What you need to know about the 2022 California elections

Read Time:7 Minute, 3 Second


Receive the Capitol Alert newsletter

Register here to get the latest news about California politics, Governor Gavin Newsom and the Legislature.

Election Day is fast approaching, and California voters have several decisions to make.

In addition to choosing who should serve in state offices and the legislature, voters will decide to approve or reject a series of ballot measures on topics ranging from abortion and contraception to legalized sports betting and dialysis.

Mid-term elections will be held on November 8. While you’re considering your ballot, here’s a quick rundown of what the various measures will do if approved.

Statement 1

The issue of abortion has been a top issue for many voters since then The US Supreme Court voted to overturn Roe v. Wade earlier this year. Because of this decision, it is now up to individual states to decide whether and to what extent abortion should remain legal.

While many states have passed laws that tighten restrictions on abortion or outright ban it, California lawmakers went in a different direction, quickly passing a constitutional amendment that would enshrine abortion and contraception as fundamental rights.

Voters must now decide whether to ratify the legislature’s decision. Abortion and contraception are already legal in California, but Proposition 1 would protect those rights in the California Constitution, making it much more difficult for hypothetical future lawmakers to repeal.

Supporters argue that this ballot measure is needed to send a message to the nation that California is an abortion haven. Critics say existing law already protects abortion rights and the measure goes too far, overriding state restrictions on late-term abortions.

You can find more information about proposal 1 here.

Proposition 26

California voters will have to decide whether to allow it tribal casinos and several private racetracks for on-site sports betting.

Proposition 26, one of the most well-funded measures on the ballot this year, would also allow tribal casinos to offer craps and roulette games.

As expected, there is a measure was supported mainly by a conglomerate of California tribeswho claim that it will bring more revenue not only to the tribals but also to the state.

Opposition to the election comes from several quarters. First, a coalition of card room companies from across the state opposes an initiative that would give tribes the legal ability to shut down card rooms that run a Las Vegas-style “house” that serves as a private banker.

Advocates also oppose the measure, arguing it will prop up the horse racing industry.

You can find more information about Proposition 26 by clicking here.

Proposition 27

You were not wrong. There are two legalized sports betting initiatives on this year’s ballot.

While Proposition 26 gives tribal casinos the right to take in-person sports betting, Proposition 27 gives that right Online companies like DraftKings and FanDuel. This will open sports betting to anyone with a computer or mobile device.

Those two companies, DraftKings and FanDuel, are among the big spenders on Proposition 27, which is one of the most expensive ballot measures in the entire country.

Supporters of the initiative say it would generate huge revenue for the state, which could be spent on combating homelessness and mental health. And it’s true that it would bring in a significant amount of revenue: up to $500 million a year, according to the Legislative Analyst’s Office.

But critics of the measure say that not only would it allow problem gambling and under-age gambling with few safeguards to keep children out, but it would also fail to provide significant funding to fight homelessness, where the state already spends billions question.

Many tribes also argue that Proposition 27 would undermine their sovereign right to conduct tribal gaming, a major source of funding for Native tribes.

You can find more information about Proposition 27 by clicking here.

Proposition 28

This year’s sleeper initiative, Proposition 28, will provide a significant increase in funding for K-12 art and music education statewide.

The measure, which has attracted less attention than other ballot measures, requires the state to spend additional funds on art and music education. However, it is not a tax; the ballot measure appropriates existing funds to pay for these programs.

Still, the Legislative Analyst’s Office estimates it would cost the state between $800 billion and $1 billion annually.

Only among the ballot measures is there no recorded opposition to Proposition 28.

You can find more information about Proposition 28 by clicking here.

Proposition 29

California voters may experience déjà vu this November when considering Proposition 29, a ballot measure that would require dialysis clinics to have licensed medical staff on staff during business hours.

That’s why this proposal has come before voters twice before and was rejected both times.

But supporters of Proposition 29 hope things will be different this time: The Service Employees International Union and United Medical Workers of the West say dialysis is a billion-dollar industry in California, but clinics have cut staff and put patients at risk.

The dialysis industry strongly opposes the measure and is spending big money to defeat it, as it has done twice before. They call it just a ploy to get management to sit down at the union negotiating table.

They say that if approved, Proposition 29 would force some community clinics to close because of increased staffing costs. However, Proposition 29 would not allow companies to close clinics without state approval.

You can find more information about Proposition 29 by clicking here.

Proposition 30

The California Democratic Party supports. But California Governor Gavin Newsom opposes it. Proposition 30 is a rare statewide ballot measure The Democratic governor is allied with the Republican Party of California.

Simply put, Proposition 30 would impose a tax on the state’s wealthiest residents, those who make more than $2 million a year, to pay for electric vehicle infrastructure and other programs, as well as wildfire prevention and mitigation.

Supporters of the measure say it’s needed as part of the state’s overall push to combat climate change and worsening wildfires. The measure would raise up to $5 billion a year to go toward making zero-emission vehicles more affordable, installing more infrastructure for charging electric vehicles, hiring more state firefighters and managing forests.

Critics, including Newsom, call the measure a payday for Lyft, the measure’s biggest financial backer, which will benefit from its passage in the form of subsidies to help pay for the company’s mandatory compliance with rules requiring 90% of the miles driven to be from vehicles with zero emissions by 2030.

Opponents of the measure also argue that California’s electric grid, which nearly broke down during a heatwave earlier this fall, will be overwhelmed by the addition of up to 3 million new electric vehicles subsidized under Proposition 30.

You can find more information about Proposition 30 by clicking here.

Proposition 31

In November of this year, California voters will decide whether to ban menthol cigarettesvapes and other flavored tobacco products for sale in the state.

Proposals prohibits the sale of most flavored tobacco productswith an exception for premium cigars, pipe and leaf tobacco, and hookah.

RJ Reynolds and Philip Morris USA spent millions on the referendum filed a petition against the law and succeeded in bringing it to the voters.

Because the law was suspended until voters could decide, it also brought the tobacco industry months of additional revenue from the sale of flavored tobacco products.

Tobacco use is the No. 1 preventable cause of death in California, and proponents of Proposition 31 say banning flavored products, including fruit flavored e-cigarettes, would free many people from addiction to toxic products. Supporters say tobacco companies are using sweet and fruity flavors to attract and hook young people.

Critics of Proposition 31 argue that the ban will drive the flavored tobacco industry underground. They say prohibition didn’t work for alcohol or marijuana, and it won’t work for tobacco.

They also argue that the measure will cost the state millions in lost revenue, although the state could see significant savings in the form of fewer people in the health care system.

You can find more information about Proposition 31 by clicking here.

Related stories from the Sacramento Bee

Andrew Schiller covers California’s unique political climate for The Sacramento Bee. He has covered crime and politics from interior Alaska to the oil patches of North Dakota and the rugged coast of southern Oregon. He attended the University of Alaska Fairbanks.

Source by [author_name]

0 %
0 %
0 %
0 %
0 %
0 %
Previous post See which San Diego residents can start paying for trash pickup
Next post New pastor Saddleback sees women clergy in the future of the church