By Jeff Bissiri
California Director, Log Cabin Republicans

On Nov. 8, Californians will be asked two simple questions: Are we satisfied with the way our state government is functioning, and are we willing to take the necessary steps to clean it up? For those who believe we can do better, the ballot includes a series of measures that improve the way our state does business.

Because Gov. Schwarzenegger supports them, you might be inclined to vote against the measures as a way of "paying him back" for his veto of the marriage equality bill. While there is justifiable disappointment at the governor for his veto, his overall record, including a 100 percent rating by Equality California for his first year in office, places him as one of the most pro-gay governors in America. No matter how you feel about the governor, your vote on these initiatives should be based on their merits. If you ask yourself how these proposals will affect LGBT Californians you'll vote yes on Propositions 74, 75, 76 and 77.

Proposition 74 seeks to improve education in California by extending from two to five years the time it takes before a teacher can achieve tenure. Tenure effectively makes it impossible for a teacher to be fired. We're grateful for the tens of thousands of excellent teachers who are educating our children, however two years just isn't long enough to determine whether a teacher deserves a job that's guaranteed for life. This initiative will improve our school system by making sure that only deserving teachers get a lifetime job. If this initiative is approved, it will not affect current law that gives LGBT teachers strong protections against discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation regardless of tenure. The Los Angeles Times supports this measure.

Proposition 75 requires public employee unions to get a member's consent before taking money from their paychecks for political purposes. Last year, public employee unions contributed to legislators who opposed marriage equality. Without Proposition 75, LGBT public employees will have money taken directly from their paychecks and put into the political coffers of those who could deny them their equal rights. Those who disagree with their unions' political decisions shouldn't have their money taken without approval.

Members of the LGBT community are taxpayers too. Public employee unions, using taxpayer dollars, have pumped so much money into political campaigns that they effectively control both sides of the negotiating table. The other side of that table is not big business but our elected representatives and we the taxpayers. The conflict of interest is clear. The Los Angeles Times supports this measure.

Proposition 76 ties state government spending to the revenues Sacramento brings in. In our personal lives we must live within our means or face the consequences. But in Sacramento, the response to this same urge to spend more money than comes in has been to deny the problem exists -- and tens of billions of dollars in debt has been racked up as a consequence. The upheaval caused by these annual budget crises has far-reaching effects.

Under the current state budget system, any program that is supported by the general fund is vulnerable to spending freezes or cuts, including many programs that benefit the LGBT community. For example, since 2000, our community has fought for full funding of the AIDS Drug Assistance Programs. With more predictable spending and revenues for the state, people with HIV/AIDS will not be asked to sacrifice to pay for the Legislature's spendthrift ways.

Proposition 77 takes the power to draw legislative boundaries away from the Legislature and puts it in the hands of a panel of retired judges selected by both parties and gives them specific criteria to draw the lines. The current system is rigged to protect incumbents. Since the politicians in Sacramento redrew congressional and state legislative districts before the 2002 elections, not one incumbent has lost. Democracy doesn't work if incumbents never have to worry about losing. It also creates a system where the sensible center is kept out of public office because our elected representatives are chosen, not in general elections, but in closed partisan primaries.

Opinion surveys show a growing number of registered Republicans in California support marriage equality and a clear majority of GOP voters support domestic partnership rights. These Republicans are not represented in the Legislature because gerrymandered districts and closed primaries silence their voices. It's time to establish clear rules that will be implemented by a fair-minded panel that will consider the best interests of the voters instead of the best interests of the politicians. The Los Angeles Times supports this measure.

Together, these four proposals offer us a chance to reform state government. All Californians, but particularly LGBT Californians, should support these common sense reforms.