Prop. 2 is officially named Standards for Confining Farm Animals. Initiative Statue. This proposition would create much needed standards for farm animals that would prohibit enclosures that prevent the motion of the animal. The animals that would be most benefited by the proposition are pregnant pigs, calves raised for veal, and egg-laying hens.

Currently, these animals are kept in cages or pens that prevent them from moving freely. The animals cannot turn around freely, lie down, stand up, and extend their limbs. If approved, Prop.2 would allow for a more comfortable life for these animals.

Opponents to Prop. 2 argue that jobs will be lost in the State, and that allowing animals to have more freedom would increase the possibility of diseases such as the avian flu.

Supporters argue that the proposition would provide for a more humane treatment of farm animals, and that will decrease disease in them. According to supporters of the proposition, a main funder of the opposition efforts -- Moark LLC -- settled animal cruelty charges for throwing live birds into trash bins. Another major supporter, United Egg Producers, also was involved in animal abuse cases.

Source: California Official Voter Information Guide.

The official name of Prop. 9 is Criminal Justice System. Victim's Rights. Parole. Initiative Constitutional Amendment and Stature. It is also known as the Victims' Rights and Protection Act of 2008, and Marsy's Law or Nicholas's Law.

This bill seeks to change the California Constitution to provide expanded victim's rights at parole hearings. Namely, the bill would allow victim's to address parole boards, and even reduce the number of parole hearings detainees are entitled to.

According to Ballotpedia:

Arguments in favor of Prop. 9

Notable arguments that have been made in favor of Proposition 9 include:
- It is just and right for the government to put the rights of victims ahead of the rights of criminals.
- Proposition 9 would save money because under the current system, taxpayers are spending money to fund hearings for criminals who have little chance of release. For example, supporters of Prop 9 argue, "'Helter Skelter' inmates Bruce Davis and Leslie Van Houten, followers of Charles Manson, convicted of multiple brutal murders, have had 38 parole hearings in 30 years. That’s 38 times the families involved have been forced to relive the painful crime and pay their own expenses to attend the hearing, plus 38 hearings that taxpayers have had to subsidize."
- Parole judges could increase the number of years between parole hearings, saving money.

And:

Arguments against Prop. 9

Notable arguments that have been made against Proposition 9 include:

- Voters already approved many components of Prop. 9 when they passed California Proposition 8 (1982), including the requirements that victims be notified of critical points in an offender’s legal process as well as the rights for victims to be heard throughout the legal process.
- Prop. 9 amounts to political grandstanding without really changing any significant problems in the criminal justice system.
- The provision in Prop. 9 to stop early release of criminals could end up costing the taxpayer in the "hundreds of millions"
- The annual parole rate for those convicted of second degree murder or manslaughter has been less than 1% of those eligible for parole for the last twenty years. Opponents of Prop. 9 say this means that the taxpayers would spend a lot of money with minimal resulting changes, since at most Prop. 9 would affect early parole of 1% of the most violent criminal population.
- Money spent enforcing the provisions of Prop. 9 won't be available for other important government programs.

Opponents of Prop. 9 created the compelling video posted here:

Check it out at:

http://www.californiaprogressreport.com/2008/09/ppic_releases_m.html

The poll includes info about presidential and statewide elections, including propositions and the budget.

Summary: Obama up; Props. 4, 8 and 11 down; voters want to change the way the budget is voted on from 2/3 to 55%.