词条 | 2012 California Proposition 32 |
释义 |
DetailsProposition 32 would have done the following:
Editorial opinionsThe North County Times states that Proposition 32 "does nothing to stifle unions' political voices -- despite claims to the contrary. Prop. 32 simply institutes an opt-in system for each employee's political donations." . The Los Angeles Daily News notes that Proposition 32 leaves the decision on how to contribute political funds to workers, not unions. In other words, "unions will still have the power of numbers. Their members will continue to be able to mobilize in support of candidates and political stands, and to donate money on their own, but it would be their decision." According to the Press Enterprise, "the meat of Prop. 32 is a ban on the use of payroll deductions to finance political spending. That provision targets one of the largest special interests in California politics: public employee unions. Automatic deductions from paychecks are the primary way unions fund political campaigns — and ending that financing mechanism would ease unions’ stranglehold on political decisions." In mid-August 2012, Los Angeles Times columnist Michael Hiltzik wrote that the proposition would exempt "such common business structures as LLCs, partnerships and real estate trusts", that the drafters included "conservative attorneys Thomas Hiltachk and Michael Capaldi", and concluded by citing a Center for Responsive Politics statistic that "business outspends organized labor 15 to 1". Supporters say the proposition allows workers to decide where their money is spent; opponents say it is a bill designed for corporations to legally fund millions of dollars to their candidates.[3] The Wall Street Journal published a late-August 2012 profile of pro-proposition campaigner and former Democratic state legislator Gloria Romero who said that unions were too powerful in Sacramento and "must be brought down" before they cause the state to become bankrupt.[4] Romero said it was "telling" that advertisements against the measure "don't mention unions."[4] On Labor Day weekend, political science professor and associate vice president of the California Faculty Association Andy Merrifield and League of Women Voters representative Dee Dee Bridges wrote against the proposition as "a particularly cynical ballot initiative ... to deny participation in the political process to working people".[5] References1. ^{{cite news|last=Maciag|first=Mike|title=California Unions Help Defeat Ballot Measure Targeting Campaign Donations|url=http://www.governing.com/blogs/politics/unions-defeat-california-proposition-32.html|accessdate=10 November 2012|newspaper=Governing|date=November 7, 2012}} 2. ^{{cite web |url=http://vig.cdn.sos.ca.gov/2012/general/pdf/32-title-summ-analysis.pdf|title=Proposition 32 - Official Title and Summary|publisher=California Secretary of State |accessdate=October 17, 2012}} 3. ^Hiltzik, Michael, "Proposition 32: A fraud to end all frauds", Los Angeles Times, August 19, 2012. Larry Sand, a retired teacher who taught for more than 28 years in California and New York, responded on August 24, 2012. Retrieved 2012-09-03. 4. ^1 Finley, Allysia, [https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10000872396390444443504577601664135014368?mod=opinion_newsreel "Gloria Romero: The Trials of a Democratic Reformer"], Wall Street Journal, August 31, 2012. Retrieved 2012-09-03. 5. ^Merrifield, Andy, and Dee Dee Bridges, "Guest Opinion: California's main threat to labor: Prop. 32", September 2, 2012. Retrieved 2012-09-03. External links
3 : 2012 California ballot propositions|Campaign finance reform in the United States|Initiatives in the United States |
随便看 |
|
开放百科全书收录14589846条英语、德语、日语等多语种百科知识,基本涵盖了大多数领域的百科知识,是一部内容自由、开放的电子版国际百科全书。