Was wondering what everyone thought about various California propositions.
Prop 1 - provides a state constitutional right for an abortion. Seems like an easy yes.
Prop 26 - legalizes sports gambling at American Indian casinos. Sure
Prop 27 - legalizes sports gambling on yo phone. Sure
Prop 28 - Requires k-12 arts and music funding. Don’t really know about this one. It doesn’t seem like it comes with extra funding, just requires that 1% of funds be spent on art/music. Would be interested to know what other people thought.
Prop 29 - This is the dialysis one. A physician/pa/np doesn’t need to be onsite for dialysis, this is dumb. It’s been voted down twice. Hard no.
Prop 30 - raises taxes on those making over 2 million for ZEV subsidies and wildfire suppression. Seems reasonable, but Newsom and some other major dems oppose it because they’re calling it a handout for lyft/uber. Leaning no.
Prop 31 - flavored tobacco ban. 100% yes
Hard to really tell what’s going on with a lot of these propositions though, so I’d like to hear what other people thought.
I am not super enthusiastic about the surge in sports gambling. I come from the Ontario perspective where single game betting technically wasn’t legal a year or two ago and now every sports broadcast has nonstop gambling ads, during commercial and during the game. All along our major highways are billboards encouraging people to download an app start betting on the Maple Leafs because it’s just super fun and has no apparent downsides. I don’t see how this ends any way other than a serious sports gambling addiction problem for the province to deal with. If we’re going to do this stuff it really needs a commensurate level of spending on mental health and addictions, but lol no we’re not doing that, ldo.
Both of these seem less than ideal. 26 legalizes in-person sports betting at tribal casinos but not online. 27 does the reverse. 27 has a more corporate feel.
If I were a Californian, my inclination would be to vote no on both and insist they take longer to do it right through the state legislature instead of rushing some half-assed measures because I want to fill a sports betting fix.
Lots of places have legalized sports gambling and I haven’t seen any sort of compelling evidence that it increases addiction to gambling.
Like with legal marijuana, there’s a big glut of advertising in the initial wave of legalization to be first to market. It does slow down though. At least that’s been my experience visiting places like Michigan.
I’ve been told it’s basically a bargaining chip the union uses against davita and other dialysis companies. But those people are hospital admins that bargain with the seiu too so take that with a grain of salt
Prop 26 is weird. It also legalizes craps and roulette in tribal casinos and makes it easier to sue legal card rooms. Technically, the card rooms can’t offer house-banked games. There are work-arounds. The tribes think they are illegal and want to sue the card rooms to comply with the law, but lack standing. Prop 26 would let citizens sue the card rooms, so the rooms fear it and are against it.
Sports gambling addiction isn’t the worst problem in the world. I would go as far as to say if you had an addiction it is one of the best ones to have. You won’t die and the edges(both ways assuming betting spreads/mls and not insane props/parlays) are super small so even if you suck you won’t get completely destroyed like you would with slots or meth or something.
You guys think sports betting addiction if worse than meth or slot ghouls? Otherwise I don’t really see your point. No addiction is going to be good period but addicts (I’m an addict) are going to addict and it’s probably one of the least horrific options in that realm. You have some chance to win. The house edge is small. The number of events is small.