November 3, 2020, Statewide Ballot Measures
*Sam Paredes, GOC’s Executive Director, has given his personal explanations and recommendations on the ballot measures.
Proposition 14
AUTHORIZES BONDS TO CONTINUE FUNDING STEM CELL AND OTHER MEDICAL RESEARCH. INITIATIVE STATUTE.
In 2004, voters approved Prop. 71, which raised $3 Billion in bond revenue. Very little research was done because most of the money went to fund buildings and personnel according to CA Political Review. Now they are coming for $5 Billion more. Prop. 71 will continue to cost Californians over $200 million per year for the next 9 years, and Prop. 14 will cost taxpayers almost double that for the next 25 years.
Sam is voting NO!
Proposition 15
INCREASES FUNDING FOR PUBLIC SCHOOLS, COMMUNITY COLLEGES, AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT SERVICES BY CHANGING TAX ASSESSMENT OF COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.
Prop. 15 changes the California constitution and will create a spit-roll tax system where businesses will be assessed property tax different than individual homeowners. The problem is, businesses do not pay taxes, customers to those businesses pay taxes through higher costs for goods and services. Prop. 15 destroys Prop. 13 protections from wild increases in property taxes. Once the government realizes that Prop. 15 is not raising enough revenue to pay for all their expenditures, you can bet that the protections for individuals will be the next to go.
This is a devastating proposition on any level, but it is particularly punitive given the impact that COVID-19 has had on the business community.
Sam is voting NO!
Proposition 16
ACA 5 (Resolution Chapter 23), Weber. Government preferences. (PDF)
Prop. 16 is a CA Constitutional Amendment that eliminates voter approved Proposition 209 (1996) which prohibits the state from discriminating against, or granting preferential treatment to any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in the operation of public employment, public education, or public contracting. In other words, Prop. 17 allows the state to discriminate, that is, pick and choose who they want to receive financial resources.
Sam is voting NO!
Proposition 17
ACA 6 (Resolution Chapter 24), McCarty. Elections: disqualification of electors. (PDF)
Prop 17 will restore voting rights to any felon after they have been released from prison, but while they are still on parole.
Sam is very sympathetic to individuals who have paid their debt to society and victims, but according to the US Parole Commission, when someone is on parole, they have not fully completed their sentencing. This measure is highly personal to many. The fact that it is strongly supported by Kamala Harris and the ACLU makes this proposition questionable at best. No recommendation.
Proposition 18
ACA 4 (Resolution Chapter 30), Mullin. Elections: voting age. (PDF)
Prop. 18 is a CA Constitutional Amendment that will allow 17-year-old U.S. citizens to vote in a Primary Election, or Special Election, if they will be 18 years of age before the next General Election.
Sam is voting NO! (Have you spoken to a 17-year-old lately?)
Proposition 19
Proposition 19 would require property transferred within families to be reassessed to market value as of the date of transfer, resulting in a huge property tax increase for long-held family homes. The only exception is if the children move into the home within a year and make it their principal residence. This is a billion-dollar tax increase on California families. Proposition 19 does contain some supportable provisions – such as the ability for older homeowners to transfer the base-year value of their home (under Prop. 13) to a replacement home – but the enormous tax is a nasty poison pill and would be seriously detrimental for most homeowners.
Sam is voting NO!
Proposition 20
RESTRICTS PAROLE FOR NON-VIOLENT OFFENDERS. AUTHORIZES FELONY SENTENCES FOR CERTAIN OFFENSES CURRENTLY TREATED ONLY AS MISDEMEANORS. INITIATIVE STATUTE.
Proposition 20 was developed in response to the Legislature’s failure to fix significant public safety problems created by AB 109 and Propositions 47 and 57. AB 109 shifted tens of thousands of criminals from state custody to overcrowded local jails and under-resourced post-release community supervision. Prop. 57 allowed many inmates to apply for an earlier parole and Prop. 47 changed some drug and property crimes from felonies to misdemeanors, allowing early parole for violent criminals, and a surge in retail theft, car break-ins, burglaries, illegal drug use and other property crimes throughout the state. This initiative perhaps most importantly, reclassifies currently “non-violent” crimes like rape of an unconscious person, human trafficking and domestic violence as “violent” to prevent early release of those convicted of these crimes.
Sam is voting YES!
Proposition 21
EXPANDS LOCAL GOVERNMENTS’ AUTHORITY TO ENACT RENT CONTROL ON RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY. INITIATIVE STATUTE.
Prop. 21 amends state law to allow local governments to establish rent control on residential properties over 15 years old. Allows rent increases on rent-controlled properties of up to 15 percent over three years from previous tenant’s rent above any increase allowed by local ordinance. It also allows unelected rent boards (or elected rent boards) to impose radical rent control and regulations, even on single-family homes. This is nothing more than an infringement on personal property rights.
Sam is voting NO!
Proposition 22
CHANGES EMPLOYMENT CLASSIFICATION RULES FOR APP-BASED TRANSPORTATION AND DELIVERY DRIVERS. INITIATIVE STATUTE.
Prop. 22 is likely the most controversial measure on the ballot this year. In essence, it upends AB 5, which was passed by the Legislature last year and prohibited the ability of individuals to work as independent contractors – or “gig” workers. AB 5 required gig workers to become actual employees of a company (it was a pro-union maneuver written by a former labor organizer), thereby eliminating the ability of individuals from taking on work independently. The impact of AB 5 has been devastating, and deserves to be repealed. Although Prop. 22 doesn’t completely undo all the provisions of AB 5, it will restore many jobs in the ride-share and food service industry.
Sam is voting YES!
Proposition 23
AUTHORIZES STATE REGULATION OF KIDNEY DIALYSIS CLINICS. ESTABLISHES MINIMUM STAFFING AND OTHER REQUIREMENTS. INITIATIVE STATUTE.
Prop. 23 will require privately operated dialysis clinics to accept any patient regardless of who is paying the bill. It also imposes reporting and staffing requirements that will increase costs significantly. Supported by unions who are upset that dialysis workers are not unionized.
Sam is voting NO!
Proposition 24
AMENDS CONSUMER PRIVACY LAWS. INITIATIVE STATUTE.
Prop. 24 is internet privacy initiative that has caused a major clash of left-wing titans. Those who support say that it will add privacy protections against unauthorized use of personal information by corporations, and those opposing say that it will undermine existing privacy protections already in statute. It creates a new state agency to write and enforce regulations that have the effect of new laws, but that no elected official will vote on. The advantage will land with the largest companies, because many small start-up companies will not be able to afford the legal bills to file the compliance documents, or the cost of defending themselves from complaints, even meritless complaints. The regulatory burden will strangle technological innovation in California and protect tech giants while hurting small businesses.
Sam is voting NO!
Proposition 25
REFERENDUM TO OVERTURN A 2018 LAW THAT REPLACED MONEY BAIL SYSTEM WITH A SYSTEM BASED ON PUBLIC SAFETY RISK.
Prop. 25 is one of the most important measures on the 2020 Ballot. It is a referendum that overturns the legislature’s actions banning the existing bail system and replacing it with a new “public risk system”. Under the public risk system, anyone arrested for any crime will either be released on their own recognizance with the hope that they show up for their court date, or, they will be kept in jail if they meet some assessment criteria as a flight risk. Bail bonds will be prohibited. Thus, far more individuals who have been arrested will be released with no supervision. And, if a person does not show up for their court date, they are cited and released again with another notice to appear. Given what has been happening across the nation with violent protesters being released to commit crimes again and again, this proposition has become even more critical.
NOTE: A “yes” vote is in favor of the “no bail” law going into effect; a “no” vote means you do not want the law to take effect.
Sam is voting NO!