California is known for its love of direct democracy, and voters in the nation’s most populous state are once again wading through a mix of ballot proposals that could confuse even the most sophisticated of voters.
Among the easily understood ballot questions on the ballot Tuesday in California: Tougher sentencing for drug and theft crimes, raising the state’s minimum wage and removing language against same-sex marriage from the state constitution.
But voters are also being asked whether to place restrictions on a health care provider that generates revenues from a federal prescription drug program, as well as whether to make permanent a budget mechanism that even state lawmakers have had trouble understanding over the years.
Voters will decide on 10 ballot measures in all, and each measure requires a simple majority to pass.
Here’s what to know about some of the key measures.
Tougher sentencing for drug crimes and theft
Proposition 36 would reclassify some drug possession crimes and theft as felonies, allowing for tougher penalties. The measure would reverse changes the state made a decade ago in order to reduce the state’s prison population.
Supporters say the initiative is necessary to address “a continued explosion in theft and trafficking of deadly hard drugs” in the state. Gov. Gavin Newsom and criminal justice reform advocates oppose it, saying it would waste money on incarcerating people.
Major retailers are among the initiative’s backers, and they’re hoping to harness growing frustrations over property crimes and fentanyl deaths in the state. A recent survey from the Public Policy Institute of California found that nearly three quarters of voters support it — more than any other measure on the ballot this year.
Bonds for climate and schools
Two propositions would authorize borrowing of $10 billion each for school facilities and projects related to climate change, including drinking water and wildfire prevention. Historically, California voters have approved similar measures, but the failure of a water bond in 2018 showed that borrowing proposals are not always slam dunks.
A third ballot measure would make it easier for local governments to raise money for affordable housing, by lowering the approval threshold from two-thirds of voters to 55 percent.
The minimum wage
California’s minimum wage would rise to $18 by 2026 — the highest in the nation — and then go up with inflation if Proposition 32 passes.
The California Democratic Party, labor unions and progressive groups all support the measure, which they say would raise wages for about two million Californians. Opponents, including employers in the restaurant and grocery industries, say it would raise costs and cause more confusion for businesses.
Perhaps reflecting the limits of liberal appetite for wage increases, the Public Policy Institute of California found that most voters said they don’t plan to support it. California already raised the minimum wage for fast-food employees to $20 per hour in April, and restaurants have steadily increased menu prices to account for higher wages and inflation.
Old language against same-sex marriage
California has allowed same-sex couples to marry since 2013, two years before that became the law of the land. But the state constitution still says “only marriage between a man and a woman” is valid in the state (a section that was itself added thanks to a 2008 ballot initiative).
Proposition 3 would remove that language, but wouldn’t change who can marry in the state. Some Democrats have suggested the change is not just a matter of principle, but a way to protect the state against any federal changes that could affect same-sex marriages under Republican control of government.
Inmate rights
Proposition 6 would ban forced labor in California prisons, a practice that has been increasingly banned by other states, starting with Colorado in 2018. The proposal came from a recommendation from a state commission that studied reparations for African Americans.
Rent control — and revenge?
Proposition 33 would make it easier for local governments to impose rent controls by eliminating a state law that exempts certain types of housing, including new apartments, from such ceilings. Opponents have contributed more than $120 million, and supporters nearly $50 million, according to the campaign finance statements, making this fight the most expensive on the ballot this year.
The initiative is backed by the AIDS Healthcare Foundation, a nonprofit that generates hundreds of millions of dollars in revenue each year, mostly through a federal discount drug program. The organization has increasingly weighed into ballot politics and has tried and failed twice before to overhaul the state’s rent control laws.
Opponents include apartment owners and the California Association of Realtors, but also some key Democrats, including Gov. Gavin Newsom.
At first glance, Proposition 34 seems unrelated: It would dramatically restrict how certain health care providers spend revenues from a federal discount drug program. But political experts say that it was designed to punish the AIDS Healthcare Foundation for supporting Proposition 33 and rent control measures in the past. The foundation and some newspapers have called it a “revenge initiative” that weaponizes the state’s ballot measure process.
The post California voters are wading through a dizzying mix of ballot measures. appeared first on New York Times.
