Parsing the state’s propositions
Unlike elections past, California voters have only 12 statewide ballot measures to vote on
Election Day is less than two months away. And while the presidential race between Donald Trump and Joe Biden — featuring California’s own Sen. Kamala Harris as the Democrats’ VP nominee — is the main attraction, voters have plenty of weighty issues to decide in November.
From affirmative action to rent control, voters could have a dramatic impact on life in the Golden State. The good news: This year, there’s less homework: only 12 statewide propositions, five fewer than in 2016.
Whether the drop is related to the coronavirus, lawmakers opting to go the legislative route or something else entirely, the Nov. 3 ballot still leaves voters with a hefty amount of information — and misinformation — to sort through.
“The honest concern is that it’s just information overload,” said Bill Whalen, a research fellow from the Hoover Institution at Stanford University.
Breaking down the propositions into a few different buckets can help.
First up, money, money, money — also known as Proposition 15.
Whalen thinks Proposition 15 is the most important measure on the ballot. It would raise taxes on many businesses by taxing property based on its market value instead of the purchase price. The upshot? More money for local governments and schools.
But this one is no easy sell for advocates, including the California Teachers Association. It takes aim at the third rail of California politics: Proposition 13. That 1970s measure tied property taxes to the purchase price of a property, and critics have argued it has hamstrung cities and counties across the state. But it’s popular with homeowners.
Proposition 15 aims to squelch opposition by being more limited in scope. It would apply to commercial landlords who are sitting on more than $3 million, not the average homeowner.
Depending on the real estate market, the measure could bring in an additional $12 billion in property tax revenue each year.
Not surprisingly, Proposition 15 is also one of the most expensive ballot fights. Supporters, including a nonprofit established by Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg and his wife, Priscilla Chan, have dumped roughly $30 million into the campaign, while opponents, including homeowner groups and the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, have spent more than $10 million against it.
Also on the subject of property: Propositions 21 and 19.
Proposition 21 would allow more cities to create or expand rent control. They could apply new ordinances to homes built at least 15 years ago. The proposition would exclude single-family homes owned by landlords with two or fewer properties.
It’s similar to an unsuccessful 2018 rent control measure from AIDS activist Michael Weinstein, who also is behind this new proposition, which is more modest in scope but still faces opposition from landlords and building trade groups.
So far, Weinstein’s allies have spent more than $16 million, but opponents also have spent big, with the California
Apartment Association and others kicking in roughly $30 million to kill it.
Proposition 19, backed by the real estate industry, would create a tax break for victims of wildfires and natural disasters by letting them take advantage of and expanding a policy that allows older homeowners and disabled people to transfer their lower property tax burden to a replacement home.
One of the most closely watched measures could overhaul higher-ed admissions: Proposition 16. This proposition would repeal California’s ban on affirmative action.
If it passes, colleges and public agencies would be able to take race, in addition to other factors, into consideration when deciding which candidates to admit or hire, and in government contracts.
Proposition 16, which Gov. Gavin Newsom and the leaders of all three California public higher-education systems have endorsed, would do away with Proposition 209, a controversial 1996 measure that sent the number of Black and Latino students at top schools plummeting.
Opponents, including some Asian American groups, worry it could make it harder to gain admission for Asian Americans, who are overrepresented in proportion to their share of the state’s population at many of the state’s top public universities. Advocates say it would be a step toward undoing some of the systemic racism that has prevented Black and Latino young people from accessing higher education opportunities.
Business roars back with Proposition 22.
This one is pushback to last year’s Assembly Bill 5, which forced companies like Uber and Lyft to recognize its drivers as employees and provide the benefits and protections that come with that. Proposition 22 would essentially reverse that but guarantee drivers a minimum level of compensation and health care subsidies.
Uber and Lyft say their futures depend on it, and the Yes on 22 campaign has spent more than $111 million, making it the most expensive issue on the ballot so far. Opponents have spent roughly $3.5 million.
“This is going to be a serious fight,” Whalen said.
Two measures are related to criminal justice: Propositions 20 and 25.
Proposition 20, an effort backed by law enforcement agencies to roll back reforms championed by Gov. Jerry Brown aimed at easing prison overcrowding, would let prosecutors charge some current misdemeanors as felonies, restrict parole opportunities and require probation officers to go after tougher penalties for people who violate their parole three times.
Proposition 25 is a referendum to overturn a 2018 law that got rid of a cash bail system and replaced it with one that instead looks at public safety and flight risk to decide whether to release someone before trial. The tougher-on-crime measures are in sharp contrast to growing calls for police reforms after the death of George Floyd and Black Lives Matter protests throughout the country.
Dialysis clinics are back on the ballot with Proposition 23.
In 2018, a health care union upset with for-profit dialysis clinics like Davita Kidney Care proposed Proposition 8, which would have capped their profit margins. The clinics helped defeat the effort by pouring north of $100 million into opposing the measure.
Now SEIU United Healthcare Workers West is back with Proposition 23, which would impose new regulations, including requiring clinics to have at least one physician on site during treatment. The dialysis industry has dumped nearly $63 million into defeating the effort.
Propositions 17 and 18 center on voting rights.
Right now, convicted felons are not allowed to vote while behind bars or on parole. Proposition 17 would restore voting rights for prisoners once their prison terms are complete, so that they could vote on parole.
Proposition 18 would let 17-year-olds vote in primary or special elections as long as they are 18 by the next general election.
Proposition 14 would mean more money for stemcell research.
The measure would boost funding for stemcell research by $5.5 billion through bonds that would fund grants to universities and other research institutions through the California Institute of Regenerative Medicine, which voters helped create by passing Proposition 71 in 2004.
Silicon Valley real estate investor Robert Klein, who also championed Proposition 71, says it would keep badly needed research alive, but critics say it would produce more under-regulated stem-cell clinics that offer overhyped treatments.
Proposition 24 would expand online privacy protections.
California has the strongest consumer privacy law in the country, but Proposition 24 would strengthen it and create a new enforcement agency. The measure would let residents prevent businesses from sharing their personal information.
On issues where there are entities with deep pockets, such as Uber or dialysis companies, voters can expect to be hit with a volley of political ads in the coming weeks. But it’s not clear that will make much of a difference, since many voters already have entrenched views.
“I know the conventional wisdom says big-spending propositions can spend their way to victory one way or the other,” said ballot measure expert and UC Riverside professor Shaun Bowler, “but the statistical evidence on that is pretty fragile.”
Overall, Bowler said, “there’s a lot there for people to think about and respond to that will affect the lives of tons of Californians.”