My 2018 Midterm Election Ballot Choices

My midterm election ballot has exactly SIXTY candidates, propositions and measures. I spent a couple dozen hours researching my choices, reading newspaper endorsements, video interviews, voting guides, etc. This is not a straight-ticket party ballot as I considered each position independently and voted for candidates from both parties and independents. 

Some of the resources I found helpful:

• http://voterguide.sos.ca.gov/ - Government site. I think it’s the equivalent of what they mail out. I can’t find any local candidate stuff though.
• https://www.ballot.fyi - Fun/visual breakdown of the propositions. No candidate info
• https://elections.calmatters.org/2018/
• https://sandiegofreepress.org/2018/10/san-diego-progressive-voter-guide-november-2018/ A very partisan site that gives who progressives should vote for
• https://couragevoterguide.org/ - A partisan site, but nice visual breakdown of how organizations are endorsing different ballot proposals. No info on any candidates
• https://votesaveamerica.com/ballot - Really nice tech savvy way to get bite sized information on state and federal candidates and proposals. No local stuff

Here's who I'm voting for and why:

• Governor - John H. Cox vs Gavin Newsom

  Newsom is the current Lieutenant Governor. He has basically been lined up for this job for years (probably would have won 8 years ago if not for Jerry Brown). According to the LA times, six year CA resident Cox is "comically unqualified". In a 2007 presidential debate, Cox did say that gay rights could "open the floodgates to polygamy and bestiality" and that "transvestites" wanting to be teachers was a problem. Cox is against single payer health care, for repealing gas tax and vehicle registration fees. Hasn’t taken a position on net neutrality. Not sure I can really trust any of his positions… just talks about how California is a mess and how "help is on the way". Illinois snowbird who has a habit of running (and losing) for offices all over the place. There are things not to like about Newsom, but I just can't vote for Cox. LA times has a good article on it: http://www.latimes.com/la-ol-opinion-newsletter-gavin-newsom-governor-20181020-htmlstory.html My vote: Gavin Newsom

• Lieutenant Governor - Ed Hernandez vs Eleni Kounalakis

  Eleni is no on prop 10. Ed is undecided on 10. The democratic party marching orders seem to be yes on 10, so I respect that Eleni is a no because it doesn’t seem like such a good idea. Eleni’s family spent $11M on campaign. Eleni seems to be more on the ball and smarter, former Ambassador under Obama. My vote: Eleni Kounalakis

• Secretary of State - Alex Padilla vs Mark P. Meuser

  Meuser seems to be a voting fraud conspiracy theorist without data to back it up. “Someone told me their dead grandpa voted” is not a good way to govern. Padilla talks about decentralization and paper trails. My vote: Alex Padilla

• Controller - Konstantinos Roditis vs Betty T. Yee

  LA Times gives a really good endorsement for Betty Yee. Particularly concerning is her opponent doesn’t know how the position works. http://www.latimes.com/opinion/editorials/la-ed-endorsement-yee-controller-20180913-story.html My vote: Betty Yee

• Treasurer - Greg Conlon vs Fiona Ma

  Not sure… they both seem pretty good. I like Conlon’s push to reform CA’s pension system and remove the $800 fee for businesses. Ma seems to be qualified too. LA Times endorses Ma but not a super strong argument on this one: http://www.latimes.com/opinion/editorials/la-ed-fiona-ma-treasurer-endorsement-20180914-story.html Just found Conlon’s twitter. He’s an “early trump supporter” and has retweeted #MAGA bullshit. My vote: Fiona Ma

• Attorney General - Steven C Bailey vs Xavier Becerra

  Becerra is standing up against the Trump administration. Bailey is facing some ethics violation charges (although they do seem relatively minor and conceivably politically motivated). LA Times endorses Becerra. My vote: Xavier Becerra

• Insurance Commissioner - Ricardo Lara vs Steve Poizner

  Steve Poizner had the job in the past and appears to be more qualified and experienced. Republican turned independent trying to show that you can have an apolitical path to office. LA Times and San Diego UT endorses him.http://www.latimes.com/opinion/editorials/la-ed-poizner-endorsement-20181003-story.html My vote: Steve Poizner

• Member, State Board of Equalization 4th District - Mike Schaeffer vs Joel Anderson

  They both seem really shitty. Schaeffer is a notorious slumlord, disbarred for fraud and involved in some taxi scandal, Anderson threatened to hit a female lobbyist… http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-pol-ca-joel-anderson-complaint-20180821-story.html http://articles.latimes.com/1986-08-31/magazine/tm-14766_1_michael-schaefer They're running for board of equalization which was recently stripped of its power. I'm not going to give either my vote. My vote: Abstaining

• US Senator - Dianne Feinstein vs Kevin De Leon

  De Leon seems a little amateurish… should probably stick with experience in Washington. My vote: Dianne Feinstein

• United States Representative 52nd District - Scott Peters vs Omar Qudrat

  I'm sure you know where you stand, but I can’t currently support republicans in national races. My vote: Scott Peters

• Member of the State Assembly 77th district - Brian Maienschein vs Sunda Gover

  Mainschein is the incumbent. Supports repealing the gas tax. Seems competent. Gover is a real estate agent with a degree in history. She seems fine too. This one seems pretty hotly contested. Gover has been sending me lots of lame negative ads on Maienschein. My vote: Undecided but leaning Brian Maienschein

• Associate Justice of the Supreme Court - Carol Corrigan, Leondra Kruger

  Corrigan dissented against marriage equality twice… but is gay herself? Seems like kind of pragmatic/logistical dissensions though (This should be a question for voters, not judges). LA Times gives a nice endorsement for both. Seems they're more known for competence than ideology which is a good thing on the court. “Retention votes support independent courts that make decisions based on the law and not on popular sentiment or political partisanship.” My vote: Yes on both

• Fourteen Associate Justices, Court of Appeals - Joan Kathleen Irion, Judith L. Haller, Richard D. Huffman, Patricia D. Benke, Cynthia Aaron, William S. Dato, Patricia Guerrero, Douglas P. Miller, Richard T. Fields, Art W. Mckinster, Marsha G. Slough, David A. Thompson, Raymond J Ikola, Thomas M. Goethals

  So, apparently we have a “hybrid” judicial system where judges are appointed by elected officials then reconfirmed during the first gubernatorial election then every 12 years after that. Given the age of outrage and super partisanship of our times, I don’t really love the idea of voting up/down based on who nominated who. Some of these judges seem to be more ideological than others (in both directions) but I’d prefer judges to stick to judging impartially rather than amplifying their ideology to play to bases or whatever. I like the idea of having a vote as a type of emergency/ejection seat kinda thing, but in the face of gross negligence I think judges should be able to do their jobs without worrying about partisan pandering. I haven't found any gross negligence among these 14 so I’m voting yes on all. This is a really thoughtful breakdown on the individuals running and how you might vote if you wanted to be more proactive about getting ideology off the bench: http://www.orangejuiceblog.com/2018/10/2018-vote-1-gregs-recommendations-on-judicial-races/ My vote: Yes on all

• Judge of Superior Court no 37

  Kreep is a guy that seriously needs to get kicked off the bench. Questioned Obama’s birth in Hawaii, was subject to a rare “severe public censure” in 2017 by the state Commission on Judicial Performance for 29 charges that reflected “a pattern of misconduct that demonstrates a lack of judicial temperament,”.http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/opinion/editorials/sd-matt-brower-gary-kreep-judge-20181009-story.html My vote: Matt Brower

• Superintendent of Public Instruction - Marshall Tuck vs Tony K. Thurmond

  Both Tuck and Thurmond seem like good guys who agree on most stuff. The big difference seems to be their approach towards charter schools. I think I come down on Thurmond’s side who says they need more oversight on their spending. Also seems to be more supportive of equal pay in underfunded schools. http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-pol-ca-road-map-thurmond-tuck-schools-charters-unions-20181021-story.html LA Times endorses him too: http://www.latimes.com/opinion/endorsements/la-ed-endorsement-superintendent-public-instruction-20180423-story.html My vote: Tony K. Thurmond

• San Diego Community College District Member, Board of Trustees District A - Diane Hickman vs Maria Nieto Senour

  Senour has been doing the job well for almost 30 years. Not sure Hickman has a good enough platform to unseat her.http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/education/sd-me-communitycolleges-election-20181005-story.html My vote: Maria Nieto Senour

• San Diego Community College District Member, Board of Trustees District C - Loren Seth Casuto vs Craig Milgrim

  Milgrim is the incumbent. Casuto wants to get costs down and transfer/graduation rates up. My vote: Undecided

• SDCC Board of Trustees, District E - David Alvarez vs Sean Elo

  Alvarez is on the city council and hitting his term limit. Seems to admit that he’s just doing this as a gap to another job. He does seem to present more of a plan with what he would want to do. Elo seems to be a competent go-getter who might stay at the job longer. My vote: Undecided

• San Diego Unified School District Member, Board of Education District B - Tom Keliinoi vs Kevin Richard Beiser

  My vote: Undecided

• San Diego Unified School District Member, Board of Education District C - Marcia Nordstrom vs Michael G McQuary

  My vote: Undecided

• Member, Board of Supervisors District No. 4 - Nathan Fletcher vs Bonnie Dumanis

  Fletcher seems competent. Dumanis seems to have a relatively lengthy history of making bad decisions (prosecuting innocent black kids, taking illegal donations and writing recommendation for that illegal donor's son whom she never met) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bonnie_Dumanis#Controversies My vote: Nathan Fletcher

• City of San Diego, Member City Council District No. 6 - Chris Cate vs Tommy Hough

  Cate is the incumbent. I've read a lot about both of them and Cate seems to be a smart guy who makes thoughtful decisions. Hough is a former radio personality who seems to bash Cate a lot but I don't see better ideas coming from him. My vote: Chris Cate

• Prop 1

  $4B in bonds to create more affordable housing… I’m for affordable housing, but against debt that is just paid by the taxpayer and benefits the wealthy who are buying the bonds. But it's relatively small (both debt and help). A good comment below goes into more detail on why a "no" vote makes more sense here. My vote: Undecided

• Prop 2

  Let’s the “millionaire tax” already in place be used for housing for people with mental illness in addition to what it’s already been going for. Seems silly this needs to come to the voters. Easy yes. My vote: Yes

• Prop 3

  We just passed two propositions to do almost the exact same thing written by legislators. This seems to be here thanks to special interests who will benefit greatly from it. All the newspapers are endorsing a no.http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/opinion/endorsements/sd-proposition-3-water-bond-20180911-story.html My vote: No

• Prop 4

  It’s basically a small amount of money that helps fund medical care for those in the greatest need. Every paper endorses this. http://www.latimes.com/opinion/editorials/la-ed-yes-on-proposition-4-20180925-story.html My vote: Yes

• Prop 5

  Basically gives everyone over 55 keep their super low property taxes whenever they move. It is likely to increase houses for sale, pushing prices housing prices down. But at the cost of tax revenue… Newspapers are split. The big problem is it gives a tax break to people who move UP in house. So basically old rich property owners get to keep this crazy low tax rate. I don’t like the property tax laws in CA, but this isn’t the solution.http://www.latimes.com/opinion/endorsements/la-ed-proposition-5-real-estate-20181008-story.html My vote: No

• Prop 6

  Repeal the gas tax. I actually hate that we can only fund road and bridge infrastructure through a gas tax because it’s so regressive. (Poor people pay a huge percentage of income, while rich people pay almost nothing). But it seems like repealing this tax would be devastating for our economy/infrastructure. So I guess we have to vote “no” on this until something better comes along. http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/opinion/editorials/sd-prop-6-gas-tax-california-20180920-story.html My vote: No

• Prop 7

  Move to daylight savings time year round. (Meaning it stays light later in the winter). This would only happen if the federal congress lets us. This is an easy yes for me because I would much rather have light later. Studies seem to indicate it either mixed or saves lives from traffic accidents and the such. My vote: Yes

• Prop 8

  This is the really contentious dialysis clinic thing. It tries to impose “revenue limits” on dialysis clinics. It’s just such a stupid rule that would cause more red tape and big profitable clinics to jump through hoops and get richer in some other way. I’m a no as is every newspaper. My vote: No

• Prop 10

  A “yes” vote basically will let all localities establish rent control if they want… Lots of democrats seem to be for it. It would push down housing prices and maybe make it less attractive to build. I’m going with no vote to prevent tons of different local rent control laws and keep the incentives on new construction. Eleni Kounalakis is against it and I respect her as well. My vote: No

• Prop 11

  Some nonsense rule about EMTs. Prop 11 seems fine, but essentially is just paid for by some big ambulance company to try to bypass ongoing litigation on the subject with an outcome that just seems fine for everyone. Newspapers are generally for a yes, except SF. It seems fine, but I guess I fall on the side of "big companies shouldn't spend millions to get special interests in the ballot to try to subvert the normal legislative/judicial process" My vote: No

• Prop 12

  More space for animals. People generally think more space for animals is a good thing, but say the proposition is vague, possibly unconstitutional, expensive or impossible to enforce or should be legislated on the ballot, but by our elected officials. Prop 8 a few years ago seemed to help. I think we should keep voting in favor of animal rights. My vote: Yes

• San Diego County Measures A, C and D

  Kinda cryptic rules surrounding districts and voting. The UT gives a good endorsement of them all. My vote: Yes on all three

• San Diego County Measure B

  This feels like a gerrymandering attempt to give those in outlying area far more voting power than those who live in the city. My vote: No

• San Diego Measures E & G

  Whichever gets more votes wins. If neither gets 50%, they both fail. Basically two options for mission valley stadium land. Kinda undecided but the UT gives a mediocre endorsement for no on both:http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/opinion/endorsements/sd-soccercity-sdsu-west-endorsement-20181017-story.html Personally it seems like E would be a nice place for public use and better money for the city. /u/dr_nick750has a really good argument here in support of either E or G, but I think E would be the best for everyone. My vote: Yes on E, No on G

• San Diego Measures J, K, M & N

  These seem pretty straightforward and positive with not much controversy. The UT gives a good endorsement of all.http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/opinion/editorials/sd-san-diego-measure-j-k-m-n-20181016-story.html My vote: Yes on all

• San Diego Measure L

  Vote to lock city council members and mayor’s pay based on judges and other state employees. The UT actually says to vote no, but I think that’s insane. Our elected officials have crazy low salaries ($74K/year for city council… less than tons of other government employees). They keep voting to keep it low to avoid political blowback from opponents. But that artificially low salary just keeps good honest people from being able to afford to run, or encourages corrupt people to get kickbacks. My vote: Yes

• San Diego Measure H

  The UT gives a confusing dissent. One one hand they say term limits are bad because it means less experienced people are in office who can eff it up. But then they say the people want SHORTER term limits (one or two) whereas the measure suggest a 3 term limit. I actually think 3 terms (12 years) is a pretty good way to keep new blood and avoid stagnation… but plenty long enough to have experienced people. And in the UT’s article they say only 12% of people want a 3 term limit, but they don’t add up the percentages to show 89% want SOME term limits. My vote: Yes

• San Diego Measure YY

  Higher property taxes for school money. The UT says no because schools aren’t that good at spending their money. But even the examples they give seem pretty weak. All of the world’s problems fundamentally come down to education. I vote for better funded schools. http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/opinion/editorials/sd-san-diego-school-bond-yy-20181019-story.html My vote: Yes