California's November 3, 2026 propositions: what they do, who's paying, and why
Passed in Sacramento, but the California Constitution requires your vote for constitution changes (Art. XVIII, §§ 1, 4), state borrowing (Art. XVI, § 1), undoing past voter measures (Art. II, § 10(c)).
Signature drives cost millions. Who paid:
If you're unsure: a NO vote keeps current law. A YES on a citizen initiative is hard to undo, because the Legislature can't change it without another statewide vote. Check which side the big money is on. Art. II, § 10(c)
Prop numbers don't tell you who put a measure on the ballot. The Secretary of State numbers them in the order they qualify.
Since 2014, sponsors can withdraw an initiative after collecting signatures, right up until it officially qualifies, often in exchange for a deal in Sacramento. That's how Prop 43 got here, and why Uber's measure didn't. SB 1253 (2014)
Look closer = over $10M spent, or a High special interest score on either side. Big money means big stakes for someone, so these deserve your time. It says nothing about whether to vote yes or no.
13 quick questions, one per issue. Your answers are translated into a YES or NO lean on each measure, along with who is paying for each side.
Nothing is saved. No cookies, no tracking, no accounts. Your answers stay on your device and disappear when you close the tab. This is a side project by a regular Californian trying to figure out how to vote, with no connection to any campaign.
Answer any question above and your results appear here. Skip anything you like.
A typical California household earns about $99,000 a year. About 44% rent. Almost none earn over $371,000 or are billionaires.
None of these 14 measures raises your taxes. Two add state debt of about $40 a year per household. The rest change rules, or affect you only in specific situations.
Why are some from the Legislature? 5 of these passed in Sacramento, but the California Constitution requires voters to approve changes to the constitution (Article XVIII), state borrowing (Article XVI), and undoing past voter-approved measures (Article II). The other 9 got here through paid petition drives.
Beyond your wallet, each measure is a choice about values: who should pay for health care, how strict voting rules should be, how fast things get built. Below, see who is paying to persuade you, or grab the one-page cheat sheet.
Sources: Census ACS 2020–2024: California income, households, homeownership · California Health Care Foundation: community clinic patients. Per-household cost = state's estimated yearly bond payment ÷ 13.5 million households.
For each measure: who paid to put it on the ballot, what your vote does, who it helps, who pays, and who is funding each side. No ads, no endorsements from us.
Largest single funder: Building a Better California, $238.7M across 6 measures (Props 1, 37, 40, 41, 42, 45).
14 measures. 9 got there through paid petition drives. 5 were passed by the Legislature and are on the ballot because the law requires voter approval. Percentages are of the $370.1M that top donors gave to YES campaigns. Figures as of October 4, 2026. Source: FPPC top-contributor lists.
One-page cheat sheet, made to print or keep next to your ballot.
Special interest score, for each side's money: one point for each check. One funder dominates: a single funder paid more than half that side's money (calculated from FPPC data). Funders profit: the main funders or their members gain financially if their side wins. Narrow benefit: the gains go mainly to one industry, organization or small group rather than the general public. Outside money: more than half that side's money came from outside California. The middle two are judgment calls; the reason for each is shown so you can decide for yourself. A high score doesn't mean a measure is bad, and a low score doesn't mean it's good. It tells you who is behind it.
YES = Borrow $11.25B for affordable and veterans' housing
Top donors include developers who could get the money
YES = Raise the cap on state reserves from 10% to 20%
YES = Make the 2012 tax on incomes over ~$371K permanent
Teachers' unions put up nearly all the money
YES = Allow public funding of campaigns
YES = Pick a recall replacement in a later election, not on the same ballot
YES = State loans for buyers of NEWLY BUILT homes only, 3% down
Only about 36,500 new homes sold in 2025. California has about 7.6 million owner-occupied homes. About 7 in 8 buyers buy existing homes and can't use it.
YES = Borrow $8.4B for immunology research
The main funder co-founded and chairs the institute that gets $4.2B
YES = Require ID to vote in person, and an ID number on mail ballots
77% of the YES money is from one Wisconsin donor
YES = One-time 5% tax on wealth over $1B
99% of the NO money comes from a billionaire-funded PAC, plus billionaire Chris Larsen and his company
YES = Audit new taxes; cancel new taxes exempt from the spending cap
Written by Prop 40's opponents to cancel it
YES = Ban state taxes on owning assets such as stocks
If it gets more votes than Prop 40, Prop 40 is cancelled
YES = Citizen-proposed local taxes need two-thirds of the vote, not a majority
Commercial landlords and business groups fund the YES side
YES = Clinics must spend 90% of revenue on care or pay penalties
Clinics allege in court that the union offered to drop it in exchange for new union members (unproven)
YES = Deadlines for environmental reviews and lawsuits
Utilities, homebuilders and an oil producer fund the YES side
Money is from top donors reported to the FPPC. Bars are to scale across all measures. Tap a measure's title for its full details.
Why it's on your ballot The Legislature passed it, but the law requires voters to approve it. State borrowing through bonds requires voter approval. The rule: Cal. Constitution, Art. XVI, § 1. State debt over $300,000 needs a two-thirds vote of the Legislature and a majority of voters.
History Voters approved housing bonds in 2018 ($4B, Prop 1) and March 2024 ($6.4B for mental health housing, Prop 1).
Cost to taxpayers $500 million to $600 million a year from the state budget for about 25 years to repay the bonds.
Authorizes $11.25 billion in state bonds for rental housing, veterans' mortgages and down payment assistance.
The state estimates the money would fund about 40,000 rental units and help about 40,000 households buy homes. Repaying the bonds would cost the state $500 million to $600 million a year for about 25 years.
No committee has raised $1M or more. That is the state's threshold for reporting top donors.
Why it's on your ballot The Legislature passed it, but the law requires voters to approve it. It changes the state constitution, which only voters can do. The rule: Cal. Constitution, Art. XVIII, §§ 1, 4. Amendments the Legislature proposes must be approved by a majority of voters.
History Voters created the current rainy day fund rules in 2014 (Prop 2).
Cost to taxpayers No new taxes. More money would be set aside in good years instead of being spent.
Raises the limit on the state's rainy day reserve from 10% to 20% of general fund tax revenue, and allows tax revenue to be used to pay down California's $20 billion federal unemployment insurance debt.
The state could save more money in good years to spend in bad ones. Money put into reserves is not available for current programs.
No committee has raised $1M or more. That is the state's threshold for reporting top donors.
No committee has raised $1M or more. That is the state's threshold for reporting top donors.
Who paid to put it on the ballot California Teachers Association, through a petition drive.
History Only voters can extend it. It's in the state constitution: voters approved it in 2012 (Prop 30) and extended it in 2016 (Prop 55).
Cost to taxpayers No new tax. It keeps $5 billion to $15 billion a year in state revenue that would otherwise end after 2031.
Makes permanent a tax on high-income earners that is set to expire in 2031. Rates run from 10.3% to 12.3% on individual income above about $371,000.
About 89% of the money goes to K–12 schools and 11% to community colleges, with any excess going to public health care. If it fails, the tax expires in 2031 as scheduled.
No committee has raised $1M or more. That is the state's threshold for reporting top donors.
Why it's on your ballot The Legislature passed it, but the law requires voters to approve it. It repeals a ban voters passed in 1988 (Prop 73). The Legislature can't undo a voter-approved measure on its own. The rule: Cal. Constitution, Art. II, § 10(c). The Legislature can change a voter-passed initiative only with voter approval, unless the initiative allows it.
History Voters banned public campaign funding in 1988 (Prop 73). Since then, only charter cities such as San Francisco have been allowed to create programs.
Cost to taxpayers A few hundred thousand dollars a year for state oversight. Any actual program would be created and paid for separately, later.
Allows state and local governments to create public funds for candidates' campaigns, reversing a 1988 ban.
Today only a handful of charter cities, including San Francisco and Berkeley, publicly fund candidates. This would let the state and any city or county set up a program. It does not create one by itself.
No committee has raised $1M or more. That is the state's threshold for reporting top donors.
No committee has raised $1M or more. That is the state's threshold for reporting top donors.
Why it's on your ballot The Legislature passed it, but the law requires voters to approve it. It changes the state constitution, which only voters can do. The rule: Cal. Constitution, Art. XVIII, §§ 1, 4. Amendments the Legislature proposes must be approved by a majority of voters.
History In 2003, Gov. Gray Davis was recalled and replaced on the same ballot by Arnold Schwarzenegger. A 2021 attempt to recall Gov. Newsom failed.
Cost to taxpayers Unknown. Each recall could save or cost millions of dollars, depending on the office.
Ends the single recall ballot that asks both whether to remove an official and who should replace them. A replacement would be chosen in a later election, and the recalled official could run in it.
If a governor were recalled, the lieutenant governor would serve until the new election. Under current rules, a replacement can win with a small plurality on the same ballot.
No committee has raised $1M or more. That is the state's threshold for reporting top donors.
No committee has raised $1M or more. That is the state's threshold for reporting top donors.
Who paid to put it on the ballot Realtors, with carpenters' unions, through a petition drive.
History No related bill found. The state already runs smaller down payment programs, such as CalHFA's Dream for All. This would add a separate, larger one.
Cost to taxpayers The official state analysis finds no direct state or local cost.
Authorizes $25 billion in bonds for the state Housing Finance Agency to fund loans covering up to 17% of the price of a newly built home, for buyers earning up to twice the area median income.
The loans would cover up to 17% of the price of a newly built home under about $1.5 million. Buyers must live in the home and meet income limits.
No committee has raised $1M or more. That is the state's threshold for reporting top donors.
Who paid to put it on the ballot Gary Michelson, a billionaire surgeon and inventor, through a petition drive.
History No bill. It went straight to the ballot by petition, like 2004's $3B stem-cell research bond (Prop 71).
Cost to taxpayers $500 million to $600 million a year from the state budget for about 20 years. Some or all of it could be offset if the research makes money.
Authorizes $8.4 billion in state bonds for immunology and immunotherapy research. Half would go to a single UC-affiliated nonprofit research institute, and half to selected public universities and nonprofits.
Drugs developed with the money would have to be sold to Californians at a 20% discount, and 10% of drug revenue would go back to the state. Taxpayers would repay the bonds with interest.
No committee has raised $1M or more. That is the state's threshold for reporting top donors.
Who paid to put it on the ballot Richard Uihlein and Reform California, through a petition drive.
History A Republican voter ID bill (AB 25) was voted down in committee in April 2025, and its backers, including Carl DeMaio, then launched this petition. Huntington Beach voters approved local voter ID in 2024; a state appeals court struck it down in 2025.
Cost to taxpayers Tens of millions to low hundreds of millions of dollars a year for counties to carry out.
Requires government-issued ID to vote in person, requires mail voters to provide the last four digits of an ID number, and requires election officials to verify that all registered voters are U.S. citizens.
Under current law, people must swear they are U.S. citizens, under penalty of perjury, to register to vote, and mail ballot signatures are checked against voter records. This measure adds ID requirements on top of those rules. It is a constitutional amendment, so changing it later would require another statewide vote.
Evidence Proven cases are rare. The conservative Heritage Foundation's voter fraud database lists fewer than 100 noncitizen voting cases nationwide since the 1980s. California doesn't track how many noncitizens are removed from its voter rolls.
Who paid to put it on the ballot SEIU-UHW, a healthcare workers' union, through a petition drive.
History Wealth tax bills died in committee in 2020, 2021, 2022 and 2024. Gov. Newsom said he would veto one.
Cost to taxpayers A one-time increase of tens of billions of dollars, spread over several years. The state estimates income tax revenue could later drop by up to $1 billion a year if some billionaires leave.
Imposes a one-time 5% tax on the net worth of roughly 200 Californians worth more than $1 billion. Supporters project about $100 billion over five years for health care, food assistance and education.
Props 41 and 42 were put on the same ballot by opponents of this measure. If Prop 42 gets more yes votes than Prop 40, it cancels Prop 40 even if both pass.
Who paid to put it on the ballot Building a Better California, a PAC fighting Prop 40, through a petition drive.
History No bill. Written by Prop 40's opponents to counter it.
Cost to taxpayers Unknown. It depends on what future taxes voters and the Legislature pass.
Requires the state auditor to review any proposed special tax before voters decide on it, and counts new voter-approved special taxes toward the state spending limit.
Counting new taxes toward the spending limit could trigger automatic refunds, reducing money for other state programs. It was put on the ballot by the same group fighting Prop 40.
Who paid to put it on the ballot Building a Better California, a PAC fighting Prop 40, through a petition drive.
History No bill. Written by Prop 40's opponents to counter it.
Cost to taxpayers State tax revenue may not grow as much in the future.
Bans new state taxes on owning personal property, such as investment accounts and business stakes, and bans retroactive taxes passed after January 1, 2026.
If Prop 42 gets more yes votes than Prop 40, it cancels Prop 40 even if both pass. This is a constitutional amendment.
Why it's on your ballot The Legislature passed it, but the law requires voters to approve it. It changes the state constitution, which only voters can do. Lawmakers wrote it in a deal with the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, which agreed to pull its stricter anti-tax initiative from the ballot. The rule: Cal. Constitution, Art. XVIII, §§ 1, 4. Amendments the Legislature proposes must be approved by a majority of voters.
History Prop 13 (1978) set a two-thirds vote for special taxes. A 2017 state Supreme Court ruling let citizen-proposed local taxes pass by a simple majority. This measure would close that gap.
Cost to taxpayers Local tax revenue may not grow as much in the future.
Raises the vote needed to pass a citizen-proposed local special tax from a simple majority to two-thirds, starting January 1, 2027.
Special taxes proposed by local governments already need two-thirds. Under current court rulings, citizen-proposed ones need only a majority. This would apply the two-thirds rule to both.
Who paid to put it on the ballot SEIU-UHW, a healthcare workers' union, through a petition drive. After a similar bill failed in the Legislature.
History A similar bill backed by the same union failed in the Legislature. The union then took it to the ballot. Its three dialysis-clinic measures (2018, 2020, 2022) all failed.
Cost to taxpayers State costs in the low tens of millions of dollars a year, covered by fees.
Requires nonprofit community clinics that serve low-income patients to spend at least 90% of their revenue on patient care, with financial penalties for those that don't.
The Legislative Analyst's Office says most clinics do not currently meet the 90% threshold. The fight is between a healthcare workers' union and the clinics themselves.
Who paid to put it on the ballot California Chamber of Commerce, through a petition drive.
History In June 2025, the Legislature and Gov. Newsom passed a narrower CEQA reform (AB 130 and SB 131), mostly for housing. Prop 45 goes further.
Cost to taxpayers Likely high tens of millions of dollars a year at first for state and local governments, possibly over $100 million, partly covered by fees. Long-term effects are uncertain.
Sets a 365-day deadline for environmental review of projects designated as essential, including housing, infrastructure, schools, broadband and wildfire prevention, and requires courts to rule on related lawsuits within 270 days.
This would be one of the largest changes to the California Environmental Quality Act in decades. Environmental groups and many building trades unions oppose it. Business, homebuilders, utilities and hospitals support it.
The groups behind this year's measures: what they are and who funds them. Underlined names anywhere on this page link here. Use your browser's back button to return.
A PAC formed in February 2026 by Sergey Brin, Eric Schmidt and other billionaires to fight the Prop 40 billionaire tax. An officer of the committee is the chief legal officer of Brin's family office.
Funded by Billionaires. Sergey Brin ($102M), John Doerr ($30M), Eric Schmidt ($27M) and others, including Michael Moritz. Over $250M raised.
A conservative political committee founded in 2003 by Carl DeMaio, now a Republican state Assembly member. It led the 2018 gas tax repeal effort and the 2021 attempt to recall Gov. Newsom, and it is the lead proponent of Prop 39 (voter ID).
Funded by Mostly small donors ($5.8M+ from 2023 to 2025). Its Prop 39 campaign is funded mainly by Richard Uihlein.
CEO of Uline, a shipping supply company based in Wisconsin, and a major national donor to conservative causes. He doesn't live in California. He gave $4M to Tea Party Patriots, a co-organizer of the Jan. 6, 2021 rally, and his foundation funds groups that promoted claims the 2020 election was stolen.
Funded by His own money. $17M to Prop 39, about 77% of the YES side.
A California union of healthcare workers led by Dave Regan. It is sponsoring Props 40 and 44. It also sponsored dialysis-clinic measures in 2018, 2020 and 2022, all rejected by voters. Clinics have sued it in federal court over Prop 44; the allegations are unproven.
Funded by Member dues. It is the only major funder of Yes on 40 and Yes on 44.
California's largest teachers' union. It sponsored Prop 3 and opposes Prop 40.
Funded by Member dues. It gave $33M to Prop 3, and the National Education Association gave $7.5M.
An anti-tax group named for Howard Jarvis, co-author of 1978's Prop 13. Lawmakers wrote Prop 43 in a deal with this group to keep its stricter measure off the ballot.
Funded by Members and donors. The Prop 43 campaign is funded mainly by the California Business Roundtable and commercial landlords.
A Sacramento lobbying group for California's largest employers. It is the top funder of Yes on 43 and a funder of No on 40.
Funded by Member companies and wealthy donors. Peter Thiel gave it $3M in late 2025 to fight the billionaire tax.
The state's largest business lobbying group. It sponsored Prop 45 (faster environmental review).
Funded by Member businesses. The Prop 45 campaign is also funded by homebuilders, utilities and Building a Better California.
The trade group for California real estate agents. It sponsored Prop 37 (homebuyer loans) and funds Yes on 45.
Funded by Member dues. With the National Association of Realtors, it put about $21.9M into Prop 37.
A billionaire spine surgeon and inventor, and the sponsor of Prop 38. He co-founded and chairs the California Institute for Immunology and Immunotherapy, which would get about $4.2B, and has given it at least $120M.
Funded by His own money, about $21M to Prop 38.
A tax policy and lobbying group founded in 1926. Its members are mostly businesses. It opposes Props 3 and 4 and supports Prop 43.
Funded by Member companies.
The trade group for community health clinics that serve low-income patients. It leads the No on 44 campaign and has sued SEIU-UHW.
Funded by Member clinics. AltaMed alone gave $5.5M against Prop 44.
The homebuilders' trade group. Members include Lennar, KB Home and D.R. Horton. It is a major funder of Yes on 45.
Funded by Homebuilding companies.
A nonpartisan, member-based voter education group founded in 1920. It doesn't endorse candidates, only ballot measures.
Funded by Members and small donations.
A nonpartisan government reform group, part of national Common Cause. It focuses on voting rights and money in politics.
Funded by Members and donations.
A Santa Clarita nonprofit led by Linda Paine that has sued the state and county registrars over election procedures. It opposes Prop 5.
Funded by Donations.
The trade group for personal injury and trial lawyers. It fought Uber's ballot measure, then made a deal with Uber in June 2026.
Funded by Member law firms.
A billionaire co-founder of Ripple, a cryptocurrency company.
Funded by His own money. He and Ripple gave $10M against Prop 40.
Who put it on the ballot, what they spent, what they got. Every dollar figure links to the official CA Secretary of State filing.
Based on 9 propositions tracked on this site. Verify any figure at the CA Secretary of State.
Official ballot title: Home Protection for Seniors, Severely Disabled, Families, and Victims of Wildfire or Natural Disasters Act
Expanded property tax portability for seniors and disaster victims — while gutting the parent-child inheritance exemption that let families keep parents' homes without triggering reassessment.
| Side | Funder | Amount |
|---|---|---|
| YES | California Association of Realtors — Primary funder and author of the measure | $40M* |
What they got: The California Association of Realtors got more homes listed. Inherited properties kids can't afford to hold at market-rate taxes go up for sale. Every one of those is a commission. The wildfire victims in the ads were real — and a fraction of the financial impact.
* Pre-1996 amounts from press reports. Verify at CA Secretary of State.
Official ballot title: App-Based Drivers as Contractors and Labor Policies Initiative
Classified Uber, Lyft, DoorDash, and Instacart drivers as independent contractors rather than employees, exempting these companies from California's AB5 labor law. The most expensive ballot measure in California history.
| Side | Funder | Amount |
|---|---|---|
| YES | Uber Technologies — Threatened to leave California if Prop 22 failed | $59M |
| YES | Lyft | $49M |
| YES | DoorDash | $49M |
| YES | Instacart | $31M |
| YES | Postmates | $13M |
| NO | SEIU California — Service workers union | $2M |
| NO | California Labor Federation | $1M |
What they got: Uber, Lyft, DoorDash, and Instacart avoided reclassifying drivers as employees — saving an estimated $413M per year in payroll taxes, benefits, and minimum wage compliance. Drivers remained without unemployment insurance, workers' comp, or guaranteed minimum wage.
Official ballot title: Control, Regulate and Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act
Legalized recreational marijuana for adults 21+. Taxed and regulated like alcohol. Created a licensed commercial market. California became the largest legal marijuana market in the world.
| Side | Funder | Amount |
|---|---|---|
| YES | Sean Parker — Facebook co-founder, drug policy reform as personal cause | $9M* |
| YES | Drug Policy Alliance | $2M* |
| YES | Newsweed / cannabis industry — Commercial cannabis interests stood to gain from a legal regulated market | $2M* |
| NO | Public Safety First (law enforcement associations) — Police chiefs and sheriffs associations | $1.5M* |
What they got: Sean Parker (Facebook co-founder) spent heavily as a personal cause. The legal cannabis industry that emerged is now a multi-billion dollar market. Early licensees and investors benefited enormously from having a head start in a regulated market.
* Pre-1996 amounts from press reports. Verify at CA Secretary of State.
Official ballot title: Mandatory Labeling of Genetically Engineered Food
Would have required labels on food containing genetically modified ingredients. Had 65% support in polls before the campaign began. Failed by 6 points after food and agriculture companies spent $46M in the final weeks.
| Side | Funder | Amount |
|---|---|---|
| NO | Monsanto — Largest single donor against | $8.1M* |
| NO | DuPont Pioneer | $5.4M* |
| NO | PepsiCo | $2.5M* |
| YES | Dr. Bronner's Magic Soaps — Largest single yes donor — a soap company | $2M* |
| NO | Grocery Manufacturers Association — Trade group for Pepsi, Coke, Nestle, and others — later fined in Washington for hiding member identities in a similar campaign | $2M* |
| NO | Coca-Cola | $1.7M* |
| YES | Organic Consumers Association | $1M* |
What they got: Monsanto, Pepsi, Coca-Cola, and the Grocery Manufacturers Association kept GMO labeling off California food. No federal GMO labeling law existed at the time. The same coalition later defeated similar measures in Washington and Colorado.
* Pre-1996 amounts from press reports. Verify at CA Secretary of State.
Official ballot title: Eliminates Right of Same-Sex Couples to Marry
Added a sentence to the California constitution: 'Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.' Passed. Overturned by federal courts in 2013 (Hollingsworth v. Perry). The California legislature had passed same-sex marriage bills in 2005 and 2007 — both were vetoed. Rather than resolve it, the issue was sent to voters.
| Side | Funder | Amount |
|---|---|---|
| NO | Individual donors (Hollywood, tech) — No side raised roughly equivalent to yes side but was outorganized on the ground | $25M* |
| YES | Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormon Church) — Coordinated ground operation across California, busing volunteers from Utah. Members were instructed to donate. | $20M* |
| NO | Equality California | $5M* |
| YES | National Organization for Marriage — Conservative advocacy group founded specifically to oppose same-sex marriage | $1.9M* |
| YES | Catholic dioceses and Knights of Columbus | $1.5M* |
What they got: Religious institutions maintained their doctrinal position on marriage as a matter of civil law. Overturned within 5 years. The Mormon Church faced significant backlash and boycotts. Both sides spent roughly equal amounts — the most expensive social issue campaign in US ballot history at the time.
* Pre-1996 amounts from press reports. Verify at CA Secretary of State.
Official ballot title: Compassionate Use Act of 1996
Legalized marijuana for medical use with a doctor's recommendation. First state in the US to do so. The federal government continued to classify marijuana as Schedule I and prosecute cases for years after.
| Side | Funder | Amount |
|---|---|---|
| YES | George Soros — Drug policy reform as a personal cause | $550K* |
| YES | Peter Lewis (Progressive Insurance founder) — Personal marijuana use and policy reform advocate | $500K* |
| YES | George Zimmer (Men's Wearhouse founder) | $100K* |
What they got: Billionaires George Soros, Peter Lewis, and George Zimmer funded it as a personal cause. No obvious financial return — this is one of the rare cases where wealthy individuals funded something without a direct financial interest in the outcome.
* Pre-1996 amounts from press reports. Verify at CA Secretary of State.
Official ballot title: Proposition 187 — Illegal Aliens Ineligible for Public Benefits
Would have barred undocumented immigrants from public schools, health care, and social services. Passed by voters. Struck down by federal court in 1999 as unconstitutional.
| Side | Funder | Amount |
|---|---|---|
| YES | Pete Wilson gubernatorial campaign / state GOP — Wilson was trailing in polls before making Prop 187 the centerpiece of his campaign | $4M* |
| NO | Civil rights organizations and teachers unions — Argued it would harm US-born children and overwhelm emergency rooms | $2M* |
What they got: Governor Pete Wilson used the measure to anchor his re-election campaign. It passed but was never implemented. Legal scholars noted it attempted to override federal immigration authority. Wilson won re-election.
* Pre-1996 amounts from press reports. Verify at CA Secretary of State.
Official ballot title: Insurance Rate Reduction and Reform Act
Required auto insurance companies to roll back rates 20% and get state approval before raising them. Passed despite the insurance industry spending $80M on five competing ballot measures designed to confuse voters.
| Side | Funder | Amount |
|---|---|---|
| NO | Insurance industry (5 competing props) — Did not just fund opposition — funded 5 of their own competing measures (Props 100, 101, 104, 106) to split the vote and confuse voters. The tactic almost worked. | $80M* |
| YES | Consumer Watchdog / Harvey Rosenfield — Genuine consumer advocacy group that wrote the measure | $2.9M* |
What they got: Consumer advocates got rate regulation. Insurance industry spent $80M and lost — but spent the next decade in court fighting implementation. First modern example of using the ballot as a confusion weapon.
* Pre-1996 amounts from press reports. Verify at CA Secretary of State.
Official ballot title: People's Initiative to Limit Property Taxation
Permanently capped property taxes at 1% of assessed value and locked assessments at 1975 values until a property is sold. Still in effect today.
| Side | Funder | Amount |
|---|---|---|
| YES | Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association — Jarvis was a longtime apartment owners' lobbyist — this was not a spontaneous citizen revolt | $2M* |
| YES | California real estate and landlord associations — Commercial property owners stood to gain the most from permanent assessment locks | $1.5M* |
| NO | Public employee unions and school districts — Warned of cuts to schools and public services — which happened | $1M* |
What they got: Landlords and commercial property owners locked in artificially low tax rates permanently. A homeowner who bought in 1975 pays a fraction of what their neighbor pays for an identical house bought in 2020. Commercial real estate benefited most — some corporations still pay 1970s taxes on billion-dollar properties.
* Pre-1996 amounts from press reports. Verify at CA Secretary of State.
Would have capped contingency fees in personal injury cases and limited medical cost recovery in all California car crashes, not just those involving Uber.
It never reached the ballot. In June 2026, Uber and the Consumer Attorneys of California made a deal in Sacramento that Gov. Newsom signed into law. It caps some medical damages in crash cases and requires stricter background checks for ride-share drivers. Both sides dropped their measures.