Endorsements for statewide measures
Here are our recommendations on the 12 statewide November ballot measures. Full endorsements can be read online under the “Endorsements” tab in the Opinion section.
PROPOSITION 14 » No
This measure would authorize the issuance of $5.5 billion of bonds to finance stem cell research. This is a function best left to private investors, not taxpayers. As tempting as this is considering California’s tremendous work in technology, at a time when finite resources are more important than ever, we can think of much better uses for the $260 million of public funds a year for 30 years this measure would require to repay the bonds.
PROPOSITION 15 » No
Best known as the “split roll” measure, Prop. 15 is the most significant and direct threat to Proposition 13 in decades. The measure would split off commercial and industrial properties from Prop. 13’s protections in a misguided effort to raise billions in new taxes that will ultimately go toward papering over California’s public sector pension problem. It needs to be rewritten to aid schools, not unions.
PROPOSITION 16 » No
Government should treat all people equally. Since Prop. 209 was passed, the state’s civil service and public colleges have increasingly reflected the diversity of the state. Prop. 16 seeks to sacrifice the principle of equality in the name of justice. That is unjust.
PROPOSITION 17 » Yes
Parolees who have done their time should have their voting rights restored and unlike Florida and other states, they should not have to repay their fees in order to regain the right to vote.
PROPOSITION 18 » No
As tempting as this is, because there are some 17-yearolds who we feel are smarter than adults, we feel they can wait another year before casting a ballot.
PROPOSITION 19 » No
This special interest measure is the result of the California Association of Realtors basically “buying” the support of a state firefighters union in an effort to pass what they couldn’t two years ago with Prop. 5.
PROPOSITION 20 » No
The Legislature needs to do a better job overseeing criminal justice reform. But that doesn’t justify this heavyhanded measure, backed mainly by police unions and the state’s prison guard union.
PROPOSITION 21 » No
This measure would make it easier for local governments to adopt rent control policies and we would like to see this problem resolved. But we don’t feel a statewide effort taken amid a housing crisis would resolve the problem. All it would do is make the housing crisis worse.
PROPOSITION 22 » Yes
This measure would create a middle-ground between Assembly Bill 5 and the gig economy as we knew it for app-based drivers by establishing minimum pay, portable health care benefits and other perks for those who choose to drive for companies like Lyft, DoorDash and Uber. While we’d rather see AB5 repealed, this is the next best alternative.
PROPOSITION 23 » No
This measure is a cynical effort by the Service Employees International UnionUnited Healthcare Workers West to raise costs on the dialysis industry in an effort to pressure dialysis companies into letting them unionize their workers. The measure presents as a good faith proposal to improve dialysis clinics. It’s not.
PROPOSITION 24 » No
This measure is a convoluted privacy law crafted behind closed doors that would authorize a new state agency to enforce the aforementioned convoluted data privacy laws.
PROPOSITION 25 » Yes.
This is a referendum on Senate Bill 10, a bail reform law signed into law in 2018. A “yes” vote upholds the law, while a “no” vote rejects it. It is fundamentally unjust for anyone to remain locked behind bars before they’ve been convicted a crime solely because they’re poor.