Latest / Groundwork Policy / 2026 California Props 38 and 41 + the Whole Ballot: What They Actually Do
Transcript
- James Joyce III: Today, an eight point four billion dollar bond that sends half its money to one research institute, the one most likely to get it, had three employees in September. Sean Bhardwaj: A measure about audits that could cancel another measure on this same ballot even when a majority votes for. James Joyce III: And the one fund that's put more than 300 million into this year's ballot measures as of October 22nd. This is Groundwork, the podcast where we take what's being decided at the local, regional, and state levels and tell you what it actually does for you, your business, and your community, and most importantly, what you can do about it. Sean Bhardwaj: I'm Sean Bhardwaj. I work with business owners and leaders, so I read every policy the way they would. What will this do to my organization? James Joyce III: And I'm James Joyce. I was trained as a journalist and I've worked inside government for more than a decade. So I know some of the players and how the game gets played. We do the homework and follow the money so you see what each choice gets you, and we'll each tell you where we land. Where you land is your call. Sean Bhardwaj: James, ballots have been in mailboxes for three weeks now. What's a conversation about this ballot you've had that stuck with you? James Joyce III: So far, I'd have to say overwhelm. not so much the conversations that we've had here about the propositions, but hearing from some of our early listeners about the usefulness of our breakdown, it's overwhelming, right? Because being a thoughtful voter on 14 relatively intricate measures is a lot to ask of voters. And that's just the statewide stuff. That doesn't account for the offices and the things that are happening at the local level, such as Tax measures and other things that you're being asked to weigh in on. It's a lot. What about you, Sean? What's stuck with you? Sean Bhardwaj: Yeah, I've definitely heard a lot of that. And that's actually why we have cut a lot of this down into some shorts, which tells you what the measure is and where we land. They're all in about a minute, minute and a half. So if you are pressed for time or maybe you have your ballot in front of you, feel free to check those out on our YouTube at Groundwork Policy. The conversations that have stuck with me have been about the mechanics. I've had quite a few folks reach out and say, I thought I knew which way I was going to vote on a lot of these measures, but I didn't know that one more thing under the hood. And now that I know about it, it's actually changing the way that I'm going to be making decisions about my ballot. So it's been exciting to see that what we're doing is useful and and folks have found it valuable to look under the hood as we love to do. We're continuing our rundown of the last two of California's fourteen state measures, Props 38 and 41 Then we'll do our review of this ballot as a whole and how all the propositions work together. James Joyce III: So let's get started today with Prop 38. Prop 38 would have the state borrow $8.4 billion for research on the immune system, with at least half of it aimed at cancer, heart disease, and Alzheimer's. And it splits all that money in two, with one half going to a single research institute that the measure describes in detail but never names. Sean Bhardwaj: Here's how the official summary puts it. The money is split equally between a single University of California affiliated nonprofit medical research institute and research grants for public or nonprofit universities and institutions. The State Health Department picks that institute from a list of requirements in the measure. One of them is that it has to have existed by January of last year, specialize in immunology. and have a signed partnership in place with a UC campus that runs a big hospital system. It also needs to have a site of at least 200,000 square feet, and it needs 250 million in donations lined up. James Joyce III: Well, that seems pretty specific. and who decides where the other half goes? Sean Bhardwaj: A council does by handing out research grants. Seven UC campuses each name a member. Those seven members then pick 10 to 15 more from other nonprofit universities and research institutes. James Joyce III: CalMatters found only one institute in California that meets those requirements today, and that is the California Institute for Immunology and Immunotherapy, which works with UCLA. And UCLA has confirmed it's the only UCLA affiliated nonprofit that could. Sean Bhardwaj: Cancer, heart disease, and Alzheimer's cause nearly half of all deaths in California. That's about 140,000 people a year. James Joyce III: And patient groups are behind it. The Alzheimer's Association, the Michael J. Fox Foundation, and the American Nurses Association's California chapter are among them. And they say immune system research is already curing some cancers and to continue that work, need more money that they can count on on a regular basis. Against it are a former associate director of the National Institute of Health, now at Stanford. the League of Women Voters and several newspaper editorial boards are also against it. They say that research priorities should come from scientific review and the budget, not from a ballot. Sean Bhardwaj: So James, who put this on the ballot? James Joyce III: Well, a gentleman by the name of Gary Michelson, a spinal surgeon who became an inventor. He's in the National Inventors Hall of Fame, and his devices are central to many of the systems used in spinal surgeries. in 2005, Medtronic agreed to pay him $1.35 billion over his patents alone. He also co founded and chairs that same institute and he has given it at least $120 million since twenty twenty two. CalMatters reports that he wrote Prop 38. Sean Bhardwaj: From a business side, he's taken an invention from his garage to the operating room before. That's some impressive credibility. James Joyce III: And voters have funded research by bond before. In 2004, they approved $3 billion for stem cell research through a new state agency. In 2020, they added another $5.5 billion to that fund. The way I read it, Prop 38 is a bet that one well-funded institute working with the UC campuses can move research faster than the usual way of handing out grants. Sean Bhardwaj: Here's how the money moves. The state sells the bonds and pays them back out of its general fund, which is its main budget account. The legislative analyst puts the payments at five hundred to six hundred million a year, that runs for about twenty years. James Joyce III: Who decides when the state actually borrows that money? Sean Bhardwaj: The institute starts it. When it asks for its share, the state's finance committee sells bonds to cover it. On the grant side, only institutions with a seat on that council we talked about can win a grant. That means the council of applicants picks its own winners. James Joyce III: Hmm. So has the state tried to set up like that before? Sean Bhardwaj: The state stem cell agency had a version of it, and a national review in 2012 told it to fix the conflicts that come with this kind of an arrangement. Picture a science fair where only the schools allowed to enter are the ones the judges come from. The judging can be careful and fair, and the odd part is still who gets to compete. James Joyce III: So kinda an exclusive club. So for anyone wondering, who checks how all that money gets spent? Sean Bhardwaj: There are audits, a yearly outside audit of the institute, audits of a random 10% of the grant winners, and a public meeting on them run by the state controller. And here's the part the official summaries skip. The institute isn't covered by the state's public records law, its open meeting law, or its political reform law. And the one institute that fits these had just three employees as of September. Its own plan that it submitted to UCLA called for about fifty-one employees by last year. James Joyce III: That's a small staff for about four billion dollars. And its building at UCLA isn't due to be finished until at least twenty twenty eight. Sean, what would you want to see from a young institute before it gets a few billion dollars of public money? Sean Bhardwaj: Well, I'd at least want to see a clear plan around the kind of research they want to do, the resources it would take, and then a staffing plan based around it, before the state gets locked into them as the only choice for that kind of money. And I'd also want the ability to redirect that money if it ends up that they're not filling their performance goals. James Joyce III: And if the research does pay off, how does the state get paid back? Sean Bhardwaj: Well, any institute or university that earns money from a discovery that this bond pays for, the state owns ten percent of that. That runs until the state has gotten back everything the bonds cost, interest payments included. When a discovery gets licensed to a drug company, the license has to pay at least 10% of sales. With the states okay though, it can be as little as 5%. That 10% that the state owns, by our math, the state's share comes to about 1% of what the drug would sell for. James Joyce III: So has a bond like this ever paid the state back? Sean Bhardwaj: Well, there is track record. California's stem cell agency that came out of that 2004 bond, by 2020 had only brought the state about $350,000 in invention revenue, and that was on three billion dollars of bonds. While the legislative analyst says this one's revenue could be significant, getting the cost back could take decades. James Joyce III: Decades? Why would it take that long? Sean Bhardwaj: Because research takes a long time to become a product. The NIH's Translational Science Center says it takes about 14 years on average to get from finding a drug target to an approved drug. And more than 95% of attempts fail along the line. James Joyce III: Fourteen years, that's a pretty long time. That's kindergarten to freshman year in college. That's a long road. Sean Bhardwaj: Yes, entrepreneurship is hard, and when it's based on cutting-edge research, the road is even longer and more dangerous. But that's the cost to advance science. One more clause is worth knowing: any drug that comes out of this research has to be sold in California for at least 20% below the national average price. Let's do our box score, which is something we do with every measure. We give it a number from one to ten, one being not at all, and ten being a perfect match for whether the label matches what's inside. It's not about whether it's the right tool for the job, we'll get to that. James, does prop 38 do what it says on the box? James Joyce III: So for this one, I'd give it about a four. the title says bond for immunology research, and that's what it is. The official summary even says half goes to one institute. What it doesn't tell you is how few institutions can get the rest. And it doesn't disclose the exemptions to public transparency and accountability. And that gives it a four for me. Where are you on this one, Sean? Sean Bhardwaj: I'm with you on those reasons, James, but I'm gonna give it a five. I think there is some merit to what it's doing with immunology research and compared to some of the other bonds we've seen, this one isn't as twisty and turny underneath. So who's putting money behind this one? James Joyce III: Well, Sean, as of October 22nd, the main yes committee's biggest donors had put in about $71 million behind this. Almost all of it came from Michelson and his public policy center. the only committee against it had reported about $3,800 as of early October. On the yes side is patient groups with one big funder and you already know what he has at stake. Sean, this part of the state has nearly fifteen thousand life science jobs, and Amgen in Thousand Oaks is one of the big names behind them. What does Prop 38 mean for a company like that? Sean Bhardwaj: For businesses, the upside is research money spent in California with a goal of buying more than half of its supplies from California companies. The catch is who can get the money? A company like Amgen can't get a grant at all, since for-profits are out. It could license a discovery later, and then it would have to sell that drug in California at the discount. And UC Santa Barbara isn't even one of the seven campuses on the councils, so by the text, it can't apply either. James Joyce III: So let's say you run a lab studying the immune system at a university that doesn't have a seat at on that council. You read about this four billion dollars for exactly your field and you can't apply for any of it because your university isn't at the table. Sean Bhardwaj: For all of us, the bond payments come out of the same main budget that pays for schools, healthcare, and prisons, about a quarter of 1% of it every year. And the payoff, if it comes, is years out. That's on top of the stem cell bond payments the state's main budget took over this year. The trade-off is steady money for research against an open process for deciding who gets it. Is an eight point four billion dollar bond split between one institute and a council of universities a good way to speed up life saving research on cancer, heart disease, and Alzheimer's? James Joyce III: The goal's right, and I'd assume the people behind it want cures, but the presumed recipient has three employees and its building won't be finished until at least late 2028. That's a lot to take on faith with four billion dollars. I'd want the institute to show it can do the work before the state hands it half the money. There are built-in carrots at the end of the stick by way of discounted end product prices and profits. But how would we know if there is no public disclosure or records of or meetings No, this sounds all bad. Although both lofty and laudable in its aim, it just sounds like it's not the best tool for the job. Sean Bhardwaj: Funding research is generally the right instinct, and Michelson knows how to get from an idea to a product. But I'd want this open to every lab in the state, not just the ones at the table. As it's written, it's a long wait with very few hands on the wheel. James, why not run this the way NIH does, open to any lab in the state with the final call made by people who aren't competing for the money? James Joyce III: That's the better design, and it isn't the one that's on the ballot this time. The legislature's broader research bond negotiated down to $7.5 billion. That measure goes to voters in March of 2028, and we haven't seen how it would pick winners. So Prop 38 is on the ballot now because its funder put it there. Sean Bhardwaj: A yes means the state could borrow eight point four billion dollars to support research in immunology and immunotherapy by California research institutes and universities. A no means the state couldn't. If it passes, James, who should people be watching? James Joyce III: Well that's the State Health Department, which picks the institute within ninety days of the measure taking effect. After that, the state controller chairs the citizens committee that reviews the audits and holds a public meeting on them. That's the room to be in. Sean Bhardwaj: And if it fails? James Joyce III: The next vote on research money is already scheduled. The legislature's broader research bond that I referenced earlier, that's on the March twenty twenty eight ballot. That's your assembly member and your state senator, the same two offices that touch many of these issues. Sean Bhardwaj: That covers prop 38. Next up, prop 41. Prop 41 does two things its title names. It requires audits of the programs paid for by new state special taxes, and it says every new state tax has to count under the state's spending limit. An audit here means the state auditor checks whether a program spends its money the way it's supposed to, and whether it gets results for what it costs. The third thing isn't in the title. If Prop 41 gets more yes votes than Prop 40, the billionaire tax, Prop 40 could be stopped, even with a majority behind it. James, for anyone who hasn't had to tell a special tax from a regular one, what makes a tax special? James Joyce III: The cape on the back. No, I'm just kidding. a special tax is one whose money can only go to specific purposes, like a tax just for parks or one specifically for libraries. Sean Bhardwaj: So looking into the finances of the programs, those taxes funds, seems like a good thing to do before writing them more checks. James Joyce III: Indeed. And the no side isn't arguing against audits. It's actually calling Prop 41 a billionaire-funded smokescreen. On the yes side are the state's Society of CPAs, the Taxpayers Association, Cal Tax, and the Cal Asian Chamber of Commerce. And a former state auditor and a former controller signed the case for this measure to be on the ballot. They say voters deserve to know whether a program works before they pay for it. Seems logical. Against it are a healthcare workers union, the state PTA, and the ACLU of Southern California. CalMatters reports that opponents of the billionaires tax put prop 41 on the ballot and KQED says it was written to invalidate that tax. What it's really about is Prop 40. Sean Bhardwaj: What it does is three separate things, so let's take them again one at a time. First audits when backers of a special tax initiative reach a quarter of the signatures they need, the state auditor audits the programs that would get the money. If the initiative makes the ballot, a summary goes in your voter guide. Then every four years, the auditor again audits the programs that are paid for by any of these special taxes, whether it's from the voters or the legislature. The tax's own money pays for those audits. The audits recommend savings, but nothing in the text makes anyone act on them. James Joyce III: And that first audit only covers taxes that voters put on the ballot. A special tax that the legislature passes itself skips it and gets only audits every four years. Sean Bhardwaj: Second, the spending limit. That's the cap from our Prop 2 episode, the Gann limit, on how much tax money the state can spend each year. Prop 41 says any state tax passed or starting since January 1st of this year has to count under that cap. A tax that doesn't is void and the state can't collect it. There's a second way a tax can end up outside the cap. Today, voters can raise the cap itself for up to four years to make room for a new tax's money. The way we read Prop 41, a new tax that comes with a raise like that counts the same as one outside the cap, so it would be void as well. James Joyce III: This doesn't mean that the state can't raise new taxes. A new tax can still pass and be spent, but it counts against the cap. The state has about twenty-seven billion dollars of room under the cap by the legislative analyst count in May. Past that, the extra has to go back to taxpayers and schools. Sean Bhardwaj: Third, the part aimed at Prop 40. Prop 40 puts its money in a separate fund that sits outside the cap. That's exactly the kind of tax Prop 41 is written to void. Prop 41's text says that if it gets more yes votes than Prop 40, every part of Prop 40 is void, not just the parts that conflict. And if a court ever strikes down the measure that got more yes votes than it, Prop 41 would come back in full. So, James, does Prop 41 do what it says on the box? James Joyce III: I'm giving this one a three. the title tells you about audits and the spending limit, and both are in there. It doesn't tell you about the part that could cancel a whole other measure on this ballot. It's what's missing from the title that cost it for me. How about you? Where do you score this one? Sean Bhardwaj: two. It's a few loosely related things packaged together to stop one measure. And the title only tells you about the packaging. It's got a bunch of zombie provisions and stuff that I even I had to read, reread, and re-reread to figure out if any of those ideas were even good on their own merits. Who's paying for this one? James Joyce III: Well, Sean, as of October 22nd, the Yes Side's biggest donors had put in about $58 million. Almost all of it came from one fund, Building a Better California. The no side is Prop 40's own campaign, which had about 32 million on the same date. Shared across Prop 40, 41, and 42. building a better California has put in about $300 million, all of it on the side against Prop 40. That's roughly $9 for every one behind Prop 40. And of that $300 million, about $102 million came from Google co-founder Sergey Brin Who, according to media reports, could owe thirteen billion dollars if this measure passes Things sure can get interesting when you follow the money. Sean, businesses live with audits. What would these that are proposed under Prop 41 do for a business? Sean Bhardwaj: For businesses, looking at a program before more money goes into it is good practice. It's what you do before you would invest in anything like moving new money into a division. But an audit nobody has to act on is just an expensive report. In a business, an audit finding gets an owner and a deadline, and nothing in Prop 41 assigns either one. The spending limit rule cuts both ways. A cap that every new tax counts under is predictable. But it also leaves future budgets with fewer options since every new tax has to fit under the same cap. And we know that was set by a decades old rule, so it's already not very forward looking. James Joyce III: So let's say you fill your prescriptions at the county pharmacy in Santa Maria and you hear it's closing. Back on Prop 40 we told you Santa Barbara County is closing both of its pharmacies there and in Santa Barbara, the city proper, to save about eight million dollars a year. The Santa Barbara News Press ties that to less state money and less federal money coming in. Prop 40's money is meant to replace healthcare funding lost to federal cuts, and as we read it, cuts like those are what it's meant to prevent. So if Prop 41 stops Prop 40 that money doesn't come. Sean Bhardwaj: For all of us here, Prop 41 doesn't touch a single city, county, or district tax in Ventura or Santa Barbara County. What it reaches is the state's choices. That's the trade-off. Every new tax held to the same cap, or room for voters to decide if a tax is worth going over it. James, I'm familiar with the audits on the business side. Have you seen one on the government side actually change something? James Joyce III: Well, Sean, the process is designed for that to be the outcome. kind of the lawmaking systems process for self correction. Any legislator can ask for an audit. A committee of legislators from both houses vote on the request, and if it passes, the state auditor does the work, usually in about six months. My read is that what changes things is what happens after the report comes out, whether a committee holds a hearing on it or someone writes a fix into bill or the next budget. Sean Bhardwaj: Is requiring audits of new special tax programs and keeping every new tax under the spending limit a good way to get better results for California's tax dollars? James Joyce III: The audit idea has a real track record. Washington voters created performance audit by initiative in two thousand five. Their legislature reports every year on whether the recommendations get done, and as an aside, I lived in Yakima, Washington at the time that this was voted on in the elections. Following an audit, California state auditors already make agencies report back for a year and Tells the legislatures what's still not done after that. As far as we can tell, it can't make anyone act on what it finds. Texas does it with teeth. A state agency there comes up for review on a schedule, and unless the legislature votes to keep it, it's abolished. Sean Bhardwaj: That's the version I'd want, an audit with a consequence attached. We might have gotten on them for the voter ID thing, but on this one, good job, Texas. James Joyce III: Audits are worth having and I'd want them with teeth, but this one is built around prop 40 and the audits come along for the ride. It's hard to take it at face value. Sean Bhardwaj: The audits are a good idea we should take with us in a separate measure and only if someone has to act on the findings. The rest is a few rules bundled together to stop one measure. My read, when the answer to a tax you don't like is two more measures that could each cancel it, the ballot ends up about blocking a choice instead of offering one. So if Prop 40 is the wrong tax, then the onus should be to put a better one in front of voters. James Joyce III: A yes means the state auditor would review the programs funded by a special tax that voters propose before it reaches the ballot and would regularly review programs funded by special taxes that voters or the legislature approve. The state also might not be able to leave any new special tax spending out of its spending limit. A no means the state auditor's job and the spending limit rules stay as they are. Sean Bhardwaj: If it passes, who's on the hook? James Joyce III: The state auditor, the first time a special tax initiative reaches a quarter of its signatures, and your state assembly member and your state senator, anytime they pass a new special tax, since the program it pays for gets audited every four years from then on. Sean Bhardwaj: And if voters say no. James Joyce III: The auditor's work stays as it is today. If you want audits with consequences, that's your assembly member and your state senator again. But that would be next year. Sean Bhardwaj: That covers Prop 41 and with it our last two state measures. Now we're gonna look at the whole ballot at once. James Joyce III: When we're talking about the whole ballot, these are the headlines. Fourteen measures and a good part of what's on your ballot came together in the last week of June. The legislature sent you five of them, and three were finished on the same day. That was june twenty fifth. That's the last day backers could pull an initiative off the ballot set by statute. That's a lot of consequential movement in the eleventh hour. Sean Bhardwaj: Is that normal, James, everything coming down to the last day? James Joyce III: It's become the norm. Since 2014, there was a law that a group can pull its initiative after it qualifies up to a deadline in late June. That was that June 25th date. That gives the legislature and the backers a reason to bargain right up to the deadline. Calmatters calls it a dance that happens every election cycle. In 2018, lawmakers banned New local soda taxes in exchange, business groups pulled a measure that would have made local taxes harder to pass. It's become part of the game. Sean Bhardwaj: What stands out to me is how many of these measures are about other measures. We just talked about how two of them could cancel out a third, and that's where the biggest money on this ballot is going. James, did our homework and discussion change where you landed about a measure in a way that you didn't expect? James Joyce III: A little bit for prop five. I I went in worried about a district going months without its senator. Then the twenty twenty one recall math, a replacement who could have won with about twenty eight percent of the vote worried me. But that dissolved after we doing the homework. Which one moved you, Sean? Sean Bhardwaj: For me, it was Prop 45, the shot clock on environmental review. I tend to be skeptical when someone creates a false sense of urgency, like a sales pitch where the deal is only good for one day, so you better buy now. But this one seemed measured and reasonable. It's optional and every environmental law still applies. It just puts a reasonable 17-month shot clock on the review instead of skipping it. So let's talk about the billionaire tax and friends, the three that are really about one measure: Prop 40, which is known as the billionaire tax, and Props 41 and 42 James Joyce III: So Props 41 and 42 each say that if they get more yes votes than prop 40, that all of prop 40 is void. It's a raw count of yes votes, not a percentage of the count. CalMatters reads the rule the other way too. If Prop 40 gets more yes votes than both of them, the tax takes effect. Sean Bhardwaj: That means regardless of what your mailbox, text messages, or commercials are telling you, if you personally want prop 40 to become law, that means you probably want to vote no on Props 41 and 42, because if those get more votes, either one could cancel it. And if none of the three sits right with you, a no on all three is also perfectly fine. James, is this common one side putting measures on the ballot to cancel another? I can't remember it happening. James Joyce III: It's been a while. It's a bit of an old play. In nineteen eighty-eight, voters passed two competing campaign finance measures on the same ballot, and only the one with more yes votes took effect. That winner, Prop 73, is where the ban of public campaign money came from, the one this year's Prop four would lift. In nineteen ninety, farm interests ran their own measure against a big environmental initiative known as Big Green. If it got more votes, it would cancel Big Green's pesticide rules. Sean Bhardwaj: A Politico poll this May found about six in ten Americans think billionaires have too much influence on politics. As of October 22nd, one fund had put in $300 million into stopping Prop 40, including the two measures that could cancel it. From the outside, that doesn't do much to dispel the idea. If anything, it underscores it. For a business, the bottom line is that Props 41 and 42 change nothing you pay today. They're just built to stop Prop 40, and the rest is packaging. Let's talk about housing. Three measures are about getting more homes built. Prop 1 borrows about $11 billion for housing. Most of that goes to low-interest loans for apartments that have to stay affordable for 55 years. Prop 37 lets the state's housing finance agency lend middle income buyers part of the price of a new home as a second loan they pay back every month. Prop 37's bond gets paid back by the home buyers, not the state. And Prop 45 gives projects on an essential list, housing among them, an optional fast track through environmental review. James Joyce III: None of the three cancels another. Each works on a different piece. Prop one on the money for affordable apartments, Prop 37 on the down payment, and Prop 45 on how long a review takes. So on Prop 37, nobody knows the interest rate yet. The housing finance agency's board sets it. So that's where the monthly payment gets decided. Sean Bhardwaj: For a business, this group of measures is about whether the people you hire can afford to live near the job. Each of these fixes one piece of that, and none of them fixes the whole process. That's how I landed on each three. Each of them is a good tool, but more are needed. James Joyce III: Next, votes and elections. There are four measures that are on your ballot that change how voting works. Prop four lifts the ban on public money for campaigns and leaves it to the state, your county, your city, and your school board to decide whether to build a program. Prop five. Drops the question of who replaces a recalled official from the governor to a state senator. The job goes to the next in line, to an appointment, or to a later election, depending on the office. Sean Bhardwaj: Prop 39 requires an ID every time you vote and citizenship checks on the voter rolls. Prop 43 changes how many votes it takes to pass a local tax that residents put on the ballot themselves. Starting in 2027, a special tax like that would need two-thirds of the vote instead of a simple majority. That would include the next tax like Los Angeles' mansion tax, which pays for housing. It doesn't touch the local measures on this year's ballot, and we'll get into those on the next episode. James Joyce III: We found nothing in these four that collides. Together they decide who gets to run, who gets to stay in office, who gets to vote, and how many votes it takes to pass a tax you propose. Sean Bhardwaj: For business, the cost here lands on the state and the counties that run elections. Prop 39 alone would cost them tens of millions to low hundreds of millions of dollars a year. That's taxpayer money that can't go to anything else we need these counties to do. And Prop 43's line on property taxes makes an important source of money for local services harder to raise. The last group is about how California pays for schools and healthcare and how it runs them. Prop three makes permanent the higher taxes California's top earners have paid since 2012. Without it, those rates end in 2031. Roughly 40% of that money goes to schools and community colleges. Prop 2 lets the Rainy Day Fund grow bigger and fill faster in good years to cushion schools, healthcare, and other services in a downturn. What we found is that the state can still skip a deposit and this year's budget skipped one worth five point four billion. James Joyce III: Prop 44 requires community clinics that serve low-income patients to spend at least 90% of their revenue on care, with the Attorney General deciding what counts. Prop 38 is the research bond we just covered, and Prop 40, the billionaire's tax, sends most of its money to healthcare. Those don't collide either, and as we read both texts, Prop 41 doesn't touch Prop 3 since Prop 3's money stays in the state's main budget. And Props 2 and 41 both work on the spending cap without canceling each other. Prop 2 changes when savings count under it. And prop 41 makes new taxes Count. Sean Bhardwaj: For a business, this group is about your workforce, the schools that train it, and the care that keeps it healthy. My take on these is that a reserve for a downturn fits how any business plans. Prop 44's 90% rule creates an accounting exercise that ends up cutting services at clinics. And by our math, Props 1 and 38 together would cost the state's main budget one to one point two billion dollars a year for the next two decades. James Joyce III: For all of us, it's the classrooms and the clinic down the street. The state's own analyst already projects budget shortfalls through the end of the decade. Sean Bhardwaj: Now our honorable and dishonorable mentions, the labels that held up best and worst. On the top and bottom we agree. Our joint honorable mention is Prop four on public money for campaigns. James gave it a ten and I gave it a nine. James Joyce III: The label says it lifts a ban that lets each government decide for itself, and that's all it does. Sean Bhardwaj: Our joint dishonorable mention is Prop 42. I gave it a 1, James gave it a 4. I call it highly misleading. It's sold as protecting your retirement, and it changes nothing for most people or most businesses. James Joyce III: And it reaches all personal property from stocks to furniture and art under a label about retirement and savings. Sean Bhardwaj: Beyond those two, James, what are some of your own honorable and dishonorable mentions? James Joyce III: My honorable mention is Prop 3 at about a 10. it makes permanent a tax voters already approved twice, and it says so. My dishonorable mention is Prop 39 at a four. The title is all about showing ID, and inside it also has counties check the voter rolls for citizenships, which the title never mentions and targets a sensitive topic area for vulnerable members of our communities. How about you, Sean? What about your honorable and dishonorable mention? Sean Bhardwaj: My honorable mention is Prop 40 at a 9. Whatever you think of a tax on billionaires, the label matched what's inside with no hidden mechanics, and that's all the box score asks. My dishonorable mention is also Prop 39, at a 2, but for a different reason. It's supposed to make voting more secure, and what Texas saw was eligible voters losing their ballots at a cost far above any security it adds. Let's do one more box score for the whole ballot. We'll give it one whole number from everything we scored this year for how well this year's labels match what's inside. James, what's yours? James Joyce III: If I had to calculate it, I'd say I'd give it about a six. Most of the labels hold up. The ones that don't usually leave out the one clause that matters the most. How about yours? Sean Bhardwaj: I'm with you on that six. Half of these labels held up well for me. The other half either left out a clause that matters or promised more or something different than what the measure would actually do. A lot of what we've said comes down to the same few doors to knock on, James. So who should people have on speed dial when it comes to influencing policy as it relates to these measures? James Joyce III: You can probably guess it, Sean, but this is your assembly member and your state senator first, right? So they write the next budget. They're sending you the March twenty twenty eight research bond, and if Prop 41 passes, any new special tax they pass gets its audit. The next is the governor whose budget in January is the first one written under whatever passes, including Prop two's savings rules. Then the attorney general who decides what counts as care under Prop 44 and whose office is where every new statewide initiative starts. And closer to home, your city council, the housing authority on Prop One's projects, and your city and county on local taxes. Which Prop 43 would change starting 2027. That covers the whole ballot, and I guess the bottom line for me is that the most effective civic engagement only begins with casting a vote. Get engaged with those people who we task with representing us. Sean Bhardwaj: One more thing before you fill in your ballot. No is always an answer, and on any measure, not good enough is a good enough reason to mark it. That's part of why we did this episode. A lot of what lands in your mailbox makes it sound like a vote one way or another, says something about what kind of person you are. Your ballot is private. Nobody sees it, so it can't make you popular or put you on a team. What counts is what you think. makes the best place for you and your neighbors to live. James Joyce III: If you're mailing your ballot, the state's voter guide says to mail it at least seven days before election day. So if it's still on the counter, now's the time. It has to be postmarked by election day, which is Tuesday, November 3rd. I'm a much bigger fan of drop boxes, especially in our current environment. Drop boxes stay open until 8 p.m. that night. Polls open at 7 a.m. that morning, and you can vote early in person in every county. And if you miss the registration deadline, you can still register and vote the same day. You can do that at your county elections office, a vote center, or a polling place. Sean Bhardwaj: And as a reminder, if you want the measures one at a time, we're posting a short clip for each one on our YouTube channel. What it is, what a yes and no mean, and where we land and what it means for you, your business, and your community. And every episode of our podcast has chapter titles. So if you're listening on a different platform, you can jump straight to the measure you want to know. James Joyce III: Thanks for doing this with us, not to agree with us, not to agree with each other, just to do the groundwork before you decide. And that's our episode. Sean Bhardwaj: On the next episode, we're going to look at the local measures. There's a bunch of them in Ventura and Santa Barbara counties, from school and college bonds to a water bond, sales and hotel taxes, and more. James Joyce III: Remember to subscribe wherever you're listening so the next one is in your feed when it comes out. Groundwork is a podcast from Common Ground Policy and Public Affairs. The rest of the week, we do this work for businesses and organizations. We tell them what's coming at the local, regional, and state levels, what it means, help them decide what to do about it, and see it through with them. Sean Bhardwaj: If you like this, send this to someone you know needs help filling out their ballot this year. Also, if you have different ideas, questions, or something we didn't get to, tell us in the comments. And if your organization needs support with policy and public affairs, reach out to us at hello at commongroundppa.com and let's talk.