California, the check is in the mail.

It’s my share of Proposition 21, that $18 annual vehicle fee to help rescue our state parks from neglect and decay.

I read the papers; I know Proposition 21 lost and it wasn’t even close -- by almost 16%. And I know there were some principled reasons to vote against it, mostly that it’s the Legislature’s and the governor’s job to budget for the parks, not voters’ (Sacramento’s done such a bang-up job there), and that the last thing we need is more ballot-box budgeting.

Still, the state parks budget has already been hacked away like a clear-cut forest. The 278 parks, a million and a half acres’ worth, are California’s patrimony. The coast, the mountains, the deserts are priceless treasures, features no other single state can boast. And they’re getting no love from Sacramento. The hours have been cut back. So has maintenance. Fewer visitors means less in the cash register. Some amenities -- the things that make parks useful for visitors and campers -- have fallen to pieces. It would take more than $1 billion just to bring the parks back to reasonable health, never mind improving them.

Proposition 21 would have put about a half-billion dollars a year into the parks -- and only into the parks. Remember "lock box"? This proposition had a lock-box provision to keep the Legislature’s fingers off that dough (if I had my druthers, the lock box would have on of those fail-safe devices that would slice off the digits of any would-be filchers).

We’ve already destroyed 99% of our wetlands in California. We cut down trees and pave over habitat every day. Now the parks may wind up being the ICU of habitat and creatures -- the last line of defense if they are to survive, and there’s an argument to be made that our survival depends on theirs.

Last year, the National Park Service warned that it could take back six state parks if California doesn’t keep them up. Those six were originally federal land, donated on the condition they stay open to the public. If they don’t, they could revert to federal hands -- parklands like Point Mugu near Malibu, land and a lighthouse in Big Sur, and Angel Island in San Francisco Bay.

And Proposition 21 failed, for many reasons, like those I enumerated already. (Remember that, the next time you plan a family trip and find your favorite parks closed.)

But that doesn’t mean we can’t embrace Proposition 21 ourselves. About 3.4 million people voted for it. I’m sure some of those voters own more than one car, and some have no car at all. But average it out, and if each of those ''yes'' voters gave $18 to the parks, once a year, that could put more than $50 million back into the parks. It’s a long, long way from a half-billion, but it’s something. And something seems to be about the best we can expect these days.

If you decide to send your check too, put in a note to the state parks folks: spend it for good health -- the parks'.

-- Patt Morrison

Has anyone ever actually changed his or her vote in response to a robocall? Has anyone actually listened to one of those recorded messages all the way through?

It's reasonable to assume that market research has been done on this and that robocalls do bring in votes, although many an annoyed voter -- me, perhaps? -- has been tempted to make that a vote for the other side. Now the reports are that campaign robocalls in New England overloaded phone lines and led to some phone outages. You'd think candidates and campaigns would have figured out that a nation that clamored for the Do Not Call Registry doesn't find nonstop, impersonal, recorded phone messages a delightful exception to its distaste for telemarketing.

--Karin Klein

Twenty years ago, Mike Godwin of the Electronic Frontier Foundation postulated that the longer a debate continued in an online discussion group, the more likely someone would liken the other side to Hitler. Such nuclear rhetoric would invariably shut down the debate.

I'm thinking that we need to update Godwin's observation. Not that over-the-top Nazi comparisons have gone out of vogue; they've just been supplemented in online debates by over-the-top accusations of socialism.

I thought about this today as I was reading the comments on Karin Klein's post about Proposition 21, the ballot measure that would increase the registration fee for noncommercial vehicles by $18. The money would go to the state park system, which would be required to eliminate its entry fees.

The post attracted dozens of comments, and the overwhelming majority backed the fee. The response was so lopsided, I felt compelled to check to make sure the comments weren't all coming from the same computer (they weren't). It wasn't until late Wednesday afternoon that reader "damjr" weighed in with a detailed argument against the proposition, asserting that it would generate millions for nongovernmental conservation groups.

And then reader "john petro" posted comment Nos. 67 and 68, first against the tax increase, then against the people who support it. Here's an excerpt from the latter (the typos are his; the emphasis is mine):

After reading many comments i now understand why this state is so screwed up, most of you are as stupid as the people who run this state. I use the state parks also and want to continue to do so, but i am getting tired of the panic that our politicians create when they overspend taxpayer dollars and then threaten to close this or shut down that because they spent all the money.... It is simply unbelieveable how many of you dont mind being taxed a little more. Go to China or Russia you might feel more comfortable there.

In other words, "My opponents are socialists."

Somebody with the Internet cred of Mike Godwin needs to point out this new line of demarcation so we can name it after him or her. In the meantime, I'll just call it Trotsky's law.

-- Jon Healey

The campaigning has started early for Proposition 21, the state parks initiative, and why not? This is the season when people swarm to the state beaches, hit the trails and set up their tents and RVs in the parks' campgrounds. This is also the summer when a date for two at a movie matinee can cost less than dropping by a public park. (OK, not including the hideously priced popcorn.) Daily parking at Crystal Cove State Beach, for example, costs $15 after the state's fiscal crisis forced higher fees.

That's not to mention the reduced services at the parks and the backlog of maintenance.

Those will be among the issues for the editorial board to consider as it examines Proposition 21, which would impose an additional $18 annual fee on non-commercial vehicles to raise money for California state parks. In exchange, the public would be given free access, all year long, to those parks.

But the public schools, Cal State University and University of California are all hurting too. Why no vehicle registration fee for them? Or for the state's children who need medical care but whose parents can't afford or get health insurance? Libraries, home health services ... if state funding is involved, you can pretty much count on a program in distress.

Should state initiatives pick off individual needs with individual funding sources? That's something the Times editorial board has seldom endorsed, but these are uncommon times.

And would this added fee be worthwhile to you? How often do you visit the state's parks? Which ones? And how often would you go if it were free?

-- Karin Klein

When attempting to memorize ballot propositions for an upcoming election, "fun" isn't necessarily the first word that springs to mind. For most, the words "labor-intensive" are far more applicable.

The job becomes much easier once connections have been formed between the proposition and its meaning.

The most obvious connection between title and topic can be found in Proposition 23. This proposition deals with repealing AB 32, an environmental law passed in 2007. Switch around the numbers in 32, the number found in the title of the law, and you get 23, which corresponds directly to the number of proposition.

It's simple enough, but then again, it's only one of the 10 measures to be voted on in November. More convenient combinations will be available soon. Until then, be a prudent voter and keep reading up on the propositions to ensure you'll enter the voting booth on Nov. 4 informed!

-- Emilia Barrosse