Skip navigation
Annenberg School of Communication and Journalism University of Southern California
What to Watch

What to Watch: California Propositions

As part of ATVN's ongoing series "What to Watch," we created a guide to the propostions on the ballot in California.

Proposition 30

What is it: Temporary increase of taxes for high-income earners along with a 1/4 cent sales tax increase to fund public schools

Yes vote: Higher income taxes for wealthy and marginally higher sales tax

No vote: Reduced funding for California public education

Pro: Temporary increase primarily for the wealthy

Con: Does not address systemic issues in public education and increases taxes

 

Proposition 31

What is it: Establishes two-year state budget and new rules for expenditures

Yes vote: Change in responsibilities for government regarding budgets, especially on oversight

No vote: Government budgeting remains the same

Pro: Increases fiscal transparency

Con: Flawed proposition that prevents funding increases for state services

 

Proposition 32

What is it: Prohibits unions from allowing payroll deductions for political donations and ends government contractor and corporate donations to political committees and candidates

Yes vote: More campaign finance restrictions on unions and corporations

No vote: No change to existing political donation structure

Pro: Diminishes the influence that special interests can have in an election

Con: Not sufficiently holistic - for example, Super PACs and corporate entities can find other ways to influence elections

 

Proposition 33

What is it: Allows auto insurance companies to develop prices based on driver's history of insurance

Yes vote: New customers can be discounted based on previous insurance history

No vote: Only long-term insurance customers will receive discounts but new customers who recently switched will be ineligible

Pro: Rewards those who follow driving laws regardless of history with a specific insurance company

Con: Gives insurance companies the power to raise premiums on drivers and have more pricing flexibility

 

Proposition 34

What is it: Eliminates the death penalty and replaces it with life imprisonment without parole

Yes vote: No more death penalties

No vote: Death sentence is still a possibility for penalty structure

Pro: Ensures no more executions of innocent persons and saves money bringing death penalty cases to trial

Con: Could result in increasing costs for lifetime imprisonment

 

Proposition 35

What is it: Increases prison sentences and fines for human traffickers

Yes vote: Greater penalties for human trafficking

No vote: Existing penalties stay in place

Pro: Tougher penalties act as a deterrent to human trafficking

Con: Could widen the scope of prosecutable crimes regarding human trafficking

 

Proposition 36

What is it: Revises the 3 strike law to take into account only new felony convictions for serious and violent crimes and authorizes revising the sentencing of third-strike convicts

Yes vote: If a third crime is non-violent, individuals would receive shorter prison sentences

No vote: Existing 3 strike law remains in place, giving life sentences for those with a potentially non-serious or non-violent third crime

Pro: Restores 3 strike focus to primarily violent and serious offenders and saves $100 million for state prison system

Con: Could release potentially dangerous criminals from prison system

 

Proposition 37

What is it: Requires labeling food to indicate if ingredients have been genetically modified

Yes vote: Food labels will indicate if genetically modified

No vote: Genetically engineered foods will not have to be labeled

Pro: Increases nutritional transparency

Con: Creates a new government bureaucracy to regulate food companies, farms and grocery stores

 

Proposition 38

What is it: 12 year increase of income tax to fund K-12 and early childhood education

Yes vote: State income tax increases that will benefit education and help pay off California state debt

No vote: Income taxes remain the same and no further money would support education or alleviate the state's debt

Pro: Funds generated help offset education budget cuts and prohibits politicians from touching revenues gained

Con: Results in $120 billion in higher taxes for incomes greater than $17,346

 

Proposition 39

What is it: Businesses that operate in multiple states have to pay income taxes based on their in-state sales, with funds generated going for energy efficiency projects

Yes vote: Multi-state businesses will have to pay taxes according to set formula - not choosing the most advantageous tax scheme

No vote: Multi-state businesses continue to choose between one of two possible methods to determine tax burden

Pro: Eliminates corporate loopholes in California tax law and results in $1 billion in additional revenue for state

Con: Increases tax burden on job creators

 

Proposition 40

What is it: New delineation of State Senate districts as determined by the Citizens Redistricting Commission, otherwise redistricting will be accomplished by officials under the aegis of California Supreme Court

Yes vote: Redistricting by Citizens Redistricting Commission will be used

No vote: California Supreme Court appoints officials to accomplish redistricting

Pro: Keeps politicians out of redistricting process and uses voter-approved plans

Con: Uses voter-approved plans

COMMENTS

In regard to Prop 34, California is already paying for a lifetime of housing and medical care for death row inmates, because we are not actually executing them. California has only executed 13 people since 1978 - more death row inmates die of old age and natural causes than execution. The truth is that the death penalty is more expensive throughout the process, from the trial through the housing, and then appeals. California's Legislative Analyst, a non partisan agency tasked with analyzing the fiscal impact of ballot initiatives, found that Prop 34 would save the state $130 MILLION PER YEAR. The state is in a fiscal crisis - we need that money!

Prop 34 eliminates the possibility that we will execute an innocent person, as well. 141 people have been freed from death rows across the country. We know that mistakes happen.

Readers can learn more about Prop 34 at www.yeson34.com.

The 729 on death row murdered at least 1,279 people, with 230 children. 43 were police officers. 211 were raped, 319 were robbed, 66 were killed in execution style, and 47 were tortured. 11 murdered other inmates.

The arguments in support of Pro. 34, the ballot measure to abolish the death penalty, are exaggerated at best and, in most cases, misleading and false.

No “savings.” Alleged savings ignore increased life-time medical costs for aging inmates and require decreased security levels and housing 2-3 inmates per cell rather than one. Rather than spending 23 hours/day in their cell, inmates will be required to work. These changes will lead to increased violence for other inmates and guards and prove unworkable for these killers. Also, without the death penalty, the lack of incentive to plead the case to avoid the death penalty will lead to more trial and related costs and appeals.

No “accountability.” Max earnings for any inmate would amount to $383/year (assuming 100% of earnings went to victims), divided by number of qualifying victims. Hardly accounts for murdering a loved one.

No “full enforcement” as 729 inmates do not receive penalty given them by jurors. Also, for the 34,000 inmates serving life sentences, there will be NO increased penalty for killing a guard or another inmate. They’re already serving a life sentence.

Efforts are also being made to get rid of life sentences. (Human Rights Watch, Old Behind Bars, 2012.) This would lead to possible paroles for not only the 729 on death row, but the 34,000 others serving life sentences. On 9/30/12, Brown passed the first step, signing a bill to allow 309 inmates with life sentences for murder to be paroled after serving as little as 15 years. Life without parole is meaningless. Remember Charles Manson and Sirhan Sirhan. Convicted killers get out and kill again, such as Darryl Thomas Kemp, Kenneth Allen McDuff, and Bennie Demps.

Arguments of innocence bogus. Can’t identify one innocent person executed in CA. Can’t identify one person on CA’s death row who has exhausted his appeals and has a plausible claim of innocence. See http://cadeathpenalty.webs.com/

Leave a comment
Name:
E-mail:*
URL:
Comments:*

We've Moved!


By Sam Bergum
01/21/16 | 11:09 a.m. PST

Visit us at uscannenbergmedia.com!

USC Basketball Knocks Off Rival UCLA 89- 75


By Scott Cook
01/14/16 | 12:05 a.m. PST

USC defeats UCLA with stellar play from their Freshmen. 

Holiday Bowl - USC vs Wisconsin Post-Game Press Conference

Su'a Cravens: "It's the players that need to step up"

Darreus Rogers: "It comes down to the players"

Trojans Fall to Wisconsin in the Holiday Bowl 23-21

We detected that you might be on a mobile device such as an iPad or iPhone. Sorry, at this time the video box is only visible on desktop computers.