donald J. Trump

UNITED STATES, REPRESENTATIVE 3rd DISTRICT

Dr. N. Eugene Cleek

UNITED STATES, REPRESENTATIVE 6th DISTRICT

Robert Evans

UNITED STATES, REPRESENTATIVE 7th DISTRICT

Scott Jones

UNITED STATES, REPRESENTATIVE 9th DISTRICT

Antonio Amador

STATE SENATOR 1st SENATE DISTRICT

Ted Gaines

STATE SENATOR 3rd SENATE DISTRICT

Greg Coppes

STATE SENATOR 5th SENATE DISTRICT

Alan Nakanishi

MEMBER OF THE STATE ASSEMBLY, 6th ASSEMBLY DISTRICT

Kevin Kiley

MEMBER OF THE STATE ASSEMBLY, 7th ASSEMBLY DISTRICT

Ryan Brown

MEMBER OF THE STATE ASSEMBLY, 8th ASSEMBLY DISTRICT

Nicholas Bloise

MEMBER OF THE STATE ASSEMBLY, 9th ASSEMBLY DISTRICT

Tim Gorsulowsky

MEMBER OF THE STATE ASSEMBLY, 11th ASSEMBLY DISTRICT

Dave Miller


SACRAMENTO LOCAL CANDIDATES

SACRAMENTO BOARD OF SUPERVISOR DIST. 4

Sue Frost

CITRUS HEIGHTS CITY COUNCIL

Marcel Weiland

NATOMAS SCHOOL DISTRICT

Micah Grant

ELK GROVE CITY COUNCIL

Steve Detrick

LOS RIOS COMMUNITY COLLEGE

Ralph Merletti

ELK GROVE UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT

Nikita Kostyuk

RANCH CORDOVA CITY COUNCIL

David Sander

SMUD

Christina Polley (District 1)

COSUMNES COMMUNITY SERVICE DISTRICT

Michelle Orrock

ELK GROVE CITY MAYOR

Kevin Spease

FAIR OAKS RECREATION & PARK

Tab Berg


CALIFORNIA STATE BALLOT INITIATIVES

Proposition 51: $9 Billion School Bond

Recommendation: YES

               Rationale: Allegedly Funds K-12 schools and Community Colleges

Proposition 52: Hospital Tax Increase (“Fee Extension”)

Recommendation: YES

              Rationale: State Fees on Hospitals. Federal Medi-Cal Matching Funds. Initiative Statutory and Constitutional Amendment

Recommendation: YES

             Rationale: Revenue Bonds. Statewide Voter Approval

Recommendation: YES

             Rationale: It would prohibit the Legislature from passing any bill unless published on Internet for 72 hours before the vote. It requires the Legislature to record its proceedings and post the recordings on Internet, as it generally does already.

Recommendation:  NO

             Rationale: Prop 30 is a tax payer ripoff and has been opposed by the Howard Jarvis Tax Payers Association, California Tax Payers Association, The California Tax Payers Association, and more…

Recommendation: NO

             Rationale: This is a massive $2 per pack tax increase on cigarettes, with an equivalent tax increase on cigars, electronic cigarettes, and other tobacco products.  This is a fraudulent misrepresentation allocating only 13% of proposed revenues to schools.

Recommendation: NO

              Rationale:  This measure was supposedly designed by Governor Brown to make it easier to release criminals from prison, particularly with regard to nonviolent felons. It would require judges to hold hearings to determine whether to try juveniles as adults, and it would develop a good behavior, parole-and-sentence credit system for prisoners. The net impact of this soft-on-crime approach would be to release more criminals onto our streets, despite the recent crime wave associated with Proposition 47.

Recommendation: NO

               Rationale:This measure would return California to the dark days of the past when hundreds of thousands of students were trapped in Spanish-only classrooms, condemned to a life of poverty as second-class citizens on the fringes of society. Experience has taught us that English language instruction is the fastest way to force every public school student to become proficient in English and ready to fully participate in our English-speaking society.

 Proposition 59: Advisory Measure concerning Citizens United

Recommendation: NO

               Rationale: This non-binding advisory measure would express public support for overturning the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Citizens United v. Federal Elections Commission (2010).

Proposition 60: Mandatory Condom Use in Adult Films

Recommendation: NO

                 Rationale: This initiative requires the use of condoms by adult film performers.  More significantly, the initiative creates an extensive regulatory framework and a new state bureaucracy to oversee adult files, requiring, for example, film producers to pay for performer vaccinations, testing, and medical examinations.

Recommendation: NO

                 Rationale: This initiative would allegedly fix the state’s price for prescription drugs as the lowest price paid by United States Department of Veterans Affairs.

Recommendation: NO

                 Rationale:  This initiative would repeal the death penalty in California and it would apply retroactively to existing death sentences.

Recommendation: NO

Rationale: This initiative would require a burdensome background check from the California Department of Justice for anyone seeking to purchase ammunition.  It would prohibit mere possession of ammunition magazines that hold over ten rounds, including those that were “grandfather in” or permitted by prior bans.  It would even punish the victims of firearm theft by turning them into criminals if they failed to promptly report the theft.

Recommendation: NO

              Rationale: This initiative would legalize the recreational use of marijuana in California.  It would impose a new tax on sales and cultivation, as well as a new licensing scheme.

Proposition 65: Bag Ban, Re-direction of Bag Revenue

Recommendation: YES

Rationale: This confusing initiative was placed on the ballot in response to the Legislature’s corrupt scheme to require retail stores to charge ten cents for paper bags and then keep all the money collected for themselves.

Recommendation: YES

Rationale: Streamlines and reforms the procedures governing challenges to death sentences, potentially speeding up the process of implementing the death penalty and saving millions of dollars, without sacrificing the right to appeal.

Proposition 67: Referendum on the Bag Ban

Recommendation: NO

Note: This is a referendum to overturn Senate Bill 270 from 2014, which was a law that was passed by the Legislature and signed by the Governor.  That means that a “yes” vote at the ballot box will uphold the law that the Legislature passed and a “no” vote at the ballot box will defeat it.

                   Rationale: Customers and merchants should have the freedom to decide by means of the free market what sort of bags to use, what they should cost, who should pay for them, how sturdy they should be, etc. Furthermore, expensive, bacteria-infested, multi-use bags may actually be worse for the environment.


SACRAMENTO LOCAL BALLOT INITIATIVES

MEASURE “B” — Double the Transportation Tax

NO

Measure G — school parcel tax hike

NO