(PartiallyPolitics.com) – The San Francisco Chronicle in a new article by reporters Joe Garofoli and Aldo Toledo argued that the city could no longer be referred to as a “progressive city.” This comment was made following the two law-and-order ballot measures that had received support on Tuesday.
The writers claimed that following the city voting “yes” on ballot measures that would make potential welfare recipients have to undergo drug screening and would increase police powers it has become clear that progressive policies are not looked upon favorably by residents.
Proposition F, the first of the two ballot measures would mandate that drug screening would be required for all people who receive public benefits. It would mandate that drug addicts who wanted to continue having access to these benefits would be required to go into treatment.
Proposition E on the other hand would provide law enforcement with superior surveillance tools while reducing oversight over the force. This would mean that restrictions in certain cases, such as car chases, will become restricted.
The reporters also pointed out that apart from approving these measures the voters had also supported many moderates who were running in the local Democratic County Central Committee, which could ultimately have a big effect on who gets elected in San Francisco in future years.
Marjan Philhour, the supervisor candidate, argued that the local DCCC, which had been run by progressives, was out of touch with the Democrats in the state and that they wanted the committee to represent the local democrats. Philhour is said to be a moderate.
Copyright 2024, PartiallyPolitics.com
