Skip to content
Subscribe

Proposition 31 is Too Complicated for Voters?

Published:

Of all the propositions that have been called ‘complicated,’ Proposition 31 is quite possibly the most deserving of the adjective. Titled "The Government Performance and Accountability Act," the ballot measure is a menagerie of budget amendments with a projected fiscal impact of “decreased state sales tax revenues of $200 million annually, with corresponding increases of funding to local governments. Other, potentially more significant changes in state and local budgets, depending on future decisions by public officials.”

The proposition, if passed, would establish a two-year budget cycle, prevent expenditures or tax cuts totaling over $25 million (unless they were offset by revenue increases or budget cuts), allow the governor to unilaterally cut areas of the budget during declared state fiscal emergency if the legislature is unable to act, allow counties the ability to alter state spending regulations (unless the legislature vetoes them), and imposes performance accountability standards on state programs and local budgets.

The winding and lengthy diction of the measure could mean that Proposition 31 is too complicated for voters to really understand.

Proponents of Proposition 31 are headed by Nicholas Berggruen and California Forward, both contributing around $1.5 million to the campaign, according to Ballotpedia. Berggruen, registered as a Democrat in Florida, is a major contributor for the Think Long Committee for California and President of the Nicholas Berggruen Institute. In total, Proposition 31 has raised $4.2 million.

The No on 31 campaign is spearheaded by the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME). The organization has contributed over $90,000. AFSCME is one of the largest labor unions in the country and represents over a million employees. No on 31 has raised a total of $202,000.

Strangely, Californians for Transparent and Accountable Government have opposed the measure, while Taxpayers for Government Accountability are in favor of it. Those for and against Proposition 31 contend that accountability is central to their position. Whereas, those in favor of the initiative cite the section requiring legislative oversight through performance standards; detractors say the legislation does more harm than good calling the "language of the measure unclear" with little guarantee the proposed consequences would actually be carried out.

Proposition 31 is one of the longest ballot initiatives this election and its complexity is only matched by its verbosity. Regardless of one's opinion, the proposition is difficult to fully understand given the ambitious scope of the legislation. California voters should carefully research 31 to more comprehensively understand its implications.

Adhere to the IVN etiquette

By posting a comment, you agree to adhere to our etiquette rules: No partisan attacks, no personal attacks, substantiate your sources, no self-promotion.

Contact IVN

Questions about this article or our coverage? Send us a message. A free IVN member account is required.

Message sent

Thanks, we’ll review it and get back to you if needed.

Message not sent

Sorry, something went wrong. Please try again.

Sign in to send a message

Messages are tied to your IVN member account. Signing in is free and takes a few seconds.

Contact IVN

Questions about this article or our coverage? Send us a message. A free IVN member account is required.

Message sent

Thanks, we’ll review it and get back to you if needed.

Message not sent

Sorry, something went wrong. Please try again.

Sign in to send a message

Messages are tied to your IVN member account. Signing in is free and takes a few seconds.

Republish this article

Republishing guidelines

Republish IVN articles for free. Independent Voter News articles may be republished online or in print under a Creative Commons BY-NC-ND 4.0 license, on these terms:

  1. Credit the author and IVN. Keep the byline ("By Author Name, Independent Voter News") and the attribution note at the end, which links to the original.
  2. Keep the meaning. You may update time and place references and apply your house style. You may trim for length, as long as the cuts don't change the meaning or misrepresent the author. Keep the headline. Mark any additions as your own (for example "Additional reporting by ...").
  3. Translations are welcome. Translate faithfully, add "Translated from English by [your outlet]", and tell us at editor@ivn.us.
  4. Keep the links, including the link to the original article.
  5. Keep the tracking image. The HTML includes a 1-pixel image that counts readers on your page. It collects no personal information.
  6. Photos and illustrations. Images credited to IVN may be used with this article only. Images credited to others (AP, Getty, Unsplash, Wikimedia and so on) stay under their owners' terms. Secure the rights or switch "Include images" off.
  7. Don't sell it. You can't sell our articles or sell ads specifically against them. Your normal site advertising is fine.
  8. No implied endorsement. Don't suggest that IVN or the author endorses you, your candidates or your causes, or that donations to you support IVN.
  9. Keep labels. Opinion or analysis pieces keep that label.
  10. Point search engines to the original. Where your CMS allows, set the canonical URL to the original IVN article.
  11. No bulk or automated republishing, and don't submit our articles to aggregators (Apple News, Google News, MSN) as your own.
  12. Corrections and removals. Update your copy when we correct it, and remove it promptly if we ask. We'll contact you at the email you give us.
  13. Questions or print republication: editor@ivn.us.

IVN staff: fill in who you're inviting above, then create the invite.

Preparing the article

Proposition 31 is Too Complicated for Voters?

Choose a format
  • HTML
  • Email HTML
  • Markdown
  • Formatted (.docx)
  • Plain text
  • WordPress blocks
  • PDF
Choose a platform

Photos credited to others need their owners' permission.

To for

Republishing somewhere else? Questions? editor@ivn.us