Didn't go well here, at all. The anti-gun incumbents were handily re-elected. In fact, my state senator, Tom Torlakson, didn't even have an opponent. He sponsors anti-gun legislation all the time. He also hasn't met a tax he didn't love. My assembly member, Loni Hancock, former mayor of Berkeley, was also relected. She did have an opponent, but he was pretty invisible. She got around 75% of the vote. Of course, our districts here are hopelessly gerrymandered. She has voted for every anti-gun bill to come along.
California also voted to impose a 1% surcharge on millionaires. Now, that doesn't even remotely apply to me and my husband, but of course, it could serve to drive more of the high-earners out of state. Several years ago, there were around 44,000 taxpayers in California that earned more than 1 million/year. In the past couple of years, that number has been around 25,000. Some of that decrease is not doubt due to the implosion of the high-tech bubble, but I wouldn't doubt that some of them also left the state and took their seven-digit incomes with them.
What the legislators and apparently the people of California don't realize is that the programs that are dependent on the tax dollars generated by these high-earners don't go away when the high-earners either leave the state or experience a decrease in income. In this case, the program funded by this initiative is to provide mental health care for indigents. If and when the tax dollars from millionaires dries up, they'll be looking to the rest of us to backfill the shortfall. :banghead: