Court knocks re-regulation measure off Nov. 8 ballot

Court knocks re-regulation measure off Nov. 8 ballot
By STEVE LAWRENCE, Associated Press Writer

Friday, July 22, 2005



(07-22) 16:47 PDT SACRAMENTO, (AP) --


A Sacramento court ordered another initiative off California's November ballot Friday — an attempt by consumer advocates to re-regulate the state's electricity market.


A three-judge panel of the 3rd District Court of Appeal ruled that Proposition 80 was "unquestionably invalid on its face" because it would give broader powers to the Public Utilities Commission.


The court said the state constitution only allows the Legislature to increase the PUC's jurisdiction. It would take a constitutional amendment to change that requirement but Proposition 80 would only enact a statute, the justices added.


"Without such an amendment, Proposition 80 attempts to do what the voters many years ago said an initiative measure cannot do," the court said. "In other words, Proposition 80 is invalid on its face."

more...
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/news/archive/2005/07/22/state/n164756D07.DTL

Tell me, why are we having this special election again?

Too late to put a recall on there, I guess. :evilgrin

Too bad they didn't make this more of an "advisory" proposition instead. I wonder if they couldn't make it that way now. On the other hand, if they did that, they probably could justify throwing the redistricing prop back in the mix too. If we had to "trade" a prop to get redistricting out, then I'm more than happy with tabling this for now. We can wait until later and get it in a normal election cycle (and hopefully with a Democratic Governor spearheading it, etc. too).

let's just have a recall...

This is absolutely outrageous and unprecedented. I want truth to the rumor that the special election will be canceled. I need to find out if time has expired to add any initiatives. If not, lets get a recall petition drive going!

We need to elect a new mayor (if one doesn't get elected this Tuesday) and 2-3 City Council critters too! San Diego isn't waiting until March for that to happen!

initiatives.

http://www.igs.berkeley.edu/

Right now:
Prop 73 - CA CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT
Waiting period - parental notification
Pro 74 - teacher tenure
Prop 75 public employee consent for dues as political contributions
Prop 76 - CA CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT
Spending limits/School funding
Prop 78(big pharma written) & 79 (legislation steroid boy vetoed)
prescription drug discounts

I've calmed down now. I let my anger get in the way of reason sometimes. I just want my state back. :-)

If we can get Randy Duke Cunningham forced to resign here in Repub country of North San Diego before February. That would force a special "open" election that wouldn't have primaries to fill his seat, which would allow a Dem like Busby down here an excellent opportunity to steal this seat if too many Rethugs entered and split their votes with her winning the plurality. Probably his resignation wouldn't come early enough to force a November election timeframe for this seat (probably March then), but it would be a cool thing if we could haul ass down here and get Dems out en-masse to overturn Arnie's propositions, vote in more Dems for this congress seat on top of the City Council and likely Mayoral races.

If he resigns after February, his seat stays "open" (though one less Rethug vote) until the 2006 election.

I had a good laugh when I read a few weeks ago that he would not seek reelection. He said "I may not be the strongest candidate." Wow, no kidding, Duke!
So what is being done to get him to resign before February? Also, I would think with all the R corruption, Dems stand a very good chance to pick up seats on the City Council, as well as Duke's seat.

replace a representative that leaves office a given time before the regular election time for congress critters. That deadline happens to be in February.

Before then, a special election gets called (which I think that Dems might want to take advantage of). Afterwards, well, the vote in congress gets lost to the Rethugs (but not picked up by a newer member). So it is helpful if he resigns before the end of his term in any case, but it's an added opportunity if it opens up that special election.

I have a feeling that Bushco has ordered that the Feds pull back on his investigation, since they don't want him forced to leave before the end of his term, but now the goal of getting him out of the race for 2006 has been met (to allow another Rethug to take his seat then).

It's up to us to force the issue that demands that he gets investigated further before then to force the question of getting him out of office. We really don't have much to lose by doing so, and everything to gain, as long as what's done to get him out is proper and that most folks looking on see is a process that is a quest for justice and one they will respect.

and only wish I could think a Dem could take Cox's seat. We don't even dream of it, I'm afraid. But, who knows, we got rid of B1 Bob but he is a lunatic.