What to Watch: California Propositions
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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.