Voters show support for high-tech, high spending and high taxes (on rich)

Many political observers agree that this year's election was about values. If that's the case, the results speak volumes about the character of Californians, especially when one considers how ballot propositions did.

One of the most controversial was Proposition 71, the stem cell initiative. Californians answered a resounding "yes" to this proposal for the state to borrow $3 billion for new research and facilities. Since the loan will have to be paid back with interest, 71 will wind up costing the state $6 billion.

At a time when California households carry record levels of debt and the state itself was forced to borrow $15 billion simply to balance the budget, the 59 percent approval won by this measure is disappointing, but perhaps not surprising. California sees itself as a leader in new technologies, and the widely held perception that President Bush's morally driven policies were holding back important biotech research resonated with a state that supported John Kerry in any case.

Californians wanted to send a message to the president that they do not accept the current moral limits placed on biotech research and they are willing to go further into debt to prove it. But given this position and the new stash of cash that will soon be spent on stem cell work, Californians would do well to ask themselves another question: If there is a market for the research, why should government be involved in funding it?

While Prop. 71 took the state further down the road of massive government spending, Californians also rejected a broad new tax on telephone service while sacrificing a select group of people to the taxman.

A full 72 percent of voters wisely rejected Proposition 67, which would have imposed a new surcharge on residential, cellular and business phone calls in order to line the pockets of some emergency-room doctors and hospitals. But at the same time, voters approved Proposition 63, which will impose an extra 1 percent tax on any income earned over $1 million to pay for mental health programs.

This new tax on wealth generation is a signal that Californians don't mind slowing down the entrepreneurial spirit in the quest to bring everyone to the same level of government-sanctioned mediocrity. Support for this measure ran around 53 percent, demonstrating that a majority of California voters embrace the idea of taxing the rich - and may be sending a message to the president, who has made cutting taxes a big part of his agenda.

But Californians are not quite as rebellious as they might think. Perhaps the election's biggest surprise is how readily voters embraced DNA collection for arrestees. When it comes to security, California went conservative. As much as Californians embraced government spending and higher taxes, they also voted for more law and order.

Proposition 69, which passed with nearly 62 percent, will forcibly take DNA samples from anyone arrested on suspicion of committing a felony, even if the charges are dropped or the person is found innocent. The massive support for Prop. 69 is an indication of just how much Californians value their privacy relative to other concerns, such as lower crime. This result will trouble privacy advocates and disappoint the ACLU, which estimates that more than 50,000 Californians get arrested each year but are never charged with a crime.

The next time you hear any Californians complain about President Bush's attorney general, John Ashcroft, and the privacy violations of the administration's Patriot Act, ask how they voted on Prop. 69.

California's proposition choices paint a picture of a state that is pro-technology but could use some lessons in economics and political theory. Supporting stem cell research and opposing a new tax on telecommunications demonstrate the pro-technology bent, but plunging California into $6 billion in debt and taxing its most effective earners shows a dangerous blindness to economic reality.