EDITOR: Both Proposition 30 and Proposition 38 are designed to increase funding for children's education (while paying down state debt). There are good arguments on both sides regarding which one will help children more, but what we know for sure is that if neither proposition passes, our children will be in trouble. We need at least one of these propositions to pass to protect funding for schools.
We urge you not to let the arguments for or against either of these propositions keep you from voting on them. You can even vote yes for both; if both pass by a majority, the tax increases from the proposition with the most yes votes will be enacted.
Polls show that voters are ready to pay more taxes if they're for children's education; on Nov. 6 we have a fantastic opportunity to act. We know that investing in our children means investing in our economy, our society and our future. It is the smartest investment we can make.
The Child Care Planning Council of Sonoma County urges you to vote yes for kids on Proposition 30 or Proposition 38 or both.
Child Care Planning Council of Sonoma County
Right to know
EDITOR: I will be voting yes on Proposition 37, because there's more to the issue than The Press Democrat's Oct. 2 editorial would have you believe (“No on 37: Label this one over-regulation”).
You say that “families can't afford (GMO labeling).” Currently, a mom's only option for GMO-free food is to buy premium organic products. After Proposition 37 passes, she'll be able to purchase less expensive, conventional non-GMO food. How is this not a win?
Next, the paper said “science simply doesn't warrant it.” What you didn't say is is that the U.S. government does little testing of GMOs, instead relying on the results of studies conducted by the manufacturers. Remember when DDT was harmless and cigarettes were good for you? It's no different this time.