The following information was found at the Secretary of State’s website, ballotpedia.org or the California Voter’s Guide, unless otherwise stated.
Secretary of State: www.sos.ca.gov/elections/ballot-measures/qualified-ballot-measures.htm
Ballotpedia: www.ballotpedia.org
California Voter’s Guide: www.voterguide.sos.ca.gov/propositions
Proposition 30 – Temporary taxes to fund education
Summary
Those who earn more than $250,000 annually would see a seven-year increase on their income taxes. Sales taxes would also be raised by 0.25 percent for four years. The revenue generated would go towards schools and public safety realignment funding. Approximately $6 billion would be raised annually after 2018-19 from the sales tax increase, with revenues going towards the state budget. Budget cuts, mostly in education, for 2012-13 would not occur.
NOTE: According to the state constitution, if two income tax measures conflict, the one with the most votes will prevail. Therefore, Prop. 30 cannot pass if Prop. 38 passes with more votes, and vice versa.
If voting “yes”
Income taxes will be raised for seven years and sales taxes will be raised for four years, with money going towards programs in the state budget. Students in the Cal State University system will receive a refund of the 9 percent tuition increase from fall 2012 and will not see a 5 percent tuition increase in spring 2013.
If voting “no”
Taxes will be increased, and public programs, such as education, will see budget cuts in 2012-13. The CSU system will undergo a $250 million trigger cut, and students will see a 5 percent tuition increase implemented by next spring. Out-of-state students will see a 7 percent tuition increase by next fall.
Pros
The temporary tax increase on the wealthiest citizens would help raise billions of dollars for California’s education system, prevent further cuts to education programs, provide funding for public safety and help balance the state’s budget.
Cons
There is no guarantee that money from the tax increase will go straight towards education. It is unclear where the revenue will end up, and schools will not be reformed and wasteful spending will not be cut.
Groups who support
Cal State University, California Faculty Association, California State Student Association, Cal State Long Beach Associated Students Inc., Long Beach Unified School District
Source: yesonprop30.com
Groups who oppose
Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, Small Business Action Committee, National Federation of Independent Business California
Source: stopprop30.com
Proposition 31 – State budget
Summary
Creates a two-year state budget cycle and restricts the California legislature from spending more than $25 million at a time without the agreement to offset the revenue or cut spending. Sales tax revenues would drop by $200 million annually, and funding to local governments would increase. Gov. Jerry Brown would have the ability to cut the budget in financial emergencies if the legislature does not make cuts. A performance review of all state programs and state and local budgets is recommended. Bills must be publicly released before a vote.
If voting “yes”
Financial responsibilities of the governor and legislature will change. Local governments will be able to modify how state-funded programs apply for them. Spending more than $25 million will be offset by other means.
If voting “no”
Financial responsibilities will stay the same. Local governments will not have the ability to change the way state-funded programs operate.
Pros
It would keep Californians informed on bills and financial matters. The initiative requires the state to report its spending before spending more. Local governments would have more responsibility.
Cons
Prop. 31’s text can be construed as “confusing.” With more power, counties may be able to alter state laws. States cannot cut taxes without raising taxes somewhere else or cutting spending.
Groups who support
Taxpayers for Government Accountability, California Forward Action, California Chamber of Commerce
Source: accountableca.org
Groups who oppose
Californians for Transparent and Accountable Government, California Federation of Teachers, California Labor Federation
Source: prop31facts.com
Proposition 32 – Political contributions by payroll deduction
Summary
Prevents unions, corporations and government contractors from using payroll-deducted funds for any kind of political purpose. The proposition also forbids unions and corporate contributions to any candidate or committee. This may cost up to $1 million annually to enforce.
If voting “yes”
Funds deducted from an employee’s paycheck will not be used for political purposes. Unions, corporations and government contractors will be more restricted in regards to donations.
If voting “no”
No change in current law. Unions, corporations and government contractors will be able to use payroll-deducted funds for political purposes.
Pros
It splits the line between politicians and special-interest groups. All contributions would be voluntary, not taken from a check.
Cons
Applies restrictions to unions but leaves loopholes for big corporations.
Groups who support
Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, Citizens for California Reform, California Taxpayer Protection Committee
Source: yesprop32.com
Groups who oppose
California Faculty Association, California Federation of Teachers, Long Beach City Council
Source: stopspecialexemptions.org
Proposition 33 – Auto Insurance
Summary
Allows insurance companies to give continuous coverage discounts on automobile policies to new customers who switched from another insurer. If a driver can prove automobile coverage for the past five years, a full continuous coverage discount would be provided. If a driver was covered for only three of the last five years, 60 percent of the discount would be provided. Those who had to stop driving for 90 days for any reason, 18 months due to loss of employment or were in active military service, would still be eligible for the discount. The fiscal impact of this proposition would be negligible.
If voting “yes”
Insurance companies will be able to offer discounts on insurance based on the number of years the individual has been insured.
If voting “no”
Insurers will not be able to provide insurance discounts to new customers, no matter how long the customer has been insured before. Companies will still be able to offer discounts to existing customers.
Pros
It allows all drivers to keep their coverage discounts when they switch insurers. It would be easier to switch insurance policies from one insurer to another, which will lead to increased competition amongst insurance providers and lower rates for everyone.
Cons
It unfairly targets those reentering the insurance market who stopped driving for legitimate reasons and allows insurance companies to mark up premiums for drivers with perfect records.
Groups who support
California Association of Highway Patrolmen, American Legion, Veterans of Foreign Wars California
Source: yesprop33.com
Groups who oppose
California Alliance for Retired Americans, Consumer Watchdog, California Labor Federation
Source: stopthesurcharge.consumerwatchdogcampaign.org
Proposition 34 – Death Penalty
Summary
Replaces the death penalty with life imprisonment without parole, and changes all inmates’ sentences on death row to life imprisonment without parole. Creates the SAFE California fund, which allocates $100 million from the general fund to law enforcement agencies over the next four years to aid investigations of rape and murder. Requires all inmates, including those considered violent, to work while in prison to give restitution to those they victimized.
If voting “yes”
Offenders charged with murder and those on death row will have their sentences changed from the death penalty to life imprisonment without a possibility of parole. Funds amounting to $100 million would be granted to local law enforcement agencies over the next four years. The funding will be used to further investigate homicide and rape cases.
If voting “no”
Those sentenced with the death penalty will stay on their original sentencing, and certain future offenders may be charged with the death penalty. Local law enforcement will not get additional funding from the state to investigate homicide and rape cases.
Pros
The proposition is expected to save $130 million a few years after its induction. Further investigation of crimes may allow for thorough and fair sentencing. Fewer appeal cases for death row inmates and fewer court hearings are expected to save California more money than it costs to house inmates on death row. County jails, which often house murder suspects for the duration of their trials, are expected to save money from shortened trials as well.
Cons
California lacks the funds necessary to provide an additional $100 million to law enforcement agencies. California residents would have to provide thousands of taxpayer dollars annually to house, feed and provide healthcare for violent offenders. If increased funding to law enforcement agencies results in an increase in arrests, the measure could create additional costs for county jails, trials and prison operations.
Groups who support
Equal Justice Initiative, Feminist Majority Foundation, Green Party of California
Source: safecalifornia.org
Groups who oppose
Long Beach Police Officer’s Association, Citizens Against Homicide, California Association of Highway Patrolmen
Source: voteno34.org
Proposition 35 – Human Trafficking
Criminal penalties for human trafficking would be increased, including longer prison sentences and fines of up to $1,500,000. Collected fines would fund law enforcement training and victim services. Persons convicted of human trafficking would have to register as sex offenders, and all sex offenders would be newly required to disclose Internet identities and online activity.
If voting “yes”
A wider range of sexual offenses in the state will be classified as human trafficking, and those involved will be criminalized and subject to longer prison sentences and fines. Additional funding will go towards law enforcement training programs.
If voting “no”
Existing human trafficking laws will stay in effect.
Pros
It aims to bring human trafficking to a stop, making the streets and online communication safer for members of society.
Cons
Those who benefit from the profits of prostitution will be forced to register as sex offenders, which will affect the state budget adding less than $2 million annually for law enforcement training and added imprisonments.
Groups who support
California Law Enforcement, Crime Victims United, California Labor Federation, Planned Parenthood
Source: caseact.org
Groups who disagree
Harvey Milk LGBT Democratic Club, California Council of Churches, California Association for Criminal Justice, The Peace and Freedom Party.
Source: esplerp.org
Proposition 36 – Three Strikes Law
Summary
Calls for revision of the Three Strikes Law and would impose a life sentence only if the third crime is serious or violent. In some cases, resentencing may be authorized unless the felon is convicted of rape, murder, child molestation and other serious crimes involving drug and firearm possession.
If voting “yes”
Criminal offenders convicted of two prior serious or violent crimes who commit additional non-serious crimes will no longer have the Three Strikes Law imposed upon them. Those already serving life sentences may be eligible for resentencing, depending on the gravity of their latter crimes.
If voting “no”
The current three-strikes law will go unchanged. Offenders already sentenced to life will continue to serve their sentences. Those who are guilty of prior serious or felony convictions and commit any new felony may be sentenced to life imprisonment.
Pros
The revised Three Strikes Law would restore its original purpose: to focus on repeat offenders of serious or violent crimes. Nonviolent third time offenders will serve shorter sentences, saving a substantial amount of taxpayers’ dollars, about $70 million annually. Prison crowding will be reduced.
Cons
Criminals who have committed serious crimes in the past but were sentenced to life for a recent non-serious crime would be released from prison earlier under this new law.
Groups who Support
Los Angeles County District Attorney Steve Cooley, Lawyers of Stanford Law School, The NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund, The California Democratic Party
Source: yeson36.org
Groups who oppose
The California Republican Party, California Police Chiefs Association, Peace Officers Research League of California
Source: noonprop36.com
Proposition 37 – Genetically Engineered Foods
Summary
Requires most genetically engineered foods – excluding alcoholic beverages, organic foods, restaurant foods and other prepared foods that are eaten immediately – to be marked “genetically engineered” on the front package or label.
If voting “yes”
Most genetically engineered foods sold will be properly labeled. The Department of Public Health will regulate the labeling of such foods and individuals will be allowed to sue food manufacturers who violate the measure’s labeling provisions.
If voting “no”
Foods that go through the process of having their genetic make-up modified will not be required to have “genetically engineered” labels on their packages.
Pros
Consumers would be aware if the foods they purchase contain genetically engineered ingredients.
Cons
In order to regulate the labeling of products the state would see an increase in administrative costs that could range from a few hundred thousand dollars to more than $1 million annually.
Groups who support
California Labor Federation, California Nurses Association, Whole Foods
Source: carighttoknow.org
Groups who disagree
California Small Business Association, California Chamber of Commerce, California Farm Bureau Federation, American Council on Science and Health
Source: noprop37.com
Proposition 38 – Tax to fund education and early childhood programs
Summary
A personal income tax increase would be implemented for individuals earning more than $7,316 annually, using a scale that ranges from 0.4 percent for the lowest wage salaries and up to 2.2 percent for individuals earning more than $2.5 million annually. The tax increas
e would be implemented for the next 12 years and would allocate its revenues towards K-12 schools, early childhood programs and reducing state debt.
NOTE: According to the state constitution, if two income tax measures conflict, the one with the most votes will prevail. Therefore, Prop. 30 cannot pass if Prop. 38 passes with more votes, and vice versa.
If voting “yes”
During the first four years, 60 percent of revenues will go to K-12 schools, 30 percent to the state debt and 10 percent to early childhood programs. After four years, 85 percent will go to K-12 schools and 15 percent to early childhood programs. If California grows and per capita personal income is more than the past five-year’s average, the additional revenues will go towards state debt payments.
If voting “no”
K-12 schools, preschool, early childhood programs and state debt payments will not receive the projected $10 billion raised in revenue by the proposition, an amount that is expected to increase over time, in 2013-14.
Pros
The revenues acquired would be dedicated exclusively to K-12 schools, early childhood programs and state debt payments.
Cons
The proposition is binding for the next 12 years. It taxes all individuals who annually earn more than $7,316.
Groups who support
California State Parent Teacher Association, California Head Start Association, Long Beach Unified School District
Source: prop38forlocalschools.org
Groups who oppose
California Community College Association, California Business PAC, California State Sherriff’s Association, California Faculty Association
Source: stopthemiddleclasstaxhike.com
Prop 39 – Tax Treatment for Multistate Businesses
Summary
Requires businesses that operate in multiple states to pay income taxes based on the percentage of their sales in California and modify the way these corporations calculate their income tax burdens. It eliminates out-of-state corporations from avoiding taxes by keeping jobs out of Calif., closing tax loopholes. The expected $550 million in savings would go towards education and energy efficient projects through the year 2017.
If voting “yes”
Multi-state businesses will no longer benefit from using out-of-state labor. Some multi-state businesses will have to pay more corporate income taxes due to this change. About half of this increased tax revenue over the next five years will be used to support energy efficiency and alternative energy projects.
If voting “no”
Most multi-state businesses will continue to be able to choose one of two methods to determine their California taxable income.
Pros
It would remove the advantage of building new facilities or hiring out-of-state employees. It provides $1 billion to be used for creating 40,000 new jobs in California.
Cons
The $1 billion tax increase on California job creators that employ tens of thousands of middle class workers could add to the existing multi-billion dollar state deficit.
Groups who support
Californians to Close the Out-of-State Corporate Tax Loophole, California Tax Reform Association, Los Angeles Building and Construction Trades Council
Source: cleanenergyjobsact.com
Groups who oppose
California Manufacturers and Technology Association, National Tax Limitation Committee, Californian Asian Pacific Chamber of Commerce
Source: stop39.com
Prop 40 – Redistricting
Summary
Counteracts work done by the California Citizens Redistricting Commission, which is responsible for redrawing the lines for California’s Board of Equalization and its legislative and congressional districts. A “no” vote on Prop. 40 would allow officials appointed by the Supreme Court to redraw the State Senate district boundaries.
If voting “yes”
The State Senate district boundaries certified by the Citizens Redistricting Commission will remain in place.
If voting “no”
Overturns current district boundaries. Boundaries will be adjusted by officials that are supervised by California’s Supreme Court. California would see a one-time cost of $500,000, which would be implemented to fund the redrawing of State Senate district lines.
Pros
Preexisting State Senate district map lines are protected. Lawmakers cannot draw district lines. There will be no fiscal impact on state or local governments.
Cons
There are currently no cons or oppositions to Prop. 40.
Groups who support
California Common Cause, Los Angeles Area Chamber of Commerce, National Federation of Independent Business – California
Source: www.holdpoliticiansaccountable.org