ASI’s Voter Guide to State Propositions

ASI’s Voter Guide to State Propositions Primary elections are not as popular as Presidential elections, but they are equally or more important since they affect your state, county, or municipality. According to the Los Angeles County Registrar, there are 5,674,856 total registered voters in the county. Yet the US Census Bureau estimates there are 9,663,345 people living in the county alone. That’s nearly 10 million people in our community! Want to make a change? It is time to make an informed decision. What are propositions and why are they important issues for me to vote on? Whether this is your first time voting in an election or not, propositions are potential by-state-only laws or policies that can go into effect depending on voter turnout and its majority. The way to vote for and against these potential laws or policies is through voting “yes” or “no.” It is important to understand the language of each given proposition because they can get tricky, and they are not always self-explanatory. Prop 2: Authorizes Bonds for Public School and Community College Facilities. Legislative Statute. This bond will distribute $10 billion dollars for K-12, charters, career technical, and community colleges across the state. This will also improve health services and security across the board. Yes: Allows the state to distribute the $10 billion for education. No: Does not allow California to distribute the money for education. Prop 3: Constitutional Right to Marriage. Legislative Constitutional Amendment. This proposition will re-write the California Constitution to re-instate marriage as a fundamental right despite sex/gender, race, or sexual orientation. Yes: Will rewrite the California Constitution to recognize marriage despite sex/gender, race, or sexual orientation as a fundamental right. No: California Constitution will maintain its same language. Prop 4: Authorizes Bonds for Safe Drinking Water, Wildfire Prevention, and Protecting Communities and Natural Lands from Climate Risks. Legislative Statute. This bill will allocate $10 billion (about $31 per person in California) in general obligation bonds (GO bonds) for water and wildfire prevention to allow protection of land and communities alike. According to Investopedia, GO bonds are debt securities issued by state and local governments to finance projects. A municipality will be able to repay its debt obligation to the bond investors through taxation or revenue from projects. No assets are used as collateral. This means the state will use its taxation power to fund this bond. Yes: California will borrow $10 billion to fund nature conservation projects and resources to respond to climate change’s causes and effects. No: California will not borrow $10 billion for water, wildfire prevention, lands/communities from climate risks. Prop 5: Allows Local Bonds for Affordable Housing and Public Infrastructure with 55% Voter Approval. Legislative Constitutional Amendment. This bond hopes to alleviate some of the challenges of the inflated cost of living throughout the state for low to middle-income residents with the approval of local infrastructure and more housing bonds. Local infrastructure is not thoroughly defined in this proposition. Although the narrative on the ballot is for affordable housing, this money in the past has gone to fire stations and community-driven projects. But it can potentially fund affordable, supportive, and public housing and property-related taxes. This bill will re-write the bond to only need a 55% or more majority rather than a 2/3 or more majority. Yes: This bond would allocate funds statewide for local infrastructures struggling alongside the excessive cost of rent by having a 55% majority or more. No: The bond would continue to be based by local infrastructures and its precedent vote of 2/3 majority. It changes the constitution to make it easier to increase bond debt, leading to higher property taxes. Prop 6: Eliminates Constitutional Provision Allowing Involuntary Servitude for Incarcerated Persons. Legislative Constitutional Amendment. This prop would end a loophole in the current Prop 6, which deals with involuntary servitude or people who are in jail or prison. According to Cornell Law, involuntary servitude is a condition of servitude induced by means of threats, coercion, or abuse of the legal process. In other words, work without pay. Critics say that involuntary servitude goes against the U.S. Constitution’s Thirteenth Amendment that abolishes slavery. Yes: Will instate Prop 6 to not allow prisoners to be punished by involuntary servitude. No: Prop 6 will continue to allow prisoners to serve their sentences through involuntary servitude. Prop 32: Raises Minimum Wage. Initiative Statute. Prop 32 will raise the minimum wage for employers with 26 or more employees to $17 per hour immediately, with a required increase to $18 by Jan. 1, 2025. Employers with 25 or fewer employees shall maintain $17 by Jan. 1, 2025, but they must raise their minimum wage to $18 by Jan. 1, 2026. Yes: Minimum wage employers must pay employees $18 by Jan. 1, 2026. No: The minimum wage will remain set to go up to $17 by Jan. 1, 2026, as originally planned. Prop 33: Expands Local Governments’ Authority to Enact Rent Control on Residential Property. Initiative Statute. This prop repeals the Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act of 1995, which currently allows cities and counties to impose rent control only on units built before 1995. But if a tenant leaves, the apartment complex would legally be allowed to sell the unit at market price. If passed, local governments would be allowed to impose rent control on any unit regardless of when it was built. This could cause a decline in property values. Yes: The prop would not limit the rent control laws enacted by cities or counties. No: This prop would limit the rent control laws imposed by cities and counties. Prop 34: Restricts Spending of Prescription Drug Revenues by Certain Health Care Providers. Initiative Statute. Prop 34, if passed, would require certain healthcare providers to spend 98% of their revenue on the federal discount prescription drug program for direct patient care. In other words, this will mandate certain healthcare providers (not all) to fund patient care from the profit. The federal discount prescription drug program, also known as the 340B Drug Pricing Program, provides financial help to hospitals serving low-income communities to manage rising prescription drug costs, according to the American Health Association. The proposition does not disclose which healthcare providers will be impacted, if passed. Yes: Certain healthcare providers will be required to follow new spending rules for the 340B Drug Pricing Program., with potential penalties for non-compliance. No: No changes would be made. Prop 35: Provides Permanent Funding for Medi-Cal Health Care Services. Initiative Statute. This prop will allow existing taxes to fund current healthcare insurance permanently. If it passes, it will require federal government approval to allocate revenue from these taxes for Medi-Cal. Medi-Cal is a healthcare program that helps disproportionately impacted residents access low- to zero-cost healthcare. Services include dental, vision, psychological care, emergency services, and prescription drugs. Yes: Prop 35 will maintain the current healthcare tax to provide for Medi-Cal, permanently. No: The existing tax would end by January 2027. Prop 36: Allows Felony Charges and Increases Sentences for Certain Drug and Theft Crimes. Initiative Statute. Through Prop 36, if a person has been convicted of either theft or drug trafficking twice, they could legally face an increase to felony charges for theft/drug trafficking charges under $950. Currently, California Health & Safety Code 11352 forbids the sale and movement of drugs by any means. For theft to be considered a felony, it must exceed $950 under California Penal Code Section 487(a). This prop could create a new felony category called “treatment-mandated felony,” which could potentially increase the defendant’s jail sentences. According to CalMatters, suspects who do not contest the charges could complete drug treatment instead of going to prison, but if they do not finish treatment, they still face up to three years in prison. Yes: People who have two past felony charges from theft/drug trafficking could be sentenced up to three years for a theft or possession of drugs valued at less than $950. No: The punishment for drug trafficking and theft would remain the same. Source: Quick Voter Guide