Elections in California |
---|
Proposition 27 was an unsuccessful ballot proposition on the November 2, 2010 ballot in California, placed there by the initiative process. If approved, this measure would have repealed California Proposition 11 (2008), which authorized the creation of the California Citizens Redistricting Commission to draw the electoral boundaries for State Assembly and State Senate districts. It would also have modified the provision in California law that says that proposed congressional districts can not be subjected to a veto referendum. [1]
According to political journalist Shane Goldmacher, Democratic political strategists said that this initiative was a political tactic to defeat Proposition 20, the Congressional Redistricting Initiative, which was also on the November 2, 2010 ballot: "Democratic political strategists say the best way to ensure a 'no' vote this fall on California Proposition 20 is to confuse the public further with a second ballot measure on the already head spinning topic of political line drawing." [2] This tactic was ultimately unsuccessful, as Proposition 20 passed, extending the commission's power over redistricting to include U.S. House districts.
Proposition 27 and Proposition 20 each had a so-called "poison pill" provision. This meant that if both received a majority vote, the proposition that received the highest majority vote would be the law to go into effect. Since Proposition 20 passed but Proposition 27 did not, neither provision was triggered.
Ballot title:
Official summary:
Estimated fiscal impact:
If Proposition 27 was approved by California's voters, it would have amended some parts of the California Constitution.
Specifically, it will amend:
Daniel Lowenstein, the official proponent of the measure, is a professor at UCLA and a former chairman of the California Fair Political Practices Commission. [1]
Although Lowenstein's name was on the application for the initiative, he said that the real sponsors are Democratic members of the U.S. Congress led by Howard Berman and Berman's brother Michael Berman of Berman & D'Agostino Campaigns, [3] a paid consultant for Democrats on redistricting issues. Lowenstein says, "It's Michael and Howard together." [4] Both Daniel Lowenstein and Michael Berman worked on the No on California Proposition 77 (2005) campaign where Mr. Lowenstein was Chairman and Mr. Berman was the committee's campaign consultant. [5] California Proposition 77 (2005) was a previous attempt at independent redistricting reform that failed at the ballot box. Mr. Lowenstein also wrote scholarly articles that highlight Michael Berman and his company. [6] [7]
During the 2001 California redistricting process, U.S. Congresswoman Loretta Sanchez explained how the pre-Proposition 11 Gerrymandering system worked and Michael Berman's importance in the process. "Twenty thousand is nothing to keep your seat. I spend $2 million [campaigning] every year. If my colleagues are smart, they'll pay their $20,000, and Michael [Berman] will draw the district they can win in. Those who have refused to pay? God help them." [8] [9] [10] Congresswoman Loretta Sanchez did not fund Yes on Proposition 27, but her sister [11] U.S. Congresswoman Linda Sanchez was among the members of Congress funding Yes on Proposition 27. However, both Congresswomen Loretta Sanchez and Linda Sanchez did fund [12] the campaign against a previous redistricting measure, California Proposition 77 (2005).
Reasons Lowenstein gives to support his measure include:
Arguments were submitted to the official California Voter Guide on behalf of a "yes" vote on Proposition 27, as were rebuttals to the arguments provided by Prop 27 opponents. The signers of these arguments were:
The arguments made by them for publication in the California Voter Guide on behalf of Proposition 27 focus on these themes:
Haim Saban loaned $2 million to the campaign in mid-April. [14] Saban is in the entertainment business and his personal fortune has been helped along by his association with the Mighty Morphin' Power Rangers. [15] Saban also has media holdings in Israel, Europe, Asia and the United States, including a major stake in Univision, a Spanish-language network. [16] Saban's donation to the effort to overturn Proposition 11 has raised eyebrows, because in 2008, he gave $200,000 to the campaign to pass Proposition 11.
Many of the donors were also big-money donors to the Democratic Party. Others, including Haim Saban, Fred Eychaner, George Soros, Edith Wasserman, Louise Gund, Jack C. Bendheim, Kathryn Hall, and George M. Marcus also contributed between $25,000 up to $25 million to the William J. Clinton Foundation.
Many of the donors supporting Proposition 27 were also major contributors [12] opposing California Proposition 77 (2005), seeking to defeat an earlier proposed redistricting plan. AFSCME spent more than $1,000,000 on both Proposition 77 and on Proposition 27. The largest contribution to No on Proposition 77 was $4,000,000 from Stephen Bing [17] 's Shangri-La Entertainment Company, [18] a major contributor to 527 political organizations. [19] [20] Stephen Bing is not a contributor to Yes on Proposition 27. However, Stephen Bing was the #1 top political contributor in 2002, [21] joined by Haim Saban (#2), Fred Eychaner (#3), Peter G. Angelos (#8), and Louise Gund (#18), who funded both Yes on Proposition 27 and No on Proposition 77.
Through October 20, 2010, these donors have given $20,000 or more to the "Yes on FAIR, Yes on 27--A Coalition of Entrepreneurs, Working People, Businesses, Community Leaders Such as Karen Bass, and Other Concerned Citizens" campaign committee.
(Updated October 20, 2010)
Donor (Affiliation) | Amount |
---|---|
Haim Saban (Saban Capital Group, President) | $2,000,000 |
American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) | $1,250,000 |
American Federation of Teachers (AFT) | $1,000,000 |
Working 4 Working Americans (associated with the United Brotherhood of Carpenters & Joiners [22] ) | $500,000 |
Democratic State Central Committee of California | $250,000 |
California State Council of Service Employees Political Issues Committee (SEIU) | $200,000 |
Judy Chu TruPAC | $125,000 |
Charles Calderon for State Assembly Committee | $100,000 |
George Soros | $100,000 |
Peter G. Angelos (Attorney, Law Offices of Peter G. Angelos and majority owner of the Baltimore Orioles baseball team) | $100,000 |
Louise Gund | $100,000 |
Edith Wasserman (Wasserman Foundation, vice-president) | $100,000 |
Fred Eychaner (Newsweb Corporation, Owner) | $100,000 |
Zenith Insurance (Stanley R. Zax, President/Chairman of the Board) | $100,000 |
International Association of Fire Fighters | $100,000 |
Steven S. Myers (Dolphin Capital Holdings, Inc., Chairman/CEO) | $100,000 |
Jack C. Bendheim (Phibro Animal Health Corp., President) | $50,000 |
International Brotherhood of Electric Workers (IBEW) Educational Committee | $50,000 |
International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) Local No. 47 | $50,000 |
California State Association of Electrical Workers | $50,000 |
California State Pipe Trades Council of the United Association | $50,000 |
Joseph W. Cotchett (Attorney with Cotchett, Piper & McCarthy) | $25,000 |
Kathryn Hall (Hall Financial Group, Investor; Former Ambassador to Austria, appointed by President Clinton) | $25,000 |
C. Paul Johnson (Astrale e Tierra Winery, CEO) | $25,000 |
Stephen Grand (Grand-Sakwa Properties, real estate investor) | $25,000 |
George M. Marcus (Marcus & Millichap, Chairman; University of California Regent appointed by former Governor Gray Davis) | $25,000 |
Stewart Resnick (Roll International Corp., President and Chairman) | $25,000 |
Plumbers & Pipefitters Local 447 | $25,000 |
DRIVE Committee (The Teamsters Union) | $25,000 |
Santa Ynez Band of Mission Indians [23] | $25,000 |
Lloyd Thomas Galloway (Attorney at Galloway & Associates) | $20,000 |
Note: "Working 4 Working Americans" is described by Capitol Weekly as "a Washington, D.C.-based, labor-backed group." [24]
The following table lists the individuals that contributed $20,000 or more to the Yes on Prop. 27 campaign. Many of the top individual donors also are big-money donors to the Democratic Party. The table indicates
(Updated October 11, 2010)
Individual | Affiliation | $ Amount to Yes on Prop. 27 | Donor Address in California? | Donor to No on Prop. 77 (2005)? | $ Amount to DSCC (2010) | $ Amount to DCCC (2010) | $ Amount to DNC (2010) | $ Amount to Clinton Foundation | $ Amount to Obama Inauguration | Affiliation's Position on OpenSecrets.org Heavy Hitters List | Affiliation's % of Contributions Given to Democrats |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Haim Saban [29] [30] [31] [32] | Saban Capital Group (Chairman/CEO) | $2,000,000 | Yes | YES | $34,400 [33] | $30,400 | - | $5M to $10M [34] | - | #85 [35] | 99% [36] [37] |
Peter G. Angelos [38] | Offices of Peter G. Angelos (Attorney) Baltimore Orioles Archived 2011-02-02 at the Wayback Machine baseball team (Majority Owner) [39] | $100,000 | NO | YES | $40,400 [40] | - | $30,200 | - | - | - | 94% [41] |
Fred Eychaner [30] [42] [43] | Newsweb Corporation(Owner), Alphawood Foundation [44] (Founder and Chairman) | $100,000 | NO | YES | $30,400 [45] | - | $15,200 | $10M to $25M [46] | $50,000 | #100 [47] | 100% [48] |
Louise Gund [49] | Philanthropist, Louise Gund Foundation | $100,000 | NO | YES | $30,000 [50] | $30,400 | - | $50K to $100K [51] | - | - | - |
Steven S. Myers [52] | Dolphin Capital Holdings, Inc. (Chairman/CEO) SM&A (CEO, Retired) | $100,000 | Yes | No | - | $30,400 | $60,400 [53] | - | $300 | - | 52% [54] |
George Soros | Soros Fund Management (chairman) | $100,000 | NO | No | - | $20,000 [55] | $15,200 | $500K to $1M [56] | $200,000 (includes relatives) | - | 59% [57] (36% other, non-Repub.) |
Edith Wasserman | Retired, Wasserman Foundation (Vice-President) [58] | $100,000 | Yes | YES | $35,400 [59] | $30,400 | - | $5M to $10M [60] | - | - | 91% [61] |
Stanley R. Zax | Zenith Insurance Company (President/Chairman of the Board) | $100,000 | Yes | No | $10,000 [62] | $30,400 | - | - | - | - | 91% [63] |
Jack C. Bendheim | Phibro Animal Health Corp. (President) | $50,000 | NO | YES | $15,000 [64] | $21,300 | - | $25K to $50K [65] | - | - | 94% [66] |
Joseph W. Cotchett | Cotchett, Piper & McCarthy (Attorney) | $25,000 | Yes | No | $30,400 [67] | - | - | - | - | - | 99% [68] |
Stephen Grand | Grand-Sakwa Properties (Real Estate Investor) | $25,000 | Yes | YES | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
Kathryn Hall | Hall Financial Group (Investor) | $25,000 | NO | YES | $33,600 [69] | - | - | $100K to $250K [70] | $50,000 | - | 100% [71] |
C. Paul Johnson | Astrale e Terra, (CEO) | $25,000 | Yes | YES | - | - | $30,400 [72] | - | $3,000 | - | 100% [73] |
George M. Marcus | Marcus & Millichap (Chairman) University of California (Regent) | $25,000 | Yes | YES | - | $45,600 [74] | - | $250K to $500K [75] | $15,000 | - | 91% [76] |
Stewart Resnick [77] [78] [79] | Roll International Corp. (President and chairman) | $25,000 | Yes | No | - | - | $15,200 [80] | - | - | - | 67% [81] |
Lloyd Thomas Galloway | Galloway & Associates (Attorney) | $20,000 | NO | No | - | - | - | - | - | - | 100% [82] |
Donors Haim Saban and Fred Eychaner received prior attention for their multimillion-dollar donations to the Democratic Party. [30]
Donor Haim Saban ...
Donor Peter G. Angelos ...
Donor Fred Eychaner ...
Donor Louise Gund ...
Donor George Soros ...
Donor Kathryn Hall was named Ambassador to Austria by President Clinton. [103]
Various labor unions have contributed a total $3,325,000 to the Yes on Proposition 27 campaign as of October 21, 2010. The table shows:
(Updated October 21, 2010)
Labor Union | Affiliation | $ Amount to Yes on Prop. 27 | Position on OpenSecrets.org Top Donors List | % Dues Given to Democrats Nationally | Total $ Congress Members also funding Prop. 27 | Donor to No on Prop. 77 (2005)? | $ Amount to Clinton Foundation |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) | AFL-CIO | $1,250,000 | #2 [105] | 98% | $864,200 | YES | $250K to $500K [106] |
American Federation of Teachers (AFT) | AFL-CIO | $1,000,000 | #13 [107] | 98% | $332,400 | No | $100K to $250K [108] |
Working for Working Americans [22] [109] | International Brotherhood of Carpenters & Joiners | $500,000 | #12 [110] | 89% | $478,200 | No | - |
California State Council of Service Employees Political Issues Committee | Service Employees International Union (SEIU) | $200,000 | #11 [111] | 92% | $348,900 | YES | $250K to $500 [112] |
International Association of Fire Fighters | AFL-CIO | $100,000 | #47 [113] | 81% | $182,800 | YES | - |
International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) Educational Committee | International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW), AFL-CIO | $50,000 | #7 [114] | 97% | $784,500 | YES | $100K to $250K [115] |
International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) Local No. 47 | International Brotherhood of Electric Workers (IBEW), AFL-CIO | $50,000 | #7 [114] | 97% | $784,500 | No | $100K to $250K [115] |
California State Association of Electrical Workers | International Brotherhood of Electric Workers (IBEW) | $50,000 | #7 [114] | 97% | $784,500 | No | $100K to $250K [115] |
California State Pipe Trades Council of the United Association [116] [117] | Plumbers & Pipefitters Union, AFL-CIO | $50,000 | #44 [118] | 94% | $451,100 | No | - |
Plumbers & Pipefitters Local 447 [119] | Plumbers & Pipefitters Union, AFL-CIO | $25,000 | #44 [118] | 94% | $451,100 | No | - |
DRIVE Committee | Teamsters Union | $25,000 | #10 [120] | 93% | $691,000 | No | - |
Plumbers & Steamfitters Union No. 467 [121] | Plumbers & Pipefitters Union, AFL-CIO | $10,000 | #44 [118] | 94% | $451,100 | No | - |
Nationally, the Service Employee International Union (SEIU) ...
The California State Council of Service Employees union, part of the SEIU ...
Members of the U.S. Congress who are donors:
Eighteen Democratic members of California's delegation to the U.S. Congress, including Nancy Pelosi, cumulatively gave $175,000 to the initiative effort in February 2010, when the campaign needed funds to pay petition circulators to collect signatures to qualify the measure for the ballot. [128] Proposition 20, the Congressional Redistricting Initiative, which is also on the November 2, 2010 ballot in California is what motivated the round of donations from congressional representatives, according to some pundits. [129]
California has 54 seats in the U.S. Congress. Heading into the November 2, 2010 election, 34 of those seats are held by Democrats. As of October 11, 2001, 18 (nearly 53%) of those incumbent Democratic members of California's delegation to the U.S. Congress had given money to the campaign to urge a "yes" vote on Proposition 27.
No members of the state's other party delegations have, as of October 21, 2010, given money to the "Yes on 27" committee.
The 18 Democratic incumbent Congress Members who either gave money directly to the campaign, whose campaign committees gave money, or whose affiliated political action committee gave money to Proposition 27 are listed below. The table indicates ...
(Updated October 21, 2010)
Congress Member | California Congressional District | Political Party | $ Amount to Yes on Prop. 27 | Congressional Progressive Caucus Member? | Donor to No on Prop. 77 (2005)? | Career Campaign $ from Unions Supporting Prop. 27 | % Contributions from Outside California | % Contributions from PACs |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Howard Berman | CA-28 | Democrat | $10,000 | No | YES | $126,500 [130] | 19% [131] | 35% |
Lois Capps | CA-23 | Democrat | $10,000 | No | YES | $387,000 [132] | 11% [133] | 48% |
Judy Chu | CA-32 | Democrat | $225,000+ | YES | No | $87,800 [134] | 4% [135] | 31% |
Anna Eshoo | CA-14 | Democrat | $10,000 | No | YES | $158,100 [136] | 13% [137] | 54% |
Sam Farr | CA-17 | Democrat | $10,000 | YES | YES | $354,200 [138] | 15% [139] | 66% |
Mike Honda | CA-15 | Democrat | $10,000 | YES | YES | $206,200 [138] | 23% [140] | 42% |
Barbara Lee | CA-9 | Democrat | $10,000 | YES | YES | $238,100 [141] | 17% [142] | 39% |
Zoe Lofgren | CA-16 | Democrat | $10,000 | No | YES | $191,000 [143] | 12% [144] | 54% |
Nancy Pelosi | CA-28 | Democrat | $10,000 | YES (Former) | YES | $347,400 [145] | 30% [146] | 55% |
Doris Matsui | CA-5 | Democrat | $10,000 | No | No | $108,000 [147] | 44% [148] | 56% |
George Miller | CA-7 | Democrat | $10,000 | YES | YES | $427,900 [149] | 52% [150] | 68% |
Laura Richardson | CA-9 | Democrat | $5,000 | YES | No | $155,800 [151] | 22% [152] | 81% |
Lucille Roybal-Allard | CA-34 | Democrat | $10,000 | YES | YES | $288,000 [153] | 24% [154] | 58% |
Linda Sánchez | CA-39 | Democrat | $25,000 | YES | YES | $184,800 [155] | 27% [156] | 57% |
Adam Schiff | CA-29 | Democrat | $10,000 | No | YES | $157,000 [157] | 13% [158] | 41% |
Jackie Speier | CA-12 | Democrat | $10,000 | No | No | $64,500 [159] | 4% [160] | 31% |
Diane Watson | CA-33 | Democrat | $10,000 | YES | YES | $147,000 [161] | 18% [162] | 53% |
Lynn Woolsey | CA-6 | Democrat | $5,000 | YES (Co-Chair) | YES | $504,200 [163] | 8% [164] | 54% |
Arguments were submitted to the official California Voter Guide urging a "no" vote on Proposition 27, as were rebuttals to the arguments provided by Prop 27 supporters. The signers of these arguments were:
The themes of the main arguments they make against Proposition 27 (and in favor of Proposition 20) are:
There is no committee directly opposing Proposition 27. However, there is a committee called "Yes on 20, No on 27--Hold Politicians Accountable, A Coalition of Taxpayers, Seniors, Good Government Groups, Small Business and Community Organizers" whose aim is to pass Proposition 20, a competing ballot measure, and defeat Proposition 27. Because Proposition 27 contains "poison pill" language countering Proposition 27, any money spent to promote a "Yes" vote on Proposition 20 might be considered money spent to oppose Proposition 27, and vice versa.
Charles T. Munger Jr. and his wife Charlotte Lowell are the primary driving force behind Proposition 20 and are its primary funder. [168] Charles T. Munger Jr. is the son of Charles T. Munger Sr., a vice-president at Berkshire Hathaway.
Donors of $20,000 and over to "Yes on 20, No on 27" through October 21 are listed below. The table shows ...
(Updated October 21, 2010)
Individual/Organization | Affiliation | $ Amount to Yes on Prop. 20 No on Prop. 27 | Donor Address in California? |
---|---|---|---|
Charles T. Munger Jr. [171] | Stanford Linear Accelerator Center (Physicist), Self-Employed | $11,177,603 | YES |
Charolette A. Lowell | Attorney, Self-Employed | $956,001 | YES |
Diane B. Wisely [172] | A. Wisely Properties (Executive) | $100,000 | YES |
California Business Political Action Committee (CALBUSPAC) | California Chamber of Commerce | $85,000 | YES |
William Bloomfield | Retired | $50,000 | YES |
Susan L. Groff | Northwest Excavating (Contractor) | $50,000 | YES |
Rebecca Q. Moran | Retired | $50,000 | YES |
Geoffrey C. Rusack | Attorney | $20,000 | YES |
Small Business Political Action Committee | - | $20,000 | YES |
All major donors to "Yes on 20, No on 27" are from California, unlike the donors supporting Proposition 27.
Newspaper | Recommended Vote on Prop. 27 |
---|---|
Bakersfield Californian | NO |
Contra Costa Times | NO |
Fresno Bee | NO |
L.A. Weekly | NO |
Lompoc Record | NO |
Long Beach Press-Telegram | NO |
Los Angeles Daily News | NO |
Los Angeles Times | NO |
Marin Independent Journal | NO |
Monterey Herald | NO |
North County Times | NO |
Oakland Tribune | NO |
Orange County Register | NO |
Riverside Press-Enterprise | NO |
Sacramento Bee | NO |
San Bernardino Sun | NO |
San Diego Union-Tribune | NO |
San Francisco Bay Guardian | YES |
San Francisco Chronicle | NO |
San Francisco Examiner [ permanent dead link ] | NO |
San Gabriel Valley Tribune | NO |
San José Mercury-News | NO |
Santa Cruz Sentinel | NO |
Santa Rosa Press-Democrat | NO |
USA TODAY | Implied NO |
Ventura County Star | NO |
Newspapers that have editorialized in favor of Proposition 27 include:
Newspapers that have editorialized against Proposition 27 include:
Supporters of the Voters FIRST Act for Congress have asked the Fair Political Practices Commission and the Federal Elections Commission to investigate whether some members of California's U.S. Congressional delegation are "hiding their controlling involvement in the initiative" in a way that obscures who is really behind it. [167]
On December 28, 2009, Daniel Lowenstein filed a request with the Office of the California Attorney General for an official ballot title.
The official ballot title was provided on February 5, 2010.
Signatures to qualify the measure for the ballot were collected by Kimball Petition Management at a cost of $2,820,124. [190]
Choice | Votes | % |
---|---|---|
No | 5,457,940 | 59.4 |
Yes | 3,729,612 | 40.6 |
Total votes | 9,187,552 | 100.00 |
A 527 organization or 527 group is a type of U.S. tax-exempt organization organized under Section 527 of the U.S. Internal Revenue Code. A 527 group is created primarily to influence the selection, nomination, election, appointment or defeat of candidates to federal, state or local public office.
The financing of electoral campaigns in the United States happens at the federal, state, and local levels by contributions from individuals, corporations, political action committees, and sometimes the government. Campaign spending has risen steadily at least since 1990. For example, a candidate who won an election to the U.S. House of Representatives in 1990 spent on average $407,600, while the winner in 2022 spent on average $2.79 million; in the Senate, average spending for winning candidates went from $3.87 million to $26.53 million.
Haim Saban is an Israeli-American media proprietor, investor, musical composer and producer of records, film, and television. A businessman with interests in financial services, entertainment, and media, and an estimated net worth of $2.8 billion, he is ranked by Forbes as the 232nd richest person in America. Saban is the founder of Saban Entertainment, producer and distributor of children's television programs in the US such as Power Rangers. He headed up consortiums which purchased the broadcasters ProSiebenSat.1 Media and Univision Communications. He is a major donor to the United States Democratic Party and active in pro-Israel political efforts in the United States. In March 2017, Saban was honored with the 2,605th star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame for his achievements in television.
California Proposition 87 was a proposition on the ballot for California voters for the November 7, 2006 general election, officially titled Alternative Energy. Research, Production, Incentives. Tax on California Oil Producers. It was rejected by the voters, 54.7% opposed to 45.3% in favor. This was highest-funded campaign on any state ballot and surpassing every campaign in the country in spending except the presidential contest.
Proposition 4, or the Abortion Waiting Period and Parental Notification Initiative, also known to its supporters as Sarah's Law, was an initiative state constitutional amendment in the 2008 California general election.
Proposition 8, known informally as Prop 8, was a California ballot proposition and a state constitutional amendment intended to ban same-sex marriage; it passed in the November 2008 California state elections and was later overturned in court. The proposition was created by opponents of same-sex marriage in advance of the California Supreme Court's May 2008 appeal ruling, In re Marriage Cases, which followed the short-lived 2004 same-sex weddings controversy and found the previous ban on same-sex marriage unconstitutional. Proposition 8 was ultimately ruled unconstitutional by a federal court in 2010, although the court decision did not go into effect until June 26, 2013, following the conclusion of proponents' appeals.
California Proposition 6, also known as the Safe Neighborhoods Act and The Runner Initiative, is a statutory initiative that appeared on the November 2008 ballot in California. This proposition was rejected by voters on November 4 of that year.
Proposition 3, the Children's Hospital Bond Act of 2008, is a law that was enacted by California voters by means of the initiative process. It is a bond issue that authorizes $980 million in bonds, to be repaid from state's General Fund, to fund the construction, expansion, remodeling, renovation, furnishing and equipping of children's hospitals. The annual payment on the debt authorized by the initiative is approximately $64 million a year. Altogether, the measure would cost about $1.9 billion over 30 years out of California's general fund.
California Proposition 5, or the Nonviolent Offender Rehabilitation Act was an initiated state statute that appeared as a ballot measure on the November 2008 ballot in California. It was disapproved by voters on November 4 of that year.
Proposition 11 of 2008 was a law enacted by California voters that placed the power to draw electoral boundaries for State Assembly and State Senate districts in a Citizens Redistricting Commission, as opposed to the State Legislature. To do this the Act amended both the Constitution of California and the Government Code. The law was proposed by means of the initiative process and was put to voters as part of the November 4, 2008 state elections. In 2010, voters passed Proposition 20 which extended the Citizen Redistricting Commission's power to draw electoral boundaries to include U.S. House seats as well.
California Proposition 7, would have required California utilities to procure half of their power from renewable resources by 2025. In order to make that goal, levels of production of solar, wind and other renewable energy resources would more than quadruple from their current output of 10.9%. It would also require California utilities to increase their purchase of electricity generated from renewable resources by 2% annually to meet Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) requirements of 40% in 2020 and 50% in 2025. Current law AB32 requires an RPS of 20% by 2010.
The California state elections, November 2010 were held on November 2, 2010.
A California Congressional Redistricting Initiative, Proposition 20 was on the November 2, 2010 ballot in California. It was approved by 61.2% of voters. Election officials announced on May 5 that the proposition had collected sufficient signatures to qualify for the ballot. The measure is known by its supporters as the VOTERS FIRST Act for Congress.
The California state elections was held on Election Day, November 6, 2012. On the ballot were eleven propositions, various parties' nominees for the United States presidency, the Class I Senator to the United States Senate, all of California's seats to the House of Representatives, all of the seats of the State Assembly, and all odd-numbered seats of the State Senate.
Proposition 32 is a California ballot measure that was decided by California voters at the statewide election on November 6, 2012. This initiative statute would have affected political contributions via payroll deductions, and contributions to political candidates. The proposition was defeated by voters by a margin of 56 to 44 percent.
Redistricting in California has historically been highly controversial. Critics have accused legislators of attempting to protect themselves from competition by gerrymandering districts. Conflicts between the governor and the legislature during redistricting often have only been resolved by the courts.
Proposition 16 was a failed California ballot proposition that appeared on the November 3, 2020, general election ballot, asking California voters to amend the Constitution of California to repeal Proposition 209 (1996). Proposition 209 amended the state constitution to prohibit government institutions from considering race, sex, or ethnicity, specifically in the areas of public employment, public contracting, and public education. Therefore, Proposition 209 banned the use of race- and gender-based affirmative action in California's public sector and public university admissions.
California Proposition 15 was a failed citizen-initiated proposition on the November 3, 2020, ballot. It would have provided $6.5 billion to $11.5 billion in new funding for public schools, community colleges, and local government services by creating a "split roll" system that increased taxes on large commercial properties by assessing them at market value, without changing property taxes for small business owners or residential properties for homeowners or renters. The measure failed by a small margin of about four percentage points.
Proposition 21, an initiative statute for local rent control officially called the Expands Local Governments’ Authority to Enact Rent Control on Residential Property, was a California ballot proposition that appeared on the ballot for the general election on November 3, 2020 and was rejected. If approved, it would allow local governments to establish rent control on residential properties that have been occupied for over 15 years. It would also allow landlords who own no more than two homes to exempt themselves from such policies. This would essentially repeal some of the provisions in the 1995 Costa–Hawkins Rental Housing Act. Proposition 21 was rejected by 60% of California voters, just like Proposition 10 was before it.
Proposition 1, titled Constitutional Right to Reproductive Freedom and initially known as Senate Constitutional Amendment 10 (SCA 10), was a California ballot proposition and state constitutional amendment that was voted on in the 2022 general election on November 8. Passing with more than two-thirds of the vote, the proposition amended the Constitution of California to explicitly grant the right to an abortion and contraceptives, making California among the first states in the nation to codify the right. The decision to propose the codification of abortion rights in the state constitution was precipitated in May 2022 by Politico's publishing of a leaked draft opinion showing the United States Supreme Court overturning Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization. The decision reversed judicial precedent that previously held that the United States Constitution protected the right to an abortion.