SACRAMENTO, Calif. (CN) — Emotion can play a large role in California elections, especially when it comes to statewide ballot measures.
Californians typically see a handful of measures at the polls, and the upcoming Nov. 5 election is no different. They range in subject matter, from repealing large parts of a decade-old criminal justice initiative to deciding if involuntary servitude should continue in state prisons.
In many cases, it’s a gut feeling that influences someone’s vote, said Kimberly Nalder, a professor of political science at Sacramento State University. The average voter isn’t a policy wonk, meaning they base their decision on a minimum amount of information or on gut-level response.
“The whole process is just ripe for misunderstanding,” Nalder said in an interview. “Voters just aren’t experts on this stuff.”
People can agreeably disagree on an issue like economic policy, said James Adams, a UC Davis political science professor. However, it’s the cultural issues — abortion, immigration and LGBTQ+ rights — that inflame people.
“To a greater extent, it’s debates over who we are,” Adams said. “It’s hard to compromise over who we are.”
There are 10 statewide ballot measures in November, as well as the presidential race and legislative and local contests across California. Nalder’s university is hosting an initiative explainer for the public at the Downtown Library Galleria in Sacramento on Oct. 16.
Proposition 36 is one that’s grabbed many of the headlines. If passed, it would undo much of the 10-year-old Proposition 47, which reduced penalties for many theft and drug crimes.
The initiative sparked political back-and-forth between state lawmakers this summer. Democrats worked to keep Proposition 47 intact, saying they didn’t want its criminal justice reforms gutted. They sought to put a competing measure on the November ballot, which Republicans claimed was an attempt to confuse voters. It was pulled from consideration in early July.
A Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies poll completed this week showed 60% of likely voters favor Proposition 36, with 21% opposed. Nineteen percent were undecided.
“They want more prosecution of repeat offenders,” Mark DiCamillo, director of the Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies Poll, told Courthouse News.
Supporters have said the initiative will enable prosecutors to file felony charges against someone who has two or more prior theft convictions. It also would increase penalties for trafficking fentanyl, a synthetic opioid.
“Retail theft has put a strain on our businesses, our employees, our community,” said Scott Miller, president and CEO of the Fresno County Chamber of Commerce, in a Thursday press conference. “Proposition 36 offers a path forward.”
Cristine Soto DeBerry, executive director of Prosecutors Alliance Action, opposes Proposition 36, calling it short on solutions. Increasing the number of people incarcerated instead of helping them with treatment isn’t the answer and won’t deter crime.
She also said the proposition will take away funding that’s currently dedicated to treatment.
“How do we eliminate the problem at its source?” DeBerry asked. “None of those things are contemplated in the ballot measure.”
Impact
David Harding, a sociology professor at UC Berkeley and its Othering and Belonging Institute, also has his eye on Proposition 36. He said videos on social media depicting large retail theft incidents have had a major impact on voters’ perceptions about crime in the state. He called the videos an easy tool for someone to create a narrative about rising crime in California — true or not.
“We tend to think by anecdote and example, and reason from that,” he added.
Harding also is watching Proposition 6, which would prohibit mandatory involuntary servitude for prison inmates. Those incarcerated people could still work, but they couldn’t be forced.
According to Harding, forcing prisoners to work is linked to racial inequality. He called the chain gang a replacement for slavery in some ways.
The financial impacts of the measure aren’t known. Supporters in the voter information guide write that prisons and jails might have to increase pay for inmates, which would lead to cost increases. However, if credit for time served is offered, the proposition could lead to cost decreases, as people would be released earlier.
There is no formal opposition to the ballot measure.
Other measures up for a vote next month include whether local governments should have more power over rent control, if the vote threshold for certain bond issuances to pass should be reduced, and whether the minimum wage should increase.
Proposition 33 would prohibit the state from limiting a local government’s power to start, maintain or expand rent control.
Supporters have said California needs more affordable housing. However, as its residents wait for that construction, they need protection in the form of rent control.
Opponents note voters opposed the initiative in both 2018 and 2020. Affordable housing experts oppose the measure because they say it would worsen the state’s housing crisis.
They also point to Michael Weinstein, president of the AIDS Healthcare Foundation, as the person bankrolling the measure. Weinstein has been described as a slumlord in media reports.
The Berkeley poll shows 37% of likely voters support Proposition 33.
Weinstein’s foundation is connected to a seemingly unrelated ballot measure: Proposition 34. That initiative would require certain health care providers to spend 98% of their revenue from federal discount prescription drug programs on patient care.
An attorney for the foundation has argued in court documents that her client is only entity the measure would affect.
Nalder said it’s the first time she’s seen two ballot measures conflict in that precise manner.
“That’s a new one,” she added. “But that will be confusing.”
Other measures on November’s ballot also have faced court challenges.
Proposition 5 would reduce the vote threshold needed to pass bond measures for affordable housing or public infrastructure projects from two-thirds to 55%. John Coupal and his organization, the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, argued successfully that the ballot label needed revising, though an appeals court later overturned that decision.
California voters also will decide whether to enshrine same-sex marriage in the state constitution and raise the minimum wage.
While same-sex marriage is legal nationwide, the California Constitution states such couples can’t marry — a relic of Proposition 8 passed in 2008 but struck down on a technicality by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2013. Proposition 3 would add that right in the state constitution.
Proposition 32 would bring the state’s minimum wage to $18 an hour for all employees by 2026. It would be adjusted for inflation starting in 2027.
The Berkeley poll shows this initiative has 46% support.
Voters also will decide:
• Proposition 2: Approves $10 billion in bonds for repairing, upgrading and building facilities for kindergarten through 12th grade schools and community colleges.
• Proposition 4: Approves $10 billion in bonds for projects to address climate risks and impacts, like wildfire prevention, clean energy and agriculture.
• Proposition 35: Would make permanent an existing tax on health care plans, which currently expires in 2027.