Should online sports betting be legal in California? Does the right to abortion need to be included in the state’s constitution? Can a ban on flavored tobacco products remain in place?
These are just a few of the ballot measures, which require approval by a majority of voters, before Californians in November.
Measures can be placed on the ballot either by the legislature (which has the power to place proposed changes in laws and constitutional amendments before voters) or by California voters (who have the ability to place initiatives or referendums on the ballot).
Secretary of State Shirley Weber recently assigned proposition numbers to the seven measures voters will decide in November. And her office is also accepting arguments for or against the ballot measures to be included in the Official Voter Information Guide. (More information about how to submit an argument can be found on the secretary of state’s website at sos.ca.gov.)
Here’s a look at the legislative, initiative and referendum measures that will appear on the Nov. 8 ballot along with their assigned numbers.
Proposition 1: This is a constitutional amendment that, if approved, would enshrine protections for abortion rights in the California Constitution. It would prohibit the state from denying or interfering with a person’s reproductive health care, including when it comes to their choice regarding abortion and contraceptives.
Proposition 26: This would allow on-site sports wagering at specific privately operated horse racing tracks in four counties (Alameda, Los Angeles, Orange and San Diego) for those older than 21. It would also allow federally recognized Native American tribes to operate dice games, roulette and sports wagering on tribal lands. This measure is estimated to increase state revenues by tens of millions of dollars each year.
Proposition 27: Another sports wagering-related measure, this one would legalize online and mobile sports wagering offered by federally recognized Native American tribes and eligible businesses. Most of the tax and licensing revenues would be directed to homelessness programs as well as regulatory costs and nonparticipating tribes. This measure is estimated to increase state revenues by the mid-hundreds of millions of dollars annually.
Proposition 28: This measure would provide additional funding for arts and music education in all K-12 public schools, including charters. Funding would be based on a formula that considers both enrollment and students from low-income families, and local education agencies would be encouraged to use the money to hire new staff. This is estimated to require, beginning in 2023-2024, an additional $800 million to $1 billion annually for arts programs.
Proposition 29: This measure would require a physician, nurse practitioner or physician assistant with at least six months of relevant experience to be on-site during treatment at an outpatient kidney dialysis clinic. Among other things, it would also prohibit clinics from closing or substantially reducing services without approval from the state and would require clinics to report dialysis-related infection information to California. Additionally, clinics would be prohibited from turning away patients based on their method of payment. This is estimated to accrue costs for state and local governments in the tens of millions of dollars each year.
Proposition 30: To support the state’s promotion of electric vehicles and wildfire prevention efforts, this measure would increase the personal income tax on those making more than $2 million by 1.75%. This is estimated to increase annual state tax revenues between $3 billion to $4.5 billion with most of the funds used for incentives for zero-emission vehicle purchases as well as electric vehicle charging stations. Other funds would be directed toward wildfire prevention and suppression efforts, including the training and hiring of new firefighters.
Proposition 31: This measure would solidify a 2020 law signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom that banned the sale of certain flavored tobacco products. It requires a majority of voters to approve the ban in order for the law to be implemented.
Source: Orange County Register
Be First to Comment