ARTICLE
We are only 20 days away from election day. Ballots are already out and many voters have already cast their vote and returned their ballot. The Chamber encourages our readers to learn about the ballot propositions so you are prepared to vote accordingly. A couple of weeks ago we wrote about our local ballot measures — https://web.santacruzchamber.org/news/newsarticledisplay.aspx?ArticleID=1975 Today, we want to give our readers a quick overview of the 7 state propositions on the November 8 ballot. The Chamber has weighed in on only one of the propositions — Prop. 30 — at the request of a Chamber member. The Chamber’s Community Affairs Committee (CAC) reviewed the measure and recommended that the Chamber Board oppose the proposition. The Chamber Board agreed with the CAC’s recommendation. The Chamber has not and will not weigh in on the other six propositions. This article is to provide an overview and baseline information to our readers. Proposition 1 — Constitutional Right to Reproductive Freedom, placed on the ballot by the state legislature. Amends California Constitution to expressly include an individual’s fundamental right to reproductive freedom, which includes the fundamental right to choose to have an abortion and the fundamental right to choose or refuse contraceptives. This amendment does not narrow or limit the existing rights to privacy and equal protection under the California Constitution. Fiscal Impact: No direct fiscal effect because reproductive rights already are protected by state law. YES: A YES vote on this measure means: The California Constitution would be changed to expressly include existing rights to reproductive freedom—such as the right to choose whether or not to have an abortion and use contraceptives. NO: A NO vote on this measure means: The California Constitution would not be changed to expressly include existing rights to reproductive freedom. These rights, however, would continue to exist under other state laws. PRO Yes on 1 places the fundamental right to abortion and the fundamental right to contraceptives in the Constitution. Yes on 1 protects individual choices on reproductive care and the right to choose to have an abortion, keeping medical decisions where they belong—between a patient and their provider. YESon1CA.com CON Proposition 1 is an extreme law that allows late-term abortions at taxpayer expense up to the moment of birth—even if the baby is healthy and the mother’s health is not threatened. Current California law already guarantees a woman’s right to choose, making this extreme and costly proposal unnecessary. Proposition 26 — Allows in-person roulette, dice games, and sports wagering on Tribal Lands. This initiative represents a constitutional amendment. Placed on the ballot by petition signatures. Also allows: sports wagering at certain horse racing tracks; private lawsuits to enforce certain gambling laws. Directs revenues to General Fund, problem-gambling programs, and enforcement. Fiscal Impact: Increased state revenues, possibly reaching tens of millions of dollars annually. Some of these revenues would support increased state regulatory and enforcement costs that could reach the low tens of millions of dollars annually. YES: A YES vote on this measure means: Four racetracks could offer in-person sports betting. Racetracks would pay the state a share of sports bets made. Tribal casinos could offer in-person sports betting, roulette, and games played with dice (such as craps) if permitted by individual tribal gambling agreements with the state. Tribes would be required to support state sports betting regulatory costs at casinos. People and entities would have a new way to seek enforcement of certain state gambling laws. YESon26.com NO: A NO vote on this measure means: Sports betting would continue to be illegal in California. Tribal casinos would continue to be unable to offer roulette and games played with dice. No changes would be made to the way state gambling laws are enforced. https://votenoonprop26.org PRO: YES on 26 authorizes sports wagering in-person at tribal casinos. Limits sports wagering to adults only. Prop. 26 supports Indian self-reliance by providing revenue for tribal education, healthcare and other vital services. Prop. 26 promotes safe, responsible gaming and helps stop and prevent illegal gambling. Stand with Tribes. CON: Prop. 26 is a massive expansion of gambling that will lead to more underage gambling and addiction. Prop. 26 is sponsored by five wealthy gaming tribes who want to expand their monopoly on gambling to include sports betting. At the same time, Prop. 26 will devastate other communities of color. No on Prop. 26. Proposition 27 — A competing proposition to Prop 26. Allows online and mobile sports wagering outside of tribal lands. The initiative is a constitutional amendment placed on the ballot by petition signatures. Allows Indian tribes and affiliated businesses to operate online/mobile sports wagering outside tribal lands. Directs revenues to regulatory costs, homelessness programs, and nonparticipating tribes. Fiscal Impact: Increased state revenues, possibly in the hundreds of millions of dollars but not likely to exceed $500 million annually. Some revenues would support state regulatory costs, possibly reaching the mid-tens of millions of dollars annually. YES: A YES vote on this measure means: Licensed tribes or gambling companies could offer online sports betting over the Internet and mobile devices to people 21 years of age and older on non-tribal lands in California. Those offering online sports betting would be required to pay the state a share of sports bets made. A new state unit would be created to regulate online sports betting. New ways to reduce illegal online sports betting would be available.https://yestoprop27.com NO: A NO vote on this measure means: Sports betting would continue to be illegal in California. No changes would be made to the way state gambling laws are enforced. NoProp27.com PRO: Proposition 27 is supported by California Tribes and homelessness and mental health experts. For the first time, Prop. 27 PERMANENTLY funds housing, mental health and addiction treatment by regulating and taxing online sports betting. Prop. 27 contains strict rules protecting minors, regular audits, and oversight by the Attorney General. CON: Prop. 27 is a deceptive scheme funded by out-of-state gambling corporations to legalize a massive expansion of online and mobile sports gambling. Prop. 27 is NOT a "solution" to homelessness. 90% of profits would go to out-of-state corporations. Prop. 27 is opposed by 50+ California Tribes. Vote NO on 27. Proposition 28 — Provides additional funding for arts and music education in public schools. Placed on the ballot by petition signatures. Provides additional funding from the state General Fund for arts and music education in all K–12 public schools (including charter schools). Fiscal Impact: Increased state costs of about $1 billion annually, beginning next year, for arts education in public schools. YES: A YES vote on this measure means: The state would provide additional funding specifically for arts education in public schools. This amount would be above the constitutionally required amount of funding for public schools and community colleges. NO: A NO vote on this measure means: Funding for arts education in public schools would continue to depend on state and local budget decisions. PRO: Barely one in five California public schools have full-time art or music program. Prop. 28 provides additional funding to ensure every student in PK–12 public schools has access to arts and music education—without raising taxes. Protects existing education funding. Includes strict accountability, and transparency. Parents, teachers and children support. voteyeson28.org CON: No argument against Proposition 28 was submitted. Proposition 29 — Requires on-site licensed medical professionals at kidney dialysis clinics and established other state requirements. Placed on the ballot by petition signature. Note: This is the third ballot proposition over the last four years in an effort to create similar requirements at kidney dialysis clinics. Requires physician, nurse practitioner, or physician assistant on-site during treatment. Requires clinics to: disclose physicians’ ownership interests; report infection data. Fiscal Impact: Increased state and local government costs likely in the tens of millions of dollars annually. YES: A YES vote on this measure means: Chronic dialysis clinics would be required to have a physician, nurse practitioner, or physician assistant on-site during all patient treatment hours. NO: A NO vote on this measure means: Chronic dialysis clinics would not be required to have a physician, nurse practitioner, or physician assistant on-site during all patient treatment hours. PRO: Dialysis patients deserve protection under the law. Prop. 29 will help ensure they receive safe treatment in dialysis clinics under the care of a doctor or another highly trained clinician in case of emergencies, without risk of infection, and without discrimination. YesOn29.org CON: Join dialysis patients, American Nurses Association\California, California Medical Association and patient advocates: NO on 29—another dangerous dialysis proposition! Prop. 29 would shut down dialysis clinics and threaten the lives of 80,000 California patients who need dialysis to survive. California voters have overwhelmingly rejected similar dialysis propositions twice. Stop yet another dangerous dialysis proposition. NoProp29.com Proposition 30 — Provides funding for programs to reduce air pollution and prevent wildfires by increasing tax on personal income over $2 million. Placed on the ballot by petition signatures. Allocates tax revenues to zero-emission vehicle purchase incentives, vehicle charging stations, and wildfire prevention. Fiscal Impact: Increased state tax revenue ranging from $3.5 billion to $5 billion annually, with the new funding used to support zero-emission vehicle programs and wildfire response and prevention activities. YES: A YES vote on this measure means: Taxpayers would pay an additional tax of 1.75 percent on personal income above $2 million annually. The revenue collected from this additional tax would support zero-emission vehicle programs and wildfire response and prevention activities. www.Yeson30.org NO: A NO vote on this measure means: No change would be made to taxes on personal income above $2 million annually. PRO Wildfires are devastating California. Prop. 30 taxes only the wealthiest Californians—annual income over $2 million—to fund wildfire prevention and clean air programs. Funds forest management, more firefighters and equipment. Helps consumers afford zero-emission vehicles; creates statewide charging network. STRICT ACCOUNTABILITY—audits, penalties. State firefighters, environmental groups, and energy experts support. CON Prop. 30 raises taxes by up to $90 billion for as long as 20 years, increasing costs for every Californian. Prop. 30 will severely strain our struggling electricity grid already at risk of rolling blackouts. Join taxpayers, teachers, and small businesses to reject this unnecessary tax increase. No on Prop. 30! https://votenoprop30.com Proposition 31 — Referendum on 2020 Law that would prohibit the retail sales of certain flavored tobacco products. Placed on the ballot by petition signatures. A "Yes" vote approves, and a "No" vote rejects, a 2020 law prohibiting retail sale of certain flavored tobacco products. Fiscal Impact: Decreased state tobacco tax revenues ranging from tens of millions of dollars annually to around $100 million annually. YES: A YES vote on this measure means: In-person stores and vending machines could not sell most flavored tobacco products and tobacco product flavor enhancers. NO: A NO vote on this measure means: In-person stores and vending machines could continue to sell flavored tobacco products and tobacco product flavor enhancers, as allowed under other federal, state, and local rules. PRO: Yes on 31 protects kids by ending the sale of candy-flavored tobacco, including e-cigarettes and minty-menthol cigarettes. 80% of kids who've used tobacco started with a flavored tobacco product. A YES on 31 vote will save lives and save taxpayers money by preventing tobacco related healthcare expenses. www.Yeson31.com CON: Prop. 31 is adult prohibition. It is ALREADY illegal to sell any tobacco products—including vapes—to anyone under 21. Prop. 31 costs taxpayers $1 billion over four years, while criminal gangs benefit by controlling increased smuggling and underground markets, leading to more neighborhood crime. Prohibition never works. VoteNoOnProp31.com
We are only 20 days away from election day. Ballots are already out and many voters have already cast their vote and returned their ballot. The Chamber encourages our readers to learn about the ballot propositions so you are prepared to vote accordingly.
A couple of weeks ago we wrote about our local ballot measures — https://web.santacruzchamber.org/news/newsarticledisplay.aspx?ArticleID=1975
Today, we want to give our readers a quick overview of the 7 state propositions on the November 8 ballot. The Chamber has weighed in on only one of the propositions — Prop. 30 — at the request of a Chamber member. The Chamber’s Community Affairs Committee (CAC) reviewed the measure and recommended that the Chamber Board oppose the proposition. The Chamber Board agreed with the CAC’s recommendation. The Chamber has not and will not weigh in on the other six propositions. This article is to provide an overview and baseline information to our readers.
Proposition 1 — Constitutional Right to Reproductive Freedom, placed on the ballot by the state legislature. Amends California Constitution to expressly include an individual’s fundamental right to reproductive freedom, which includes the fundamental right to choose to have an abortion and the fundamental right to choose or refuse contraceptives. This amendment does not narrow or limit the existing rights to privacy and equal protection under the California Constitution. Fiscal Impact: No direct fiscal effect because reproductive rights already are protected by state law.
YES: A YES vote on this measure means: The California Constitution would be changed to expressly include existing rights to reproductive freedom—such as the right to choose whether or not to have an abortion and use contraceptives.
NO: A NO vote on this measure means: The California Constitution would not be changed to expressly include existing rights to reproductive freedom. These rights, however, would continue to exist under other state laws.
PRO Yes on 1 places the fundamental right to abortion and the fundamental right to contraceptives in the Constitution. Yes on 1 protects individual choices on reproductive care and the right to choose to have an abortion, keeping medical decisions where they belong—between a patient and their provider. YESon1CA.com
CON Proposition 1 is an extreme law that allows late-term abortions at taxpayer expense up to the moment of birth—even if the baby is healthy and the mother’s health is not threatened. Current California law already guarantees a woman’s right to choose, making this extreme and costly proposal unnecessary.
Proposition 26 — Allows in-person roulette, dice games, and sports wagering on Tribal Lands. This initiative represents a constitutional amendment. Placed on the ballot by petition signatures. Also allows: sports wagering at certain horse racing tracks; private lawsuits to enforce certain gambling laws. Directs revenues to General Fund, problem-gambling programs, and enforcement. Fiscal Impact: Increased state revenues, possibly reaching tens of millions of dollars annually. Some of these revenues would support increased state regulatory and enforcement costs that could reach the low tens of millions of dollars annually.
YES: A YES vote on this measure means: Four racetracks could offer in-person sports betting. Racetracks would pay the state a share of sports bets made. Tribal casinos could offer in-person sports betting, roulette, and games played with dice (such as craps) if permitted by individual tribal gambling agreements with the state. Tribes would be required to support state sports betting regulatory costs at casinos. People and entities would have a new way to seek enforcement of certain state gambling laws. YESon26.com
NO: A NO vote on this measure means: Sports betting would continue to be illegal in California. Tribal casinos would continue to be unable to offer roulette and games played with dice. No changes would be made to the way state gambling laws are enforced. https://votenoonprop26.org
PRO: YES on 26 authorizes sports wagering in-person at tribal casinos. Limits sports wagering to adults only. Prop. 26 supports Indian self-reliance by providing revenue for tribal education, healthcare and other vital services. Prop. 26 promotes safe, responsible gaming and helps stop and prevent illegal gambling. Stand with Tribes.
CON: Prop. 26 is a massive expansion of gambling that will lead to more underage gambling and addiction. Prop. 26 is sponsored by five wealthy gaming tribes who want to expand their monopoly on gambling to include sports betting. At the same time, Prop. 26 will devastate other communities of color. No on Prop. 26.
Proposition 27 — A competing proposition to Prop 26. Allows online and mobile sports wagering outside of tribal lands. The initiative is a constitutional amendment placed on the ballot by petition signatures.
Allows Indian tribes and affiliated businesses to operate online/mobile sports wagering outside tribal lands. Directs revenues to regulatory costs, homelessness programs, and nonparticipating tribes. Fiscal Impact: Increased state revenues, possibly in the hundreds of millions of dollars but not likely to exceed $500 million annually. Some revenues would support state regulatory costs, possibly reaching the mid-tens of millions of dollars annually.
YES: A YES vote on this measure means: Licensed tribes or gambling companies could offer online sports betting over the Internet and mobile devices to people 21 years of age and older on non-tribal lands in California. Those offering online sports betting would be required to pay the state a share of sports bets made. A new state unit would be created to regulate online sports betting. New ways to reduce illegal online sports betting would be available.https://yestoprop27.com
NO: A NO vote on this measure means: Sports betting would continue to be illegal in California. No changes would be made to the way state gambling laws are enforced. NoProp27.com
PRO: Proposition 27 is supported by California Tribes and homelessness and mental health experts. For the first time, Prop. 27 PERMANENTLY funds housing, mental health and addiction treatment by regulating and taxing online sports betting. Prop. 27 contains strict rules protecting minors, regular audits, and oversight by the Attorney General.
CON: Prop. 27 is a deceptive scheme funded by out-of-state gambling corporations to legalize a massive expansion of online and mobile sports gambling. Prop. 27 is NOT a "solution" to homelessness. 90% of profits would go to out-of-state corporations. Prop. 27 is opposed by 50+ California Tribes. Vote NO on 27.
Proposition 28 — Provides additional funding for arts and music education in public schools. Placed on the ballot by petition signatures.
Provides additional funding from the state General Fund for arts and music education in all K–12 public schools (including charter schools). Fiscal Impact: Increased state costs of about $1 billion annually, beginning next year, for arts education in public schools.
YES: A YES vote on this measure means: The state would provide additional funding specifically for arts education in public schools. This amount would be above the constitutionally required amount of funding for public schools and community colleges.
NO: A NO vote on this measure means: Funding for arts education in public schools would continue to depend on state and local budget decisions.
PRO: Barely one in five California public schools have full-time art or music program. Prop. 28 provides additional funding to ensure every student in PK–12 public schools has access to arts and music education—without raising taxes. Protects existing education funding. Includes strict accountability, and transparency. Parents, teachers and children support. voteyeson28.org
CON: No argument against Proposition 28 was submitted.
Proposition 29 — Requires on-site licensed medical professionals at kidney dialysis clinics and established other state requirements. Placed on the ballot by petition signature. Note: This is the third ballot proposition over the last four years in an effort to create similar requirements at kidney dialysis clinics. Requires physician, nurse practitioner, or physician assistant on-site during treatment. Requires clinics to: disclose physicians’ ownership interests; report infection data. Fiscal Impact: Increased state and local government costs likely in the tens of millions of dollars annually.
YES: A YES vote on this measure means: Chronic dialysis clinics would be required to have a physician, nurse practitioner, or physician assistant on-site during all patient treatment hours.
NO: A NO vote on this measure means: Chronic dialysis clinics would not be required to have a physician, nurse practitioner, or physician assistant on-site during all patient treatment hours.
PRO: Dialysis patients deserve protection under the law. Prop. 29 will help ensure they receive safe treatment in dialysis clinics under the care of a doctor or another highly trained clinician in case of emergencies, without risk of infection, and without discrimination. YesOn29.org
CON: Join dialysis patients, American Nurses Association\California, California Medical Association and patient advocates: NO on 29—another dangerous dialysis proposition! Prop. 29 would shut down dialysis clinics and threaten the lives of 80,000 California patients who need dialysis to survive. California voters have overwhelmingly rejected similar dialysis propositions twice. Stop yet another dangerous dialysis proposition. NoProp29.com
Proposition 30 — Provides funding for programs to reduce air pollution and prevent wildfires by increasing tax on personal income over $2 million. Placed on the ballot by petition signatures. Allocates tax revenues to zero-emission vehicle purchase incentives, vehicle charging stations, and wildfire prevention. Fiscal Impact: Increased state tax revenue ranging from $3.5 billion to $5 billion annually, with the new funding used to support zero-emission vehicle programs and wildfire response and prevention activities.
YES: A YES vote on this measure means: Taxpayers would pay an additional tax of 1.75 percent on personal income above $2 million annually. The revenue collected from this additional tax would support zero-emission vehicle programs and wildfire response and prevention activities. www.Yeson30.org
NO: A NO vote on this measure means: No change would be made to taxes on personal income above $2 million annually.
PRO Wildfires are devastating California. Prop. 30 taxes only the wealthiest Californians—annual income over $2 million—to fund wildfire prevention and clean air programs. Funds forest management, more firefighters and equipment. Helps consumers afford zero-emission vehicles; creates statewide charging network. STRICT ACCOUNTABILITY—audits, penalties. State firefighters, environmental groups, and energy experts support.
CON Prop. 30 raises taxes by up to $90 billion for as long as 20 years, increasing costs for every Californian. Prop. 30 will severely strain our struggling electricity grid already at risk of rolling blackouts. Join taxpayers, teachers, and small businesses to reject this unnecessary tax increase. No on Prop. 30! https://votenoprop30.com
Proposition 31 — Referendum on 2020 Law that would prohibit the retail sales of certain flavored tobacco products. Placed on the ballot by petition signatures. A "Yes" vote approves, and a "No" vote rejects, a 2020 law prohibiting retail sale of certain flavored tobacco products. Fiscal Impact: Decreased state tobacco tax revenues ranging from tens of millions of dollars annually to around $100 million annually.
YES: A YES vote on this measure means: In-person stores and vending machines could not sell most flavored tobacco products and tobacco product flavor enhancers.
NO: A NO vote on this measure means: In-person stores and vending machines could continue to sell flavored tobacco products and tobacco product flavor enhancers, as allowed under other federal, state, and local rules.
PRO: Yes on 31 protects kids by ending the sale of candy-flavored tobacco, including e-cigarettes and minty-menthol cigarettes. 80% of kids who've used tobacco started with a flavored tobacco product. A YES on 31 vote will save lives and save taxpayers money by preventing tobacco related healthcare expenses. www.Yeson31.com
CON: Prop. 31 is adult prohibition. It is ALREADY illegal to sell any tobacco products—including vapes—to anyone under 21. Prop. 31 costs taxpayers $1 billion over four years, while criminal gangs benefit by controlling increased smuggling and underground markets, leading to more neighborhood crime. Prohibition never works. VoteNoOnProp31.com