A Progressive's Quickie Guide to California 2020 Ballot Propositions
Slightly updated on 9/30/20...
Here's the link to my complete San Diego Voter Guide
Over the past couple of weeks I've been writing up my impressions of the dozen ballot measures Californians will see on the November, 2020 general election ballot.
Today, I'm presenting the short version, with everything in one place.
Clicking on the proposition number at the top of each write up will take you to my longer discussions of the issues involved. At the end of each segment there are links to be had for those wanting information from the people for and/or against the measures.
I've included a handy-dandy box with each write up showing how I think I'm going to vote on each proposition. Feel free to disagree with my determinations.
Between now and election day I'll be writing about the issues and candidates on the November ballot. I'm typing as fast as I can....
Proposition 14
UPDATED : Asks Californians to continue to support stem cell research funding via bond sales.
Long Story Short: The well has gone dry for stem cell research and they'd like to continue. Asks voters to approve the issuance of $5.5 billion in bonds over a ten year period. Payments from the General Fund will be $310 million annually for a period of up to 25 years.
Who Loves It? Patient advocates, doctors & scientists coalition. Primarily funded by Robert N. Klein II, a real estate investor.
Who Hates it? No formal opposition. BUT.... Marcy Darnovsky, executive director of the Center for Genetics and Society says:
While stem cell research is valuable, there are no longer federal limits on its funding, which was the justification in 2004 for asking California voters to allocate the first multi-billion-dollar pot of money. In the meantime, that campaign’s shameless over-promising and hype set the stage for the hundreds of under-regulated commercial stem cell clinics now offering unapproved ‘treatments’ that have caused tumors and blindness.
UPDATED ANALYSIS: Four years ago I would have bought into the argument against this, which holds that the federal government should take the lead. Now I fear the flat earthers in DC have done so much damage that hedging our bets seems like a good idea. And did I mention that San Diego’s research institutions are huge beneficiaries of this funding stream, with UCSD alone taking in $233,326,284?
More Info (Pro side only available)
Website | Facebook | Twitter | Endorsements | Text of Initiative
Proposition 15
Seeks to amend the property tax structure so commercial land isn’t taking advantage of a law passed for protecting residences from excessive increases.
Long Story Short: Would create a set of new rules for commercial property taxes, while leaving the existing rules for residential property taxes in place. Commercial property owners with more than $3 million in holdings would see their taxes go up, with the estimated $6.5 to $11.5 billion tax revenue going to local government services and schools.
Who Loves It? Coalition for Schools and Communities First, largely funded by the California Teachers Association, SEIU California and the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative. Executive committee includes: Advancement Project California, Alliance San Diego, California Calls, California Federation of Teachers, Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of California, Common Sense Kids Action, Evolve California, League of Women Voters of California, PICO California
Who Hates It? Californians to Stop Higher Property Taxes, with major funding from California Business Roundtable Issues PAC, California Taxpayers Association, BNSF Railroad, California Beer & Beverage Distributors State Issues PAC, and Western Manufactured Housing Communities Association Issues PAC.
For More Info:
Pro: Website | Facebook | Twitter | Endorsements | Text of Initiative
Anti: Website | Facebook | Twitter | Endorsements
Proposition 16
Seeks to undo the state’s ban on affirmative action.
Long Story Short: Twenty four years ago California voters considered whether race, ethnicity and gender should be considered in awarding government contracts and admission to the state’s colleges and universities. They said no, even though many were in favor of affirmative action, thanks to a right wing campaign of cultural divisiveness.
Who Loves It? Opportunity for All Coalition Introduced by Assemblymember Dr. Shirley Weber of San Diego. Led by co-chairs Vincent Pan, Co-Executive Director of Chinese for Affirmative Action, and Eva Paterson, President of the Equal Justice Society.
Who Hates It? At this point there is no organized opposition. State Senators Melissa Melendez & Ling Ling Chang, along with former U.S. Rep. Tom Campbell have all voiced opposition to the idea.
For More Info (Pro side only available):
Website | Facebook | Twitter | Endorsements | Text of Measure
Proposition 17
Expands voting rights to include parolees
Long Story Short: The backstory on this measure in California is that it is the result of a successful lobbying campaign by 31-year-old son of Fabian Núñez, a former Democratic Assembly speaker, Esteban Núñez.
Esteban was convicted of manslaughter for his role in a 2008 knife fight near SDSU that injured two men and killed Luis Santos, a 22-year-old college student. On his last day in office, former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger announced he was cutting Núñez’s 16-year prison sentence to seven years, saying the term was excessive because Núñez did not inflict the fatal stab.
Who Loves It? Free the Vote, a coalition led by Initiate Justice, ACLU of California, Californians United for a Responsible Budget, California Secretary of State Alex Padilla, League of Women Voters of California, People Over Profits San Diego, Vote Allies, White People for Black Lives, and Mi Familia Vota.
Who Hates It? No organized opposition, but right wing politicians and groups don’t like the idea, for instance... The Election Integrity Project California, in association with Judicial Watch, who were the folks who claimed California was sending 458,000 ballots to voters who are dead or have moved under its vote-by-mail plans.
For More Info (Pro side only available):
Website | Facebook | Twitter | Text of Measure |
Proposition 18
Allows 17 year-olds to vote in primary & special elections, provided they'll be 18 by the time of the general election.
Long Story Short: This constitutional amendment was placed on the ballot by the Legislature. Two thirds majority was required for its passage.
There are no groups organized in support of or in opposition to this measure.
Who Loves It? Asm. Kevin Mullin (D-22) introduced the constitutional amendment as Assembly Concurrent Resolution 4 (ACA 4) during the 2019 legislative session.
Who Hates It? There is no formal group opposing this proposition. However, The Election Integrity Project California, Inc. submitted an argument in opposition to the constitutional amendment, which said,
“17-year-olds are legal minors. Under that definition, they are still considered children. They are almost all still living at home and under the strong influence of their parents.
This is not conducive to independent thought and voting without undue pressure from their immediate superiors… 17-year-olds will almost always still be in high school, and under the strong influence of their teachers. This again makes it less likely that they would be expressing their own, independently thought-out choices were they to be allowed to vote.”
For More Info:
Proposition 19
Shuffling Tax Breaks & Making Realtors Happy
Long Story Short:
This measure was placed on the ballot by the legislature. There are no formal organizations for or against at present. That doesn’t mean people don’t have opinions.
If approved by voters, California homeowners who are 55 or older will be able to buy a new home and keep their property tax payment at the same level or a reduced rate — depending on the value of the new house.
Older Californians who might otherwise be reluctant to change homes and pay higher property taxes would receive a break, more homes would be sold, and more commissions would be charged.
Proposition 19 also expands the property tax break for older homeowners to those who lose their home to a wildfire, a program now limited to other kinds of natural disasters.
NOTE: It does NOT undermine tax benefits homeowners achieved under Proposition 13 in 1978. That's what gets said any time a change in property tax law arises.
Who Loves It? The California Association of Realtors
Who Hates It? The Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association thinks this proposition stinks.
The assaults on California property owners and taxpayers never stop. And once again the California Legislature has advanced a massive tax increase at the last possible moment when they thought no one was paying attention.
For More Info:
Proposition 20
Do We Really Need to Send More People to Jail?
Long Story Short: Proposition 20 is aimed at correcting what many in law enforcement consider significant public safety problems created by AB 109 and Propositions 47 and 57.
It’s a tough on crime measure, cutting back on the list of offenses eligible for early release from incarceration, revising the dollar threshold for theft to be considered a felony, tightens up parole requirements, and reinstates DNA collection for offenses reduced to misdemeanors by Proposition 47.
In short, advocates for Proposition 20 would like to make it easier to incarcerate people. They’d like everybody to believe the world would be a safer place with their approach.
Who Loves It? Keep California Safe, a Project of the California Public Safety Partnership Issues Committee Committee major funding from San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Employees’ Benefit Association
Who Hates It? There does not seem to be a dedicated committee in opposition to Prop 20. Funding in opposition came from Gov. Jerry Brown’s PAC, the ACLU, Lynn Schusterman, and Patty Quillin.
For More Info (Pro side only available):
Website | Facebook | Twitter | Endorsers | Text of Measure
Proposition 21
Rent Control All Over Again
Long Story Short: Four things you need to know....
**In 1995, the state legislature passed the Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act, a law that limits the ability of local governments to enact far-reaching rent control.
**In 2018, Proposition 10, which would have repealed Costa-Hawkins, allowing individual cities to enact rent control, was soundly defeated at the polls. The housing industrial complex spent nearly $80 million to convince Californians that the individual homeowner or small-time entrepreneur would suffer if this measure won at the ballot box.
**In 2019, Governor Newsom signed Assembly Bill 1482 aka the “Tenant Protection Act of 2019,” designed to prevent the most “egregious” rent hikes in California. Interestingly enough, the industry remained neutral on this law.
** In 2020, the same people who advocated for Proposition 10 are back for another stab at it, with a new and improved version. They know that “AB1482” is a paper tiger, since no enforcement capabilities were included, and the real money maker for big money interests –namely excessive increases in rent when units are vacated– remained in place under the law.
Who Loves It? Yes on 21, largely funded by the AIDS Care Foundation, with support from Senator Bernie Sanders and Representative Maxine Waters and a host of progressive political organizations.
Who Hates It? No on 21, led by an entity associated with the California Apartment Association, with financial backing from some of the nation’s largest corporate landlords, including Essex Property Trust & Founder George Marcus and Equity Residential, along with political support from unions associated with the building industry.
For More Info:
Pro: Website | Facebook | Twitter | Endorsements |
Text of Measure
Anti: Website | Facebook | Twitter | Endorsements
Proposition 22
Ride Share & Delivery Companies Seek to Overturn Worker Protections
Long Story Short: The California Legislature, following a court ruling — Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. Superior Court — sought to codify (via AB5) the finding, which held that most workers are employees, ought to be classified as such, and the burden of proof for classifying individuals as independent contractors belongs to the hiring entity.
High profile companies involved in aspects of on-demand transportation services who built their business operations around the utilization of “independent contractors”vowed to ignore the law and set about to create a ballot measure exempting themselves from its provisions.
The gig economy model seeks asks the rest of society to pick up the social costs of their work force traditionally included in employer-employee relationships.
Who Loves It? Protect App-Based Drivers & Services, with major funding from Lyft, Uber Technologies, and DoorDash.
Who Hates it? Sick of Gig Greed, Funded by Working Families Issues Committee, sponsored by the California Labor Federation, AFL-CIO
For More Information
Pro: Website | Facebook | Twitter | Endorsers | Text of Measure
Anti: Website| Facebook | Twitter | Endorsers
Proposition 23
Regulating Kidney Dialysis Clinics
Long Story Short: Prop 23 seeks to require every clinic to have at least one physician present during all operating hours. Clinics would have to offer the same level of care to all patients, regardless of whether the treatment is paid for by private insurance or a government-funded program such as Medi-Cal or Medicare. More information about infections among their dialysis patients would have to be reported, and the state Department of Public Health would have a new role in agreeing to changes at a clinic or its closure.
This ongoing battle between very profitable private clinic operators and the union has never been about pay; it’s stress from case overload and working conditions.
There are more than 588 chronic dialysis clinics in California, averaging 22 dialysis stations, with each station providing treatment to one patient at a time. Nearly three quarters of those clinics are owned by two corporations, DaVita Inc, and Fresenius Medical Care.
Who Loves It? Kidney Patients Deserve Better – Sponsored by Service Employees International Union – United Healthcare Workers West.
Who Hates It? Stop the Dangerous & Costly Dialysis Proposition – Major funding from DaVita and Fresenius Medical Care.
For More Info
Pro: Website | Facebook | Twitter | Text of Measure
Anti: Website | Facebook | Twitter | Endorsers
Proposition 24
Everybody likes privacy, right?
Long Story Short: Just about everybody wants their personal information protected, and stories about how that data is abused are regular sources of outrage.
The problem is that the vast majority of people have only a vague sense of what “protecting” data means, short of bad guys raiding your bank accounts.
Proponents say it gives web users in the Golden State new rights around their sensitive information, such their health and financial records or precise location.
Opponents of this proposition say it doesn’t deliver what it promises.
Truth be told, I can't make sense of the competing claims, but am wary of the Great White Savior approach to reform via the ballot box.
Who Loves It? Californians for Consumer Privacy, Alastair Mactaggart, Board Chair and Founder, filed an initiative to appear on the November 2020 ballot, the California Privacy Rights Act.
Who Hates It? There is no single group coordinating opposition to Prop 24. The Consumer Federation of California, Color of Change, the American Civil Liberties Union, the Silicon Valley Leadership Group, California Alliance for Retired Americans, and Media Alliance have all come out in opposition to the measure.
For More Info (Pro side only available):
Website | Facebook | Twitter | Endorsements |
Text of Measure
Proposition 25
Bail Bondsmen Want Their Money
Long Story Short: In 2018 the California Assembly passed and the governor signed SB10, which essentially eliminated cash bail for people accused of crimes. The law gives judges wide discretion to decide who can be released prior to trial.
(Voting Yes means you want the reforms passed by the legislature to happen; No means we go back to the old way.)
Companies representing the bail industry quickly gathered signatures on a referendum after the law was signed. As a result, SB10 has been on hold and is awaiting a final decision by voters in November.
While reformers agree that the use of pretrial detention needs to be minimized, and the utilization of pretrial service agencies need to be maximized, the process of the determination of risk assessment has caused divisions.
Who Loves It? Yes on 25 #End Money Bail, a coalition of justice reform and labor organizations. Committee major funding from Action Now Initiative, LLC, Patty Quillin, Lynn Schusterman
Who Hates It? No on Prop 25, sponsored by the American Bail Coalition. Committee major funding from Triton Management Services, United States Fire Insurance Company, Lexington National Insurance Corporation.
For More Info:
Pro: Website | Facebook | Twitter | Endorsements |
Text of Measure
Anti: Website | Endorsements
****
Voter Guide – You’ve Voted for President, what’s next?
I’ll be writing about many ballot measures and candidates between now and the end of September. That work will be condensed into an handy-dandy voter guide just in time for your mail-in ballots to arrive. I’m the guy who coordinated San Diego Free Press’s Voter Guides over the past decade, so this won’t be my first effort. Stay tuned.
Hey folks! Be sure to like/follow Words & Deeds on Facebook. If you’d like to have each post mailed to you check out the simple subscription form and the right side of the front page.
Email me at WritetoDougPorter@Gmail.com
Lead photo of sign outside North Park's Chris Ono Grinds Island Grill
by Doug Porter