2022 CALIFORNIA BALLOT PROPOSITIONS
I'll give my quick takes but please don't just vote the way I do. Read it. Understand it. Decide for yourself.
QUICK TAKES
PROPOSITION 1 — YES
PROPOSITION 26 — YES — keep California $ in California
PROPOSITION 27 — NO — keep California $ in California
PROPOSITION 28 — YES
PROPOSITION 29 — NO
PROPOSITION 30 — NO
PROPOSITION 31 — YES
Source: Upsplash
PROPOSITION 1 — ABORTION
A YES vote here vote amends the state constitution to prohibit the state from denying access to abortion services or contraceptives. It says nothing about funding.
Abortion is already legal in California; this prevents future legislatures — or hostile governors — from interfering with that right.
I try not to be rude, but I predict the same herd that screams about individual liberty, that chafes against wearing a face mask or accepting a COVID-19 vaccination, will cheerfully vote NO here. Make it make sense.
Proposition 1 would be the first state-level constitutional amendment of its kind. Apart from religious authoritarianism there is no reason to oppose it, because criminalizing abortion denies safe access to poor women—nothing more, nothing less.
YES.
PROPOSITION 26 — INDIAN GAMING
We now return to our regularly scheduled proposition numbering system, presumably because this and the rest were gathered by petition signatures rather than proposed by the state legislature.
A YES vote here legalizes sports betting at tribal casinos and licensed racetracks, increases tax revenue, and legalizes roulette and dice games, such as craps, at tribal casinos.
Both sides combined have raised over $100 million, which accounts for all the misleading television commercials you’re probably seeing.
There are four things to understand about this:
Opposition here is driven by gaming corporations in Nevada and elsewhere who don’t want to share their profits with California’s native people. I’ll be charitable and say that the California Republican Party’s opposition is probably driven more by donations from those corporations than by racism.
Sports betting is the real prize here. California casinos already play craps, they just do it with cards instead of dice.
More of California’s dollars stay in California with a YES vote.
More of California’s dollars stay in California with a YES vote.
Voting NO here doesn’t stop gaming in California or “keep communities more safe” or any of that specious garbage. It just keeps Nevada gaming profits from taking a hit. I realize some people really despise our state’s native people; I won’t speculate as to why that might be the case. I’m not doing it for them, but for me it comes down to money. I prefer to keep California dollars to stay in California. The tax revenue gained will be in the tens of millions. Yes, please!
Sorry, Nevada. Sorry, China. I’m a strong YES.
PROPOSITION 27 — ONLINE GAMING
The issue here is murkier. Unlike Proposition 26, which requires you to walk into a tribal casino or racetrack, this would legalize gaming on mobile devices. Yes, it would gather still more tax revenue for the state, and supporters have tried to make it more palatable by requiring tax revenue to fund programs combating homelessness, and by requiring revenues to be shared with tribes not operating sports betting.
To illustrate how much of a holy grail sports betting actually is, look again at the funds raised by both campaigns: over $200 million total. Tax revenue would be in the hundreds of millions. I’m a sports fan myself, but WOW. This is mind-blowing.
Major League Baseball is helping to fund this initiative, and it is supported by mayors who see financial aid for homelessness and will take it any way they can get it.
Opposition includes prominent members of both parties, our local Agua Caliente tribe, the California Teachers’ Association, and a diverse array of other unlikely bedfellows.
This one does not pass the smell test. Online gambling corporations outside California would profit immensely from it, and are happy to throw a bone to the homelessness problem if they can gain access to this immense betting market. If it was restricted to California tribes running their own online gaming platforms, and prohibited those run by Nevada, China, and the rest, I’d probably support it because of the tax revenue. In its current form I can’t.
NO.
PROPOSITION 28 — ARTS & MUSIC EDUCATION
You know, I really do not like these constitutional amendments that tell the legislature how it can and cannot spend money forevermore. I don’t understand why this cannot be done by statute. That said, and with great skepticism, this is my understanding of what is intended here.
A YES vote will essentially amend Proposition 98, approved in 1988, which requires the state to fund education at a minimum of about 40% of the general fund. So it’s not really a new amendment. 1% of that minimum guarantee would have to go to arts and music education, with additional funding for economically disadvantaged students, and would require a large portion of the money to be used for employing teachers.
A great deal of arts and music education is funded privately; if you think the status quo is adequate, you can vote against it, but no one officially opposes it. Like, absolutely no one.
YES.
PROPOSITION 29 — DIALYSIS AGAIN
I might be remembering wrong, but it seems like dialysis is on every single general election ballot that has been printed in California since I moved to the state 21 years ago.
This time, a YES vote requires dialysis clinics to have a doctor or nurse present during treatment, requires them to report data on dialysis-related infections, and prohibits discrimination based on source of payment for care. Sounds reasonable to me.
What’s the catch? Usually, corporations who provide essential services in exchange for profit (health care, insurance) threaten to shut everything down because they “can’t afford” new restrictions. Here we go again: it’s the SEIU (a service workers union) going after DaVita and the other for-profit corporations, who have their usual assistance from the Republican Party and various conservative Chambers of Commerce.
First of all, it’s not a good use of doctors’ time to be at the clinic, instead of a phone call away. Are we not suffering doctor and nurse shortages? Furthermore, why again does the state constitution need to be amended? I get that legislators are probably in the dialysis corporations’ pockets. To me this amendment feels like we’re taking a shot at the bad guys the only way we can, in a way that doesn’t fix anything.
Until people can’t profit by denying dialysis, the problem will remain.
NO.
PROPOSITION 30 — CLIMATE & WILDFIRE
A YES vote here increases income tax by just under 2% on incomes over $2 million for the purpose of helping the state build infrastructure for zero emission vehicles, and also for the purpose of helping the state prevent and suppress wildfires.
Sounds good, right?
It’s supported by Barbara Lee, the likely next mayor of Los Angeles, as well as California Democrats and the Lyft rideshare corporation.
But surprise! The teachers and the governor have joined the anti-tax conservatives in opposition. Why? Because, they claim, this constitutional amendment forces the state to fund Lyft’s transition to zero-emission vehicles. While I understand that it’s important to reach zero emissions however we possibly can, I cannot understand why the state constitution needs to be amended in order to fund a private corporation, even if it IS taxing only the richest Californians.
Process matters. NO.
PROPOSITION 31 — FLAVORED TOBACCO BAN
Mercifully, this is not a constitutional amendment, but a referendum to support Senate Bill 793, which would ban the sale of flavored tobacco products. The governor and the California Teachers Association recognize that young people are especially susceptible to bubble gum and chocolate chip cookie vapes designed to get them hooked for life. Republicans and all the worst multinational tobacco corporations are spending big to stop this.
You might think supporting this is hypocritical on my part. I do support freedom and choice. I recognize that criminalizing something that is in demand simply creates a black market for that product. And I recognize that we can’t legislate healthy lifestyle choices in our criminal code. Big Tobacco says—rightfully—that tobacco is already illegal to anyone under 21. But they know what they’re doing with this stuff. Their goal is to hook young people. They know it’s easier to hook young people with these types of vape products. They know that if the products are an arm’s length away kids will get their hands on them more readily. They don’t care about anything but their bottom line and pro-family Republicans ought to be ashamed of themselves for supporting this effort to get kids addicted to tobacco. It’s the worst kind of capitalist evil, and it costs all of us in our health care plans.
Flavored tobacco is not a normal product. It’s the same as a toy gun that shoots real bullets. Take it off our shelves entirely, and do it by statute since, pathetically, we lack the will in our local communities to do what’s right.
YES.
WHY DO YOU VOTE ALMOST EXCLUSIVELY FOR DEMOCRATS?
Three reasons. (1) California has a budget surplus and is running like a well-oiled machine, and has been ever since Democrats took over in Sacramento. Yes, we have problems, and right now based on their track record and stated policy positions, I trust Democrats to do a better job addressing those problems. (2) California is now the freest society in the world, while other democracies are eroding into fascism. Thank you, Democrats! (3) Republicans, instead of offering a new vision of the future, offer policy ideas that exacerbate hoarding, pollution, xenophobia, corruption, and debt. I eagerly await their resurrection into a party of fresh conservative ideas. I respect my conservative students and families and even if I thought I it was possible to move someone away from their family’s values, I recognize that is not my job. I want all of my students to succeed and flourish and writers and thinkers. I do not conceal my bias; to do so is fundamentally insidious. Students are not required to read what I have said here about the ballot. As with all my opinions, they are free to disregard it.