Description

Would allocate $9 billion in school bonds for both construction and modernization projects at K-12 schools and community college facilities.

Pros

School facilities throughout California are falling apart. The last time funding was passed to repair schools was in 2006. There is a backlog of almost $2 billion dollars in K-12 project applications, and the funding is running out.  Proposition 51 will help fill in the deficit and ensure that our schools have the funding they need to meet basic health and safety standards. The measure is backed by the California Democratic AND Republican Parties. Also, a poll by Public Policy Institute of California found that 63% of likely voters would support the proposition.

Cons

Funding for Proposition 51 is based on a first come, first serve basis. This means that Proposition 51 would benefit larger, better funded school districts, who have more administrative staff to fill out the complex paperwork. The measure is viewed as a cash cow for the construction and development industry, who are funding the initiative. Some see Prop 51 as a short sighted solution that will add to the state’s debt while taking away much-needed funding from low-income communities. It is opposed by Governor Jerry Brown.

Staff Recommendation (SUPPORT):

While we are concerned about how Prop 51 will distribute funds to schools and the fact that it was written by developers and the construction industry, we are acutely aware that our schools cannot wait another year (or another decade) for funding to repair their crumbling, deteriorating facilities. It is with caution that Courage Campaign staff recommends supporting this initiative.

Description

CA hospitals currently pay a Medi-Cal fee -- which is then matched by the federal government -- to help pay for healthcare services for low-income children. The fee is set to expire in 2017. Proposition 52 would make that fee permanent and require voter approval for any further changes to the program.

Pros

Proposition 52 will save the state more than $1 billion annually by 2020 in costs for children’s health care coverage and increase revenues for public hospitals by nearly $350 million.

Cons

While the state needs consistent revenue for Medi-Cal patients, Proposition 52 would make it more difficult for the Governor and legislators to amend the hospital fee. If passed, the California State Legislature would need a two-thirds majority vote to change the measure, making it nearly impossible to reverse it. The measure could derail funding for other health and human services during a state revenue crisis.

Staff Recommendation (NEUTRAL):

Medi-Cal is vital to the health of Californians. It serves a third of the population. Maintaining its funding is very important. However, we are concerned that locking in Medi-Cal hospital fees via this initiative will hinder our government’s ability to respond to another funding crisis. It could also potentially impact the funding for other health care services that are not covered under Prop 52. Courage Campaign staff does not have a recommendation on this initiative.

Description

Prop 53 is a right-wing millionaire's attempt to hijack local control, infrastructure, and emergency funds by requiring a statewide vote on projects that exceed $2 billion.

Pros

Proposition 53 will require voters across the state to approve big, local infrastructure projects -- such as bridges -- if they cost the state more than $2 billion.

Cons

Despite the initiative’s claim that it will increase the public voice on how their taxpayer dollars are spent, it does the exact opposite. The measure takes away local control on critical projects. For example, if LA residents want to repair their local freeways, Bay Area residents, who are unfamiliar with the project and don't even live in the area, have the power to reject the proposal. 

Most importantly, there are also no exemptions for natural disasters. That means the residents impacted by a natural disaster (i.e. Blue Cut Fire) may have to wait up to over two years for funding to rebuild damaged infrastructure. For these reasons, the initiative is opposed by the CA Professional Firefighters.

Prop 53 could also take funds away from other vital California programs, including K-12 education programs. CA right-wing, multi-millionaire Dean Cortopassi, the CEO of Stanislaus Food Products, has spent over $4 million on the initiative. It is widely understood that Cortopassi is pushing this initiative to stop Governor Brown’s Delta tunnels project. The Delta tunnels project is a proposal, under Gov. Brown, that would create two water tunnels in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta to divert water from the Sacramento River to Central and Southern California.

Staff Recommendation (STRONGLY OPPOSE):

Proposition 53 is a poorly worded measure that reflects the special interests of right-wing millionaire Dean Cortopassi and will take away local control and halt funding during emergencies. For those reasons, Courage Campaign staff recommends that our members oppose this initiative.

Description

Requires bills to be published and available to the public at least 72 hours before legislators vote on them. It also requires audiovisual recordings of all bill proceedings, except in closed sessions, to be available to the public online. Any individual can use the recordings.

Pros

Special interest groups and lobbyists have exclusive access to legislators. This gives them an advantage to sneak in last-minute changes to critical bills without public comment or discussion. As a result, the public has little time to weigh-in on last-minute amendments that can drastically water down or change the essence of the bill.

Proposition 54 would help end backroom deals with corporate lobbyists and special interest groups, and increase public transparency within the legislative process. New York, Idaho, and Hawaii have already passed similar legislation.

Cons

The 72 hour delay before a vote gives special interest groups time to create counter proposals to stop bills. This may make it harder for the Legislature to fast-track critical bills (as it did with the minimum wage legislation and the recent gun safety package) to bypass the influence of corporate interest groups and their lobbyists.

Prop 54 would also allow anyone -- including corporate industries like Big Oil and Big Pharma --  to use video and audio clips of legislators in political advertisements. This use is currently illegal. It’s likely that these audiovisual recordings will be taken out of context and used for misleading political ads.

Staff Recommendation (NEUTRAL):

Increasing transparency and trust within the legislative process is a major priority for Courage Campaign. That is why we launched CourageScore.org last year and “Building Courage” to provide communities in CA the resources they need to hold their elected officials accountable.

Proposition 54 will likely backfire and increase political power for special interest groups and wealthy individuals, who already wield a stronghold in our State Capitol. Not to mention, California’s number one political donor -- Republican Charles Munger, Jr. -- is the sole financial backer of Prop 54. In the past, Munger has spent $26.7 million in political contributions to oppose progressive legislation and legislators. Courage Campaign staff recommends a neutral position on the initiative because of its uncertain benefits to the public.

Description

Extends the Prop 30 tax on wealthiest Californians for another twelve years. It would only impact individuals who earn over $250,000, and couples who earn over $500,000. The extension would raise an estimated $5 to $11 billion. The money raised would be used to fund CA schools, community colleges, and health programs, as well as budget reserves and debt payments.

Pros

Since voters passed Prop 30 in 2012, the state has raised over $30 billion for K-12 education! If extended, it will raise up to an additional $11 billion for schools, community colleges, and healthcare programs. Since Prop 30 was passed, California was able to provide stable funding for schools and avert thousands of teacher layoffs.

Cons

Opponents claim that this tax has given California the highest income tax rate in the United States. By extending Proposition 30, opponents fear that the tax will lead to an exodus of wealthy individuals from the state and derail California’s economic growth. However, there is little evidence to support this viewpoint.

Staff Recommendation (STRONG SUPPORT):

With the help of Courage Campaign members, in 2012, California voters passed a critical initiative (Prop 30) to tax the wealthy to help pay for education. Now that initiative is set to expire! Proposition 55 would simply extend the tax on the wealthy for another twelve years. Contrary to fear campaigns fueled by conservative economists in 2012, taxing the wealthiest Californians did not lead to a collapse in our economy. In fact California’s economy grew by 4.1% in 2015. That is 3.1% higher than 2014! California is now the 6th largest economy in the world and continues to grow. Prop 30 would continue to fund our schools and help keep teachers’ jobs. For these reasons, we recommend a HELL YES vote on Prop 55.

Description

Taxes cigarettes, electronic cigarettes, and other tobacco products by $2. The funds raised would be used to provide healthcare services for low-income Californians, and invest in research of cancer and other diseases related to tobacco, and law enforcement programs.

Pros

Proposition 56 would bring in over $1 billion annually by 2017-18 to improve existing healthcare programs and fund research into cancer and other tobacco-related diseases. It would also help reduce the number of youth smokers. Research shows that for every 10% increase in the cost of a pack of cigarettes, teen smoking drops by up to 7%. California also spends $3.5 billion dollars each year on treating cancer and other tobacco-related diseases through Medi-Cal.

Cons

Over 9 million Americans have turned to e-cigarettes and vapor products to wean themselves off of traditional cigarettes. Taxing vaping products at nearly 70% or more threatens individuals who are seeking to cut their tobacco addiction. In addition, opponents argue that Proposition 56 is a regressive tax that would largely impact low-income residents. A study from the CA Department of Public Health found that poorer households and counties had higher rates of smoking in California.

Staff Recommendation (STRONG SUPPORT):

Smoking is the leading cause of preventable death -- WORLDWIDE -- according to a report from the Center for Disease Control. Despite claims that the tax is “regressive,” 80% of the funds raised will go towards healthcare programs that would benefit Medi-Cal patients, most of whom are low-income, people of color.

Big Tobacco has spent nearly $17 million to defeat this proposition and mislead Californians about the impacts tobacco products have on our health and environment. We strongly recommend that our members hold Big Tobacco accountable and support Prop 56.

Description

Would tackle CA’s broken criminal justice system and overcrowding in prisons by allowing people charged with non-violent felonies, who have served their primary offense’s full term, to be considered for early parol.It would take away the power from prosecutors to try children (14 years and younger) as adults. Instead, the child would have a hearing first with a juvenile court judge.

Pros

Prosecutors are increasingly sentencing youth in adult courts, despite huge drops in youth crime. While California experienced a 55% drop in youth felony arrests, young people charged as adults increased by 23% from 2003 to 2015. Prop 57 would allow children 14 years old and younger to have a hearing in juvenile delinquency court BEFORE they can be prosecuted and tried as adults.

The measure would also reduce prison spending and help provide rehabilitation for nonviolent offenders. California’s prisons are beyond overcrowded, with some reaching 300% capacity.

Cons

Proposition 57 does not clearly define a “nonviolent felony.” Any nonviolent crime that is not listed as one of the 23 “violent” offenses may be considered “nonviolent.” This includes human trafficking, rape of an unconscious individual, and hate crimes. There is also uncertainty of how much money this approach will save the state.

Staff Recommendation (STRONG SUPPORT):

To try and sentence children to adult prisons -- let’s repeat that, CHILDREN -- is reprehensible. Prop 57 would address this failure by giving kids a fair chance in court.

In addition, Prop 57 would help fix CA’s broken criminal justice system, which largely discriminates against low income Californians and people of color. It’s important to note that incarcerated individuals will only be given parole consideration after completing the sentence with the longest punishment. Contrary to the lies opponents are spewing, Prop 57 will not lead to a mass release of dangerous people, because individuals who have committed a violent crime are NOT eligible for early release under this initiative. It’s high time to fix our failed “War on Drugs” and be smart on crime. Courage Campaign staff strongly recommends a yes vote on Prop 57.

Description

Repeals and changes parts of the “English in Public Schools” proposition passed by voters in 1998 to allow non-English languages to be used in public education instruction.

Pros

California is the most diverse state in the nation, with 40% of Californians speaking languages other than English at home. To support that diversity, students should be allowed access to multilingual educational programs to support their success. Also, studies have shown that learning a second language lowers risks of dementia and Alzheimer’s disease.

Cons

Opponents claim that Proposition 58 may delay English acquisition by non-English speakers.

Staff Recommendation (STRONG SUPPORT):

In 1998, California voters passed an initiative (Prop 227) that would require English-only instruction at public schools. While to some it seemed harmless, Prop 227 was a blatantly discriminatory initiative that aimed to penalize California’s growing Latino population at the time. Prop 227 and its right-wing supporters aimed to reject rather than embrace the state’s changing demographics. Prop 58 would finally give a nod to the state’s growing diversity by overturning Prop 227. Proposition 58 would also encourage students who want to learn another language in addition to English. California’s strength is derived from our diversity, and encouraging our youth to speak multiple languages would be advantageous in our increasingly, interconnected global economy. Courage Campaign staff strongly recommends our members to support the initiative.

Description

Instructs California’s representatives in Congress to do everything in their power to overturn Citizens United.

Pros

Citizens United opened the floodgates for hundreds of millions of dollars in secret, unaccountable corporate money in our elections. If passed, Proposition 59 would help build national momentum to finally end big money’s dominance on our electoral process and return the power back to the people. Colorado and Montana have passed similar initiatives.

Cons

None.

Staff Recommendation (STRONG SUPPORT):

Citizens United has placed a stranglehold on our political process. If passed in California -- the third largest state and most populous state in the country -- Proposition 59 will send a powerful message to Washington and help lead the movement to eventually overturn Citizens United, putting democracy back into the hands of the people. Courage Campaign staff strongly recommends that our members support Prop 59.

Description

Would require adult film performers to wear condoms.

Pros

Adult performers are constantly exposed to dangerous but preventable workplace-acquired infections. Proposition 60 would provide adult performers the same workplace safety protections as other Californians. It may also decrease the spread of AIDS and sexually transmitted infections.

Cons

Prop 60, however well intended, does not fully reflect the realities of the industry. Condoms can break during extended movie sessions. Performers can spread a number of diseases even with such protection. The industry requires testing of actors for HIV and most STIs every 14 days. The emergence of the HIV-prevention drug PrEP can greatly reduce the chance of infection.

Proposition 60 could also push the $9 billion adult film industry out of California. This was seen in 2012 when LA County mandated that performers use condoms. The number of permits in LA dropped by 90%. Some performers argue that it would drive production of adult films to go underground, increasing the risk of infections for performers.

The measure would also use taxpayer dollars to appoint attorney Michael Weinstein, author of the ballot initiative, to become a state employee. His job would be to monitor all adult film production in California, and file lawsuits against violators. Weinstein can only be removed by a vote from the CA State Legislature. He’d be paid with taxpayer dollars and would not even have to apply or interview for the job.

Staff Recommendation (OPPOSE):

Prop 60 takes the complex regulation of a unique industry and locks it into a rigid structure that could only be adjusted by a subsequent initiative. It also puts the $9 billion adult film industry in the hands of one person -- Michael Weinstein -- the backer of this initiative. Performers, who often use screen names, could have their identities and addresses made public, a feature that invades privacy and could lead to harm from stalkers. Courage Campaign staff recommends our members to oppose the initiative.

Description

Requires the state to pay the same (or a lower) price for pharmaceutical drugs as the United States Department of Veterans Affairs.

Pros

In the last two decades, prescription drug spending rose by over 500%! Proposition 61 would dramatically reduce drug prices for some Californians, including our seniors. This means that the state could pay 20-24% LESS on average for drugs than other government agencies, and 40% LESS than even Medicare.

Cons

Proposition 61 may invalidate existing state contracts for drugs that are not priced as the same or lower value as Department of Veterans Affairs drugs. It’s possible that drug makers could simply refuse to sell those drugs in CA. In addition, when drug prices are negotiated between the VA and pharmaceutical companies, those prices are not reflected in the VA’s public database because of confidentiality agreements. As a result, it may be difficult for the state to know exactly how much the VA pays for certain drugs.

Some speculate that the initiative would encourage pharmaceutical companies to raise the prices of drugs on the VA. Others are concerned that if drug companies refuse to sell certain drugs to CA at the lower price, then the State will have to purchase those drugs at retail cost which would be much higher.

Staff Recommendation (SUPPORT):

If passed, Prop 61 would be a historic step toward reining in Big Pharma from price gouging Americans. Three quarters of Americans believe that pharmaceutical drugs are too expensive; the recent Epi-pen scandal only proves the point. Drug prices are increased to line the pockets of pharmaceutical executives, regardless of the human consequences. The clearest indication that this initiative will help reduce Big Pharma’s profits is that drug companies have spent close to $70 million to oppose the initiative.

Various details of Prop 61’s implementation are unclear, but those can be solved, if necessary, after it is passed. Big Pharma has made a mockery of California’s Legislature, proving that it has the lobbying muscle (and campaign donations) to block even the most modest reforms. The only way to beat them is with our votes. Courage Campaign staff recommends supporting Prop 61.

Description

Would replace the death penalty with life in prison without parole.

Pros

California has 743 inmates on death row, the largest population out of all fifty states. The death penalty is immoral and leads to the death of innocent people, particularly people who are poor and/or people of color who face structural discrimination. California has spent a whopping $4 billion on just 13 executions. California spends $90,000 annually per prisoner on death row. Moreover an inmate has not been executed in over ten years. Proposition 62 would save the state $150 million annually, according to the Legislative Analyst’s Office.

Cons

Proposition 62 does not address larger systemic problems within our criminal justice system, which largely impacts low-income individuals and people of color. It removes certain worker protections and some feel that requiring life in prison only contributes to the penal system, rather than reforming it.

Staff Recommendation (STRONG SUPPORT):

Prop 62 would ensure that an innocent life is not taken by a flawed system of justice. Even if you don’t believe the death penalty is immoral, Proposition 62 would save the state considerable funds to reinvest in our communities. Our state has literally spent BILLIONS of precious taxpayer dollars on the death penalty while our roads, schools, and infrastructure are crumbling. We strongly recommend supporting Prop 62.

Description

Prohibits the possession of large-capacity ammunition magazines, requires most individuals to pass a background check to purchase ammunition, along with other provisions to increase gun safety.

Pros

Every year more than 32,000 Americans lose their lives to gun violence. And in 2016 alone, the United States had over 200 mass shootings, including the deadly attack in Orlando that claimed 49 innocent lives. California already has some of the most effective guns safety laws in the country, and as a result, gun deaths were cut in half from 1993 to 2010. Proposition 63 would continue to help save lives by keeping firearms and ammunition out of the hands of dangerous people, while protecting law-abiding Californians.

Cons

Opponents are concerned that Proposition 63 would criminalize law-abiding gun owners. The initiative would require gun owners to pay, apply, and then be screened before they are allowed to purchase ammunition. The long process could dissuade gun owners from signing up in the first place, forcing thousands of ammunition retailers out of business.

Currently under the reforms of Prop. 47, petty theft under $950 is considered a misdemeanor. But under Prop. 63, gun theft, regardless of the amount, would automatically become a felony. This means, if passed, Prop. 63 would lead to felony charges against an individual who steals a gun worth $950 or less.

Staff Recommendation (STRONG SUPPORT):

Proposition 63 helps California continue to lead on gun safety by keeping firearms and ammunition out of the hands of dangerous people, while protecting law-abiding Californians. As the most populous state in the country, we can show that these policies are effective and save lives, modeling gun violence reduction strategies for the nation. We strongly recommend our members to support Prop. 63.

Description

Would legalize marijuana in California for anyone over 21.

Pros

Proposition 64 would help address the failures of the racist War on Drugs that criminalizes non-violent offenders -- largely targeting black and Latino communities -- and has overcrowded our prisons. It also blocks the selling or advertising of marijuana near schools and youth centers, and strip licenses from businesses that sell to people under 21.

In addition, Prop 64 would ensure that children are not criminalized for marijuana possession. Youth, who receive a first offense warning, would be required to attend a four hour drug education program or counseling and complete ten hours of community service. The drug education and counseling programs are free to youth. The child’s marijuana offense would also be expunged on their 18 birthday or two years after the conviction, whichever comes first.

A report from the CA Legislative Analyst’s Office found that Proposition 64 would bring in over $1 billion annually to fund local education, law enforcement, environmental priorities, and use the funds raised for youth prevention and programming. It would reduce law enforcement costs by $100 million.

Cons

After Colorado legalized marijuana, the use of marijuana among teens increased and marijuana-involved fatal car crashes increased by 34%.There was also an increase in arrests for possession of marijuana among Latino and Black youth

In addition, lower income communities are concerned marijuana businesses will be concentrated in their neighborhoods.

Lastly some environmentalists fear that irresponsible cultivation of marijuana would endanger the survival of some salmon species, poison wildlife with pesticides, use scarce water resources, and threaten fragile habitats.

Staff Recommendation (SUPPORT):

Marijuana use presents societal benefits as well as challenges, but one thing seems clear, a blanket prohibition is not the answer. The current system, where medical marijuana can be acquired in a comically easy way for those without a medical need, doesn’t work either. The best solution is to treat marijuana like alcohol, as Prop 64 intends, and use the estimated $1 billion in revenue to address a variety of issues.

Unregulated marijuana exposed users to potentially dangerous chemicals, threatened our natural resources through unregulated marijuana fields. Proposition 64 would uphold marijuana to similar standards as tobacco and alcohol products to meet basic packaging, labeling, and advertising standards to protect consumer safety, youth, the environment, and communities of color.

In addition, the “War on Drugs” discriminatory enforcement of marijuana laws has disproportionately impacted people of color. Prop 64 would be another step toward a more equitable justice system. We recommend supporting Prop 64.

Description

Requires a fee to support an “environmental” fund that would be used to help overturn CA’s ban on plastic bags.

Pros

Pushed by the plastic bag industry, Proposition 65 would raise state funds to increase environmental and conservation efforts.

Cons

First and foremost, Proposition 65 would lay legal groundwork to overturn the state’s plastic bag ban. It would also give the plastics manufacturing industry an excuse to reintroduce wasteful plastic bags despite the ban by encouraging the state to use the “environmental fund” to recycle plastic bags. But Californians only recycle 3% of plastic bags, leaving the rest to go to landfills. To top it off California taxpayers spend an estimated $400 million to remove litter from our waterways including plastic bags. To manufacture billions of plastic bags, it requires more than two million barrels of oil.

Staff Recommendation (STRONGLY OPPOSE):

Proposition 65 doesn’t make sense. While the initiative will set up an environment fund, the fund will encourage grocery stores and environmental organizations to change their stance on banning plastic bags. In fact, the initiative would lay the legal foundation to OVERTURN CA’s landmark ban on single-use plastic bags. The reality is that using recycling as an excuse to produce more single-use plastic bags is not green at all. Courage Campaign staff strongly opposes Prop 65.

Description

Would speed up the death penalty and require inmates’ wages to go towards victims

Pros

Proponents claim that the shortsighted, poorly written initiative will reform California’s fractured death penalty system and reduce the state’s backlog of state prisoners condemned to death.

Cons

Proposition 66 will INCREASE California’s risk of executing an innocent person.

In addition, the Legislative Analyst’s Office claims the initiative will increase taxpayer costs by  tens of MILLIONS of dollars annually and its long-term impact is “unknown.” It could lead to expensive legal fights for the state. The poorly written measure would also enact dangerous legal shortcuts such as the appoint inexperienced attorneys.

Staff Recommendation (STRONGLY OPPOSE):

Courage Campaign staff strongly suggests a “NO” vote on Prop 66 because the death penalty is immoral, ineffective at deterring crime, and leads to the death of innocent people. Furthermore, the initiative’s vague language will have unknown impacts on the state, while wasting millions of precious taxpayer dollars that can be used for funding for our county hospitals, schools, roads, and more. We strongly recommend members to oppose the initiative.

Description

Would uphold or overturn California’s 2014 ban on single-use plastic bags passed by the state Legislature.

Pros

If passed, Proposition 67 would ensure the 2014 law that bans single-use grocery bags that pollute waterways, harm wildlife, and litter our environment would remain law. It would also stop out-of-state corporate plastic bag manufacturers from rejecting the statewide ban

Cons

Out-of-state plastic bag companies argue that single use plastic bags make up a small percentage of the litter that winds up in our oceans. They raised concerns that the Proposition 67 would hurt thousands of Californian families who work in the plastic bag manufacturing industry. In other words, the plastic bag industry wants to protect its profits.

Staff Recommendation (STRONG SUPPORT):

Proposition 67 is funded by the plastic bag industry and aims to have voters overturn our state’s landmark ban on plastic bags. Single-use plastic bags have devastating impacts on our environment. Californians overwhelmingly encouraged their representatives to pass Senate Bill 270 in 2014, and our legislators delivered. A handful of cities in California already enforce a plastic bag ban, and once the law is finally allowed to go into effect, it would end the patchwork of municipal policies. We strongly recommend that Californians show their support for the ban again by voting “YES” on Prop 67.