On this election day in California, voters will decide to pass or veto ten propositions on the ballot. The first five, propositions 2-6, are pushed by the legislature while the other half, props 32-36, are put on the ballot by petition signatures. The fiscal impact for each prop is calculated by the nonpartisan government agency Legislative Analyst’s Office.

Some vocabulary to know beforehand:

Bond: To borrow money and gradually repay that money with interest over time

Supporters: People who want to see the prop passed

Opponents: People who oppose the prop and who want to keep the status quo

Prop 2

 Proposition 2 will allow the state to raise $10 billion in bonds to finance renovations, fixes, and building facilities for K-12 public schools and community colleges. Out of $10 billion, $1.5 billion will go towards community colleges while the other $8.5 billion will fund public schools. The fiscal impact is that the state would have to repay $500 million each year for 35 years. 

 Supporters and Opponents

Supporters argue that due to the vast amount of public schools in California, many schools are not well-financed, and they need to renovate their outdated facilities. This prop improves safety and upgrades all public schools, especially for those from lower-income areas.

Those against this prop reason that since bonds are borrowed money, it will worsen the debt the state is already in, becoming more of a burden on taxpayers to pay it off, and that repairs should be included in schools’ regular budget. People with a more neutral standpoint voice concern about the distribution of funds and that this prop should prioritize lower-income schools.

Prop 3

There is a law in the California Constitution stating that marriage can only be between a man and a woman. This has long since been nullified by new federal laws, and Proposition 3 will officially amend the California Constitution to remove this “zombie law,” a law that can no longer be enforced in court due to it being ruled unconstitutional or overridden by another law. 

Supporters and Opponents

Supporters claim that the CA Constitution should align with federal law by removing outdated wording, and it would protect every Californian’s right to marry and protect personal freedoms. 

Opponents argue that removing the language will remove protections against child marriage, incest, and polygamy because it overrides all marriage laws. 

Prop 4

Prop 4 authorizes a $10 billion bond to natural resources and climate activities. Of those funds, $3.8 billion will go towards a cleaner water supply and better protection and response to droughts and floods. At least 40% of the money is required to be used to benefit communities vulnerable to climate change. The state will have to spend $400 million every year for 40 years to repay the bond. 

Supporters and Opponents

Supporters argue that Prop 4 will lessen the impact of climate change and improve safety. 

Opponents claim that bonds are the most inefficient way to finance a project and taxpayers’ dollars should not be spent on reckless projects and instead on more urgent and essential topics.

Prop 5

In California, the local government primarily uses bonds to pay for public infrastructure, with the voters’ approval. They need two-thirds of the total voters to pass a bond. Proposition 5 will lower that requirement from two-thirds to 55% majority approval. This will make it easier for local governments to fund public infrastructure projects and housing assistance for low-income citizens. The government would be able to fund more projects and property tax will also increase to fund the spending.

Supporters and Opponents 

Supporters state that local governments should be able to build more affordable housing to fight against the rising cost of houses and other public infrastructure.

Opponents argue that the government will sustain more debt and burden the taxpayers, who will need to pay the debt off. 

Prop 6

California has a history of forced labor. Proposition 6 inhibits prisons and jails from using involuntary servitude as punishment for inmates. They will instead use a volunteer work program as a way to shorten sentences. This will prevent prisons and jails from forcing inmates to work and can either increase or decrease state or local costs. 

Supporters and Opponents 

Supporters include both Democratic and Republican parties, who argue that involuntary servitude is unconstitutional and violates human rights. It’s also emphasized that removing it will allow rehabilitation of inmates and could improve public safety.

No official opposing argument has been submitted. However, critics from other states claim that forced labor is necessary for facilities that are trying to rehabilitate inmates, and having a volunteer system where inmates can deny work would make it more difficult to manage prisons and jails.  

Prop 32

To fight inflation and higher costs of living, Prop 32 proposes to raise the minimum wage to $17 for the remainder of 2024 and will increase the minimum wage to $18 starting January 2025 for businesses with 26 employees or over. Businesses with 25 or fewer workers will need to pay $17 in 2025 and $18 starting in 2026. If passed, California will have the highest minimum wage, and state and local taxes will likely increase or decrease by millions of dollars annually. 

Supporters and Opponents

Supporters are for this prop because it helps the average Californian afford the basic necessities as inflation goes up. It was emphasized that workers, families, and single parents would be able to afford California’s cost of living.

Opponents state that businesses will suffer a decline in profit from an increase in supply and labor costs, and argue that some businesses have not recovered fully from COVID. Customers may have to pay higher prices to compensate, thus repeating the cycle of inflation.

Prop 33

Proposition 33 repeals the Costa-Hawkins Rental Act of 1995, which limited the government’s power to place rent controls on single-family homes and homes built after Feb. 1, 1995. Cities would be able to control rent prices on any type of housing, which means they would be able to lower it without restriction. Fiscally, there would be less available housing for rent, due to landlords selling their homes or building fewer new homes because of the lower profitability of the rent industry. 

Supporters and Opponents

Supporters argue that rent prices are too high (they claim that CA renters pay 50% more than other states), and steps must be taken to lower that and create more affordable housing. 

Opponents attest their point, stating that fewer homes will be available since fewer landlords will be willing to build new affordable housing and reduce property value.

Prop 34

This prop requires certain healthcare providers in the federal discount drug program to spend at least 98% of their revenue on direct patient care. This will only apply to providers who spend at least $100 million on things other than direct care. Fiscal effects are uncertain.

Supporters and Opponents

Supporters state that leaders of nonprofit healthcare organizations are abusing their budget on expenses unrelated to medical purposes and should be required to follow new rules on spending. Supporters also argue that patients should be able to know what the money is being spent on. 

Opponents argue that this prop is a “revenge initiative,” specifically designed to target the AIDS Healthcare Foundation, one of the major proponents of Prop 33. Citing that the U.S. and state constitutions make it illegal to single out a person or organization as punishment. 

Prop 35

Prop 35 takes an existing tax on healthcare insurance tax that will expire at the end of 2026 and makes it permanent. The tax is used to fund Medi-Cal, a program that provides health coverage for low-income people and people with disabilities. A short-term effect would be a $1 to $2 billion increase in funding for health programs, but long-run fiscal effects are uncertain.

Supporters and Opponents

Supporters say that healthcare is crucial and this tax helps fund it. The tax will help more people get healthcare without raising any existing taxes. Health providers with Medi-Cal argue that the funding should go directly to Medi-Cal rather than funding the state’s general health funds.

There is no official opposing argument.

Prop 36

Passing Proposition 36 will enable certain drugs and thefts under $950 to be charged as a felony instead of a misdemeanor if the perpetrator has two prior drug or theft convictions. Perpetrators of drug-related crimes could face increased punishment and it would be easier to be convicted. Prison populations will increase and so will criminal justice costs.

Supporters and Opponents

Supporters claim that the prop will help sentence more criminals to deserved justice and lower crime rates, as well as reduce drug trafficking such as Fentanyl, one of the top causes of death in California.

Opponents argue that the proposition is too extreme. They reason that under this prop, even stealing a candy bar could lead to felony charges. Additionally, the money being used to fund more prisons can instead be used on more important things, such as helping victims and rehabilitation of inmates.