If reading through the California ballot propositions has made your head spin, you are in the right place! From Sept. 28th – Oct 9th, the teams from Bay Curious and The Bay podcasts are exploring the 14 statewide ballot propositions in our Prop Fest series. Check The Bay and Bay Curious podcast feeds every weekday for new episodes or get caught up below.
Prop 45: Faster Environmental Reviews for Certain Projects
Prop 44: Requires Health Clinics to Spend More on Patient Care
Prop 43: Raises Voter Threshold for Some Local Tax Measures
Prop 42: Bans New State Taxes on Personal Property and Investments
Prop 41: Requires New Audits of Special Tax Programs
Proposition 40: Imposes a One-Time Tax on Billionaires to Fund Healthcare and Education
Prop 39: Require Identification When Californians Cast A Ballot
Prop 38: Borrows $8.4 Billion to Fund Immunology Research
Prop 37: Creates Middle-Income Homebuying Program
Prop 5: Changes to the State Recall Election Process
Player sponsored by
window.__IS_SSR__=true
window.__INITIAL_STATE__={
"attachmentsReducer": {
"audio_0": {
"type": "attachments",
"id": "audio_0",
"imgSizes": {
"kqedFullSize": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/themes/KQED-unified/img/audio_bgs/background0.jpg"
}
}
},
"audio_1": {
"type": "attachments",
"id": "audio_1",
"imgSizes": {
"kqedFullSize": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/themes/KQED-unified/img/audio_bgs/background1.jpg"
}
}
},
"audio_2": {
"type": "attachments",
"id": "audio_2",
"imgSizes": {
"kqedFullSize": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/themes/KQED-unified/img/audio_bgs/background2.jpg"
}
}
},
"audio_3": {
"type": "attachments",
"id": "audio_3",
"imgSizes": {
"kqedFullSize": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/themes/KQED-unified/img/audio_bgs/background3.jpg"
}
}
},
"audio_4": {
"type": "attachments",
"id": "audio_4",
"imgSizes": {
"kqedFullSize": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/themes/KQED-unified/img/audio_bgs/background4.jpg"
}
}
},
"placeholder": {
"type": "attachments",
"id": "placeholder",
"imgSizes": {
"thumbnail": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-2000x1333-1-160x107.jpg",
"width": 160,
"height": 107,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"medium": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-2000x1333-1-800x533.jpg",
"width": 800,
"height": 533,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"medium_large": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-2000x1333-1-768x512.jpg",
"width": 768,
"height": 512,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"large": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-2000x1333-1-1020x680.jpg",
"width": 1020,
"height": 680,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"1536x1536": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-2000x1333-1-1536x1024.jpg",
"width": 1536,
"height": 1024,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"fd-lrg": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-2000x1333-1-1536x1024.jpg",
"width": 1536,
"height": 1024,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"fd-med": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-2000x1333-1-1020x680.jpg",
"width": 1020,
"height": 680,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"fd-sm": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-2000x1333-1-800x533.jpg",
"width": 800,
"height": 533,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"post-thumbnail": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-2000x1333-1-672x372.jpg",
"width": 672,
"height": 372,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"twentyfourteen-full-width": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-2000x1333-1-1038x576.jpg",
"width": 1038,
"height": 576,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"xxsmall": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-2000x1333-1-160x107.jpg",
"width": 160,
"height": 107,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"xsmall": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-2000x1333-1-672x372.jpg",
"width": 672,
"height": 372,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"small": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-2000x1333-1-672x372.jpg",
"width": 672,
"height": 372,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"xlarge": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-2000x1333-1-1020x680.jpg",
"width": 1020,
"height": 680,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"full-width": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-2000x1333-1-1920x1280.jpg",
"width": 1920,
"height": 1280,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"guest-author-32": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-1333x1333-1-160x160.jpg",
"width": 32,
"height": 32,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"guest-author-50": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-1333x1333-1-160x160.jpg",
"width": 50,
"height": 50,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"guest-author-64": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-1333x1333-1-160x160.jpg",
"width": 64,
"height": 64,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"guest-author-96": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-1333x1333-1-160x160.jpg",
"width": 96,
"height": 96,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"guest-author-128": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-1333x1333-1-160x160.jpg",
"width": 128,
"height": 128,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"detail": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-1333x1333-1-160x160.jpg",
"width": 160,
"height": 160,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"kqedFullSize": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-2000x1333-1.jpg",
"width": 2000,
"height": 1333
}
}
},
"news_12050791": {
"type": "attachments",
"id": "news_12050791",
"meta": {
"index": "attachments_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "12050791",
"found": true
},
"title": "012425-Affordable-Housing-DD-AP-01-CM copy",
"publishDate": 1754151382,
"status": "inherit",
"parent": 12050790,
"modified": 1754151407,
"caption": "Construction workers finish the exterior of an apartment building in downtown Los Angeles on June 18, 2021.\n",
"credit": "Damian Dovarganes/AP Photo",
"altTag": null,
"description": null,
"imgSizes": {
"thumbnail": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2025/08/012425-Affordable-Housing-DD-AP-01-CM-copy-160x107.jpg",
"width": 160,
"height": 107,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"1536x1536": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2025/08/012425-Affordable-Housing-DD-AP-01-CM-copy-1536x1024.jpg",
"width": 1536,
"height": 1024,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"post-thumbnail": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2025/08/012425-Affordable-Housing-DD-AP-01-CM-copy-672x372.jpg",
"width": 672,
"height": 372,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"twentyfourteen-full-width": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2025/08/012425-Affordable-Housing-DD-AP-01-CM-copy-1038x576.jpg",
"width": 1038,
"height": 576,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"kqedFullSize": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2025/08/012425-Affordable-Housing-DD-AP-01-CM-copy.jpg",
"width": 2000,
"height": 1333
}
},
"isLoading": false,
"fetchFailed": false
},
"news_12061658": {
"type": "attachments",
"id": "news_12061658",
"meta": {
"index": "attachments_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "12061658",
"found": true
},
"title": "072419-Rural-Doctor-AW-CM-10_scr",
"publishDate": 1761398405,
"status": "inherit",
"parent": 12061653,
"modified": 1761398442,
"caption": "A doctor listens to a patient's heartbeat at the Mountain Valley Health Center in Bieber on July 24, 2019. ",
"credit": "Anne Wernikoff for CalMatters",
"altTag": null,
"description": null,
"imgSizes": {
"thumbnail": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2025/10/072419-Rural-Doctor-AW-CM-10_scr-160x107.jpg",
"width": 160,
"height": 107,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"post-thumbnail": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2025/10/072419-Rural-Doctor-AW-CM-10_scr-672x372.jpg",
"width": 672,
"height": 372,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"twentyfourteen-full-width": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2025/10/072419-Rural-Doctor-AW-CM-10_scr-1038x576.jpg",
"width": 1038,
"height": 576,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"kqedFullSize": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2025/10/072419-Rural-Doctor-AW-CM-10_scr.jpg",
"width": 1200,
"height": 800
}
},
"isLoading": false,
"fetchFailed": false
},
"news_12062350": {
"type": "attachments",
"id": "news_12062350",
"meta": {
"index": "attachments_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "12062350",
"found": true
},
"title": "California Voters Head To Polls To Decide On Redistricting Through Prop 50",
"publishDate": 1761858649,
"status": "inherit",
"parent": 12062349,
"modified": 1761858649,
"caption": "WEST HOLLYWOOD, CALIFORNIA - OCTOBER 27: A person walks past a sign pointing to a vote center during the in-person early voting period in California's Proposition 50 special election on October 27, 2025 in West Hollywood, California. California voters are casting their ballots in the redistricting measure which would redraw the state’s congressional districts in an effort to increase Democratic seats in the U.S. House of Representatives. (Photo by Mario Tama/Getty Images)",
"credit": null,
"altTag": null,
"description": null,
"imgSizes": {
"medium": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2025/10/GettyImages-2243718109-2000x1389.jpg",
"width": 2000,
"height": 1389,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"large": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2025/10/GettyImages-2243718109-2000x1389.jpg",
"width": 2000,
"height": 1389,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"thumbnail": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2025/10/GettyImages-2243718109-160x111.jpg",
"width": 160,
"height": 111,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"1536x1536": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2025/10/GettyImages-2243718109-1536x1067.jpg",
"width": 1536,
"height": 1067,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"2048x2048": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2025/10/GettyImages-2243718109-2048x1423.jpg",
"width": 2048,
"height": 1423,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"post-thumbnail": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2025/10/GettyImages-2243718109-672x372.jpg",
"width": 672,
"height": 372,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"twentyfourteen-full-width": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2025/10/GettyImages-2243718109-1038x576.jpg",
"width": 1038,
"height": 576,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"full-width": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2025/10/GettyImages-2243718109-2000x1389.jpg",
"width": 2000,
"height": 1389,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"npr-cds-wide": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2025/10/GettyImages-2243718109-1200x675.jpg",
"width": 1200,
"height": 675,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"kqedFullSize": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2025/10/GettyImages-2243718109-scaled.jpg",
"width": 2560,
"height": 1779
}
},
"isLoading": false,
"fetchFailed": false
},
"news_12101422": {
"type": "attachments",
"id": "news_12101422",
"meta": {
"index": "attachments_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "12101422",
"found": true
},
"title": "WealthPortfolio",
"publishDate": 1790362884,
"status": "inherit",
"parent": 12101418,
"modified": 1790362956,
"caption": "Businessman and team analyzing financial statements and graphs.",
"credit": "nuttapong punna/iStock",
"altTag": null,
"description": null,
"imgSizes": {
"medium": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/09/WealthPortfolio-2000x1136.jpg",
"width": 2000,
"height": 1136,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"large": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/09/WealthPortfolio-2000x1136.jpg",
"width": 2000,
"height": 1136,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"thumbnail": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/09/WealthPortfolio-160x91.jpg",
"width": 160,
"height": 91,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"1536x1536": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/09/WealthPortfolio-1536x873.jpg",
"width": 1536,
"height": 873,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"2048x2048": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/09/WealthPortfolio-2048x1164.jpg",
"width": 2048,
"height": 1164,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"post-thumbnail": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/09/WealthPortfolio-672x372.jpg",
"width": 672,
"height": 372,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"twentyfourteen-full-width": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/09/WealthPortfolio-1038x576.jpg",
"width": 1038,
"height": 576,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"full-width": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/09/WealthPortfolio-2000x1136.jpg",
"width": 2000,
"height": 1136,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"npr-cds-wide": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/09/WealthPortfolio-1200x675.jpg",
"width": 1200,
"height": 675,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"npr-cds-square": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/09/WealthPortfolio-600x600.jpg",
"width": 600,
"height": 600,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"kqedFullSize": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/09/WealthPortfolio.jpg",
"width": 2297,
"height": 1305
}
},
"isLoading": false,
"fetchFailed": false
},
"news_12101278": {
"type": "attachments",
"id": "news_12101278",
"meta": {
"index": "attachments_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "12101278",
"found": true
},
"title": "Voting Booths",
"publishDate": 1790280662,
"status": "inherit",
"parent": 12101275,
"modified": 1790280677,
"caption": "Voting booths at Hermosa Beach City Hall during California Primary",
"credit": "Daniel Sofer / hermosawave.net",
"altTag": null,
"description": null,
"imgSizes": {
"thumbnail": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/iStock_000005814659_Large_qed-160x106.jpg",
"width": 160,
"height": 106,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"1536x1536": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/iStock_000005814659_Large_qed-1536x1021.jpg",
"width": 1536,
"height": 1021,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"post-thumbnail": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/iStock_000005814659_Large_qed-672x372.jpg",
"width": 672,
"height": 372,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"twentyfourteen-full-width": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/iStock_000005814659_Large_qed-1038x576.jpg",
"width": 1038,
"height": 576,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"npr-cds-wide": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/iStock_000005814659_Large_qed-1200x675.jpg",
"width": 1200,
"height": 675,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"npr-cds-square": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/iStock_000005814659_Large_qed-600x600.jpg",
"width": 600,
"height": 600,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"kqedFullSize": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/iStock_000005814659_Large_qed.jpg",
"width": 2000,
"height": 1329
}
},
"isLoading": false,
"fetchFailed": false
},
"news_12100662": {
"type": "attachments",
"id": "news_12100662",
"meta": {
"index": "attachments_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "12100662",
"found": true
},
"title": "California-tax-forms",
"publishDate": 1789775919,
"status": "inherit",
"parent": 12100660,
"modified": 1789775971,
"caption": "Pile of California tax documents.",
"credit": "iStock/jcamilobernal",
"altTag": null,
"description": null,
"imgSizes": {
"medium": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/09/California-tax-forms-2000x1329.jpg",
"width": 2000,
"height": 1329,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"large": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/09/California-tax-forms-2000x1329.jpg",
"width": 2000,
"height": 1329,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"thumbnail": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/09/California-tax-forms-160x106.jpg",
"width": 160,
"height": 106,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"1536x1536": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/09/California-tax-forms-1536x1021.jpg",
"width": 1536,
"height": 1021,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"2048x2048": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/09/California-tax-forms-2048x1361.jpg",
"width": 2048,
"height": 1361,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"post-thumbnail": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/09/California-tax-forms-672x372.jpg",
"width": 672,
"height": 372,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"twentyfourteen-full-width": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/09/California-tax-forms-1038x576.jpg",
"width": 1038,
"height": 576,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"full-width": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/09/California-tax-forms-2000x1329.jpg",
"width": 2000,
"height": 1329,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"npr-cds-wide": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/09/California-tax-forms-1200x675.jpg",
"width": 1200,
"height": 675,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"npr-cds-square": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/09/California-tax-forms-600x600.jpg",
"width": 600,
"height": 600,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"kqedFullSize": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/09/California-tax-forms.jpg",
"width": 2123,
"height": 1411
}
},
"isLoading": false,
"fetchFailed": false
},
"news_12101931": {
"type": "attachments",
"id": "news_12101931",
"meta": {
"index": "attachments_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "12101931",
"found": true
},
"title": "Prop39-voterID",
"publishDate": 1790714554,
"status": "inherit",
"parent": 12101928,
"modified": 1790714704,
"caption": "Sen. Tony Strickland speaks at the Riverside County Registrar of Voters on Monday, March 2, 2026, for a press conference highlighting voter signatures in favor of placing a voter ID measure on the November ballot.",
"credit": "Anjali Sharif-Paul/MediaNews Group/The Sun via Getty Images",
"altTag": "People in suits present at a podium surrounded by signs that read \"Require Voter ID.\"",
"description": null,
"imgSizes": {
"medium": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/Prop39-voterID-2000x1333.jpg",
"width": 2000,
"height": 1333,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"large": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/Prop39-voterID-2000x1333.jpg",
"width": 2000,
"height": 1333,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"thumbnail": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/Prop39-voterID-160x107.jpg",
"width": 160,
"height": 107,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"1536x1536": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/Prop39-voterID-1536x1024.jpg",
"width": 1536,
"height": 1024,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"2048x2048": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/Prop39-voterID-2048x1365.jpg",
"width": 2048,
"height": 1365,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"post-thumbnail": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/Prop39-voterID-672x372.jpg",
"width": 672,
"height": 372,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"twentyfourteen-full-width": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/Prop39-voterID-1038x576.jpg",
"width": 1038,
"height": 576,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"full-width": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/Prop39-voterID-2000x1333.jpg",
"width": 2000,
"height": 1333,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"npr-cds-wide": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/Prop39-voterID-1200x675.jpg",
"width": 1200,
"height": 675,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"npr-cds-square": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/Prop39-voterID-600x600.jpg",
"width": 600,
"height": 600,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"kqedFullSize": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/Prop39-voterID-scaled-e1791403746790.jpg",
"width": 2000,
"height": 1333
}
},
"isLoading": false,
"fetchFailed": false
},
"news_12102151": {
"type": "attachments",
"id": "news_12102151",
"meta": {
"index": "attachments_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "12102151",
"found": true
},
"title": "GettyImages-1087127564",
"publishDate": 1790793727,
"status": "inherit",
"parent": 12102150,
"modified": 1790793727,
"caption": "Scientist using multi-channel pipette",
"credit": null,
"altTag": null,
"description": null,
"imgSizes": {
"medium": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/09/GettyImages-1087127564-2000x1333.jpg",
"width": 2000,
"height": 1333,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"large": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/09/GettyImages-1087127564-2000x1333.jpg",
"width": 2000,
"height": 1333,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"thumbnail": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/09/GettyImages-1087127564-160x107.jpg",
"width": 160,
"height": 107,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"1536x1536": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/09/GettyImages-1087127564-1536x1024.jpg",
"width": 1536,
"height": 1024,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"2048x2048": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/09/GettyImages-1087127564-2048x1365.jpg",
"width": 2048,
"height": 1365,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"post-thumbnail": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/09/GettyImages-1087127564-672x372.jpg",
"width": 672,
"height": 372,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"twentyfourteen-full-width": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/09/GettyImages-1087127564-1038x576.jpg",
"width": 1038,
"height": 576,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"full-width": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/09/GettyImages-1087127564-2000x1333.jpg",
"width": 2000,
"height": 1333,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"npr-cds-wide": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/09/GettyImages-1087127564-1200x675.jpg",
"width": 1200,
"height": 675,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"npr-cds-square": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/09/GettyImages-1087127564-600x600.jpg",
"width": 600,
"height": 600,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"kqedFullSize": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/09/GettyImages-1087127564.jpg",
"width": 2121,
"height": 1414
}
},
"isLoading": false,
"fetchFailed": false
},
"news_12101459": {
"type": "attachments",
"id": "news_12101459",
"meta": {
"index": "attachments_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "12101459",
"found": true
},
"title": "_DSC0888_qed",
"publishDate": 1790369540,
"status": "inherit",
"parent": 12101434,
"modified": 1790369605,
"caption": "Prop 37 aims to spur home construction and help middle-income Californians afford mortgages.",
"credit": "Stephanie Lister/KQED",
"altTag": null,
"description": null,
"imgSizes": {
"thumbnail": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/DSC0888_qed-160x107.jpg",
"width": 160,
"height": 107,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"1536x1536": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/DSC0888_qed-1536x1025.jpg",
"width": 1536,
"height": 1025,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"post-thumbnail": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/DSC0888_qed-672x372.jpg",
"width": 672,
"height": 372,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"twentyfourteen-full-width": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/DSC0888_qed-1038x576.jpg",
"width": 1038,
"height": 576,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"npr-cds-wide": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/DSC0888_qed-1200x675.jpg",
"width": 1200,
"height": 675,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"npr-cds-square": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/DSC0888_qed-600x600.jpg",
"width": 600,
"height": 600,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"kqedFullSize": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/DSC0888_qed.jpg",
"width": 1997,
"height": 1333
}
},
"isLoading": false,
"fetchFailed": false
},
"news_11886518": {
"type": "attachments",
"id": "news_11886518",
"meta": {
"index": "attachments_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "11886518",
"found": true
},
"parent": 11886431,
"imgSizes": {
"twentyfourteen-full-width": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2021/08/GettyImages-1234716783-1024x576.jpg",
"width": 1024,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 576
},
"thumbnail": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2021/08/GettyImages-1234716783-160x94.jpg",
"width": 160,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 94
},
"post-thumbnail": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2021/08/GettyImages-1234716783-672x372.jpg",
"width": 672,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 372
},
"kqedFullSize": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2021/08/GettyImages-1234716783.jpg",
"width": 1024,
"height": 601
},
"large": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2021/08/GettyImages-1234716783-1020x599.jpg",
"width": 1020,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 599
},
"medium": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2021/08/GettyImages-1234716783-800x470.jpg",
"width": 800,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 470
}
},
"publishDate": 1630020082,
"modified": 1630024003,
"caption": "A ballot for the upcoming recall election seeking to remove California Gov. Gavin Newsom. The election will be held on Sept. 14, 2021, although most registered voters have already received their ballots and can submit them now. Forty-six candidates, including nine Democrats, are running.",
"description": null,
"title": "US-POLITICS-ELECTIONS-GOVERNOR-CALIFORNIA-NEWSOM",
"credit": "Chris Delmas/AFP via Getty Images",
"status": "inherit",
"altTag": null,
"isLoading": false,
"fetchFailed": false
}
},
"audioPlayerReducer": {
"postId": "stream_live",
"isPaused": true,
"isPlaying": false,
"pfsActive": false,
"pledgeModalIsOpen": true,
"playerDrawerIsOpen": false,
"liveAudioPlayStartedAt": 0,
"liveAudioPlayContext": ""
},
"authorsReducer": {
"ohubertallen": {
"type": "authors",
"id": "102",
"meta": {
"index": "authors_1716337520",
"id": "102",
"found": true
},
"name": "Olivia Allen-Price",
"firstName": "Olivia",
"lastName": "Allen-Price",
"slug": "ohubertallen",
"email": "oallenprice@kqed.org",
"display_author_email": false,
"staff_mastheads": [
"news"
],
"title": "Senior Editor",
"bio": "Olivia Allen-Price is senior editor and host of the award-winning Bay Curious podcast. Prior to joining KQED in 2013, Olivia worked at The Baltimore Sun and The Virginian-Pilot in Norfolk, Va. She holds degrees in journalism and political science from Elon University. Her work has earned awards from the Society of Professional Journalists, the Hearst Foundation and Hearken. She loves to talk about running and curly hair.\r\n\r\nFollow: \u003ca href=\"https://twitter.com/oallenprice\">@oallenprice\u003c/a>\r\nEmail: \u003ca href=\"mailto:oallenprice@kqed.org\">oallenprice@kqed.org\u003c/a>",
"avatar": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/07f7803c1f6be56f3be58ef276dfa64dce898502e0554408ef4858451a8294f7?s=600&d=blank&r=g",
"twitter": "oallenprice",
"bluesky": null,
"facebook": null,
"instagram": null,
"linkedin": null,
"sites": [
{
"site": "",
"roles": [
"editor"
]
},
{
"site": "arts",
"roles": [
"subscriber"
]
},
{
"site": "news",
"roles": [
"administrator"
]
},
{
"site": "pop",
"roles": [
"administrator"
]
},
{
"site": "bayareabites",
"roles": [
"contributor"
]
},
{
"site": "stateofhealth",
"roles": [
"administrator"
]
},
{
"site": "science",
"roles": [
"editor"
]
}
],
"headData": {
"title": "Olivia Allen-Price | KQED",
"description": "Senior Editor",
"ogImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/07f7803c1f6be56f3be58ef276dfa64dce898502e0554408ef4858451a8294f7?s=600&d=blank&r=g",
"twImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/07f7803c1f6be56f3be58ef276dfa64dce898502e0554408ef4858451a8294f7?s=600&d=blank&r=g"
},
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/author/ohubertallen"
},
"gmarzorati": {
"type": "authors",
"id": "227",
"meta": {
"index": "authors_1716337520",
"id": "227",
"found": true
},
"name": "Guy Marzorati",
"firstName": "Guy",
"lastName": "Marzorati",
"slug": "gmarzorati",
"email": "gmarzorati@KQED.org",
"display_author_email": true,
"staff_mastheads": [
"news"
],
"title": "Correspondent",
"bio": "Guy Marzorati is a correspondent on KQED's California Politics and Government Desk, based in San Jose. A graduate of Santa Clara University, Guy joined KQED in 2013. He reports on state and local politics and produces KQED's digital voter guide.",
"avatar": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/e7038b8dbfd55b104369b76b1cd0b9de?s=600&d=blank&r=g",
"twitter": "guymarzorati",
"facebook": null,
"instagram": null,
"linkedin": null,
"sites": [
{
"site": "",
"roles": [
"editor"
]
},
{
"site": "news",
"roles": [
"editor"
]
},
{
"site": "science",
"roles": [
"editor"
]
},
{
"site": "forum",
"roles": [
"editor"
]
},
{
"site": "elections",
"roles": [
"editor"
]
},
{
"site": "liveblog",
"roles": [
"editor"
]
}
],
"headData": {
"title": "Guy Marzorati | KQED",
"description": "Correspondent",
"ogImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/e7038b8dbfd55b104369b76b1cd0b9de?s=600&d=blank&r=g",
"twImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/e7038b8dbfd55b104369b76b1cd0b9de?s=600&d=blank&r=g"
},
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/author/gmarzorati"
},
"katrinaschwartz": {
"type": "authors",
"id": "234",
"meta": {
"index": "authors_1716337520",
"id": "234",
"found": true
},
"name": "Katrina Schwartz",
"firstName": "Katrina",
"lastName": "Schwartz",
"slug": "katrinaschwartz",
"email": "kschwartz@kqed.org",
"display_author_email": false,
"staff_mastheads": [
"news"
],
"title": "Producer",
"bio": "Katrina Schwartz is a journalist based in San Francisco. She's worked at KPCC public radio in LA and has reported on air and online for KQED since 2010. She covered how teaching and learning is changing for MindShift between 2012 and 2020. She is the co-host of the MindShift podcast and now produces KQED's Bay Curious podcast.",
"avatar": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/edb4ee79070447a018538c9aae6eeecf28786515b8a0c30e43b6b7dce5aa44c8?s=600&d=blank&r=g",
"twitter": "kschwart",
"bluesky": null,
"facebook": null,
"instagram": null,
"linkedin": null,
"sites": [
{
"site": "",
"roles": [
"editor"
]
},
{
"site": "news",
"roles": [
"editor"
]
},
{
"site": "mindshift",
"roles": [
"administrator"
]
},
{
"site": "stateofhealth",
"roles": [
"author"
]
},
{
"site": "science",
"roles": [
"editor"
]
}
],
"headData": {
"title": "Katrina Schwartz | KQED",
"description": "Producer",
"ogImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/edb4ee79070447a018538c9aae6eeecf28786515b8a0c30e43b6b7dce5aa44c8?s=600&d=blank&r=g",
"twImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/edb4ee79070447a018538c9aae6eeecf28786515b8a0c30e43b6b7dce5aa44c8?s=600&d=blank&r=g"
},
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/author/katrinaschwartz"
},
"adembosky": {
"type": "authors",
"id": "3205",
"meta": {
"index": "authors_1716337520",
"id": "3205",
"found": true
},
"name": "April Dembosky",
"firstName": "April",
"lastName": "Dembosky",
"slug": "adembosky",
"email": "adembosky@kqed.org",
"display_author_email": false,
"staff_mastheads": [
"news",
"science"
],
"title": "KQED Health Correspondent",
"bio": "April Dembosky is the health correspondent for KQED News and a regular contributor to NPR. She specializes in covering altered states of mind, from postpartum depression to methamphetamine-induced psychosis to the insanity defense. Her investigative series on insurance companies sidestepping mental health laws won multiple awards, including first place in beat reporting from the national Association of Health Care Journalists. She is the recipient of numerous other prizes and fellowships, including a national Edward R. Murrow award for investigative reporting, a Society of Professional Journalists award for long-form storytelling, and a Carter Center Fellowship for Mental Health Journalism.\r\n\r\nDembosky reported and produced \u003cem>Soundtrack of Silence\u003c/em>, an audio documentary about music and memory that is currently being made into a feature film by Paramount Pictures.\r\n\r\nBefore joining KQED in 2013, Dembosky covered technology and Silicon Valley for \u003cem>The Financial Times of London,\u003c/em> and contributed business and arts stories to \u003cem>Marketplace \u003c/em>and \u003cem>The New York Times.\u003c/em> She got her undergraduate degree in philosophy from Smith College and her master's in journalism from the University of California, Berkeley. She is a classically trained violinist and proud alum of the first symphony orchestra at Burning Man.",
"avatar": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/d6593cd737b732102fe0b6250b5351c2d3bc9b2987566514aa3c9a106494d684?s=600&d=blank&r=g",
"twitter": "adembosky",
"bluesky": null,
"facebook": null,
"instagram": null,
"linkedin": null,
"sites": [
{
"site": "arts",
"roles": [
"author"
]
},
{
"site": "news",
"roles": [
"editor"
]
},
{
"site": "futureofyou",
"roles": [
"author"
]
},
{
"site": "stateofhealth",
"roles": [
"editor"
]
},
{
"site": "science",
"roles": [
"editor"
]
},
{
"site": "forum",
"roles": [
"editor"
]
}
],
"headData": {
"title": "April Dembosky | KQED",
"description": "KQED Health Correspondent",
"ogImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/d6593cd737b732102fe0b6250b5351c2d3bc9b2987566514aa3c9a106494d684?s=600&d=blank&r=g",
"twImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/d6593cd737b732102fe0b6250b5351c2d3bc9b2987566514aa3c9a106494d684?s=600&d=blank&r=g"
},
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/author/adembosky"
},
"mlagos": {
"type": "authors",
"id": "3239",
"meta": {
"index": "authors_1716337520",
"id": "3239",
"found": true
},
"name": "Marisa Lagos",
"firstName": "Marisa",
"lastName": "Lagos",
"slug": "mlagos",
"email": "mlagos@kqed.org",
"display_author_email": false,
"staff_mastheads": [
"news"
],
"title": "KQED Contributor",
"bio": "Marisa Lagos is a correspondent for KQED’s California Politics and Government Desk and co-hosts the award-winning show and podcast, Political Breakdown. At KQED, Lagos also conducts reporting, analysis and investigations into state, local and national politics for radio, TV, online and onstage. In 2022, she and co-host, Scott Shafer, moderated the only gubernatorial debate in California. In 2020, the \u003ci>Washington Post\u003c/i> named her one of the top political journalists in California; she was nominated for a Peabody and won several other awards for her work investigating the 2017 California wildfires. She has worked at the \u003ci>San Francisco Chronicle\u003c/i>, \u003ci>San Francisco Examiner\u003c/i> and \u003ci>Los Angeles Times\u003c/i>. A UC Santa Barbara graduate, she lives in San Francisco with her two sons and husband.",
"avatar": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/a261a0d3696fc066871ef96b85b5e7d2?s=600&d=blank&r=g",
"twitter": "@mlagos",
"facebook": null,
"instagram": null,
"linkedin": null,
"sites": [
{
"site": "arts",
"roles": [
"author"
]
},
{
"site": "news",
"roles": [
"editor"
]
},
{
"site": "science",
"roles": [
"editor"
]
},
{
"site": "forum",
"roles": [
"author"
]
},
{
"site": "liveblog",
"roles": [
"author"
]
}
],
"headData": {
"title": "Marisa Lagos | KQED",
"description": "KQED Contributor",
"ogImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/a261a0d3696fc066871ef96b85b5e7d2?s=600&d=blank&r=g",
"twImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/a261a0d3696fc066871ef96b85b5e7d2?s=600&d=blank&r=g"
},
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/author/mlagos"
},
"lklivans": {
"type": "authors",
"id": "8648",
"meta": {
"index": "authors_1716337520",
"id": "8648",
"found": true
},
"name": "Laura Klivans",
"firstName": "Laura",
"lastName": "Klivans",
"slug": "lklivans",
"email": "lklivans@kqed.org",
"display_author_email": true,
"staff_mastheads": [
"news",
"science"
],
"title": "Reporter",
"bio": "Laura Klivans is an award-winning science reporter for KQED News, where she covers climate change with an eye on both groundbreaking progress and gaps in action. She is the former host of KQED's blockbuster video series about tiny, amazing animals, \u003cem>Deep Look\u003c/em>. Her work reaches national audiences through NPR, \u003cem>Here & Now, \u003c/em>PRI, and other major outlets. \r\n\r\nLaura’s won five Northern California Area Emmy Awards for Deep Look and First Place in the Greater Bay Area Journalism Awards for a podcast exploring how one Oakland neighborhood teamed up to reduce planet-heating pollution.\r\n\r\nBeyond her reporting, she hosts and moderates events. In the past, she taught audio storytelling at the UC Berkeley Graduate School of Journalism, led international education programs, worked with immigrants and refugees along the Thai-Burmese border, taught high schoolers sex ed, and was an actress. \r\n\r\nShe's a former UC Berkeley Human Rights Fellow, USC Center for Health Journalism's California Fellow and Coro Fellow in Public Affairs. Laura has a master’s in journalism from UC Berkeley, a master’s in education from Harvard, and an undergraduate degree from Northwestern University.\r\n\r\nShe loves trying to riddle the meaning out of vanity license plates.",
"avatar": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/2d2ecd1550a494cc10ad4a503406965585902124739e775a9b3817eebf1d88be?s=600&d=blank&r=g",
"twitter": "lauraklivans",
"bluesky": null,
"facebook": null,
"instagram": null,
"linkedin": null,
"sites": [
{
"site": "news",
"roles": [
"editor"
]
},
{
"site": "stateofhealth",
"roles": [
"contributor",
"editor"
]
},
{
"site": "science",
"roles": [
"editor"
]
},
{
"site": "forum",
"roles": [
"editor"
]
}
],
"headData": {
"title": "Laura Klivans | KQED",
"description": "Reporter",
"ogImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/2d2ecd1550a494cc10ad4a503406965585902124739e775a9b3817eebf1d88be?s=600&d=blank&r=g",
"twImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/2d2ecd1550a494cc10ad4a503406965585902124739e775a9b3817eebf1d88be?s=600&d=blank&r=g"
},
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/author/lklivans"
},
"ecruzguevarra": {
"type": "authors",
"id": "8654",
"meta": {
"index": "authors_1716337520",
"id": "8654",
"found": true
},
"name": "Ericka Cruz Guevarra",
"firstName": "Ericka",
"lastName": "Cruz Guevarra",
"slug": "ecruzguevarra",
"email": "ecruzguevarra@kqed.org",
"display_author_email": true,
"staff_mastheads": [
"news"
],
"title": "Producer, The Bay Podcast",
"bio": "Ericka Cruz Guevarra is host of \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/podcasts/thebay\">\u003cem>The Bay\u003c/em>\u003c/a> podcast at KQED. Before host, she was the show’s producer. Her work in that capacity includes a three-part reported series on policing in Vallejo, which won a 2020 excellence in journalism award from the Society of Professional Journalists. Ericka has worked as a breaking news reporter at Oregon Public Broadcasting, helped produce the Code Switch podcast, and was KQED’s inaugural Raul Ramirez Diversity Fund intern. She’s also an alumna of NPR’s Next Generation Radio program. Send her an email if you have strong feelings about whether Fairfield and Suisun City are the Bay. Ericka is represented by SAG-AFTRA.",
"avatar": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/accefc1de4bafc7e234b69bcb9b6f6536c130fd84709bc3069ef11a78787e1bb?s=600&d=blank&r=g",
"twitter": "NotoriousECG",
"bluesky": null,
"facebook": null,
"instagram": null,
"linkedin": null,
"sites": [
{
"site": "arts",
"roles": [
"subscriber"
]
},
{
"site": "news",
"roles": [
"editor",
"manage_categories"
]
},
{
"site": "futureofyou",
"roles": [
"subscriber"
]
},
{
"site": "stateofhealth",
"roles": [
"subscriber"
]
},
{
"site": "science",
"roles": [
"editor"
]
},
{
"site": "forum",
"roles": [
"subscriber"
]
}
],
"headData": {
"title": "Ericka Cruz Guevarra | KQED",
"description": "Producer, The Bay Podcast",
"ogImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/accefc1de4bafc7e234b69bcb9b6f6536c130fd84709bc3069ef11a78787e1bb?s=600&d=blank&r=g",
"twImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/accefc1de4bafc7e234b69bcb9b6f6536c130fd84709bc3069ef11a78787e1bb?s=600&d=blank&r=g"
},
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/author/ecruzguevarra"
},
"lesleymcclurg": {
"type": "authors",
"id": "11229",
"meta": {
"index": "authors_1716337520",
"id": "11229",
"found": true
},
"name": "Lesley McClurg",
"firstName": "Lesley",
"lastName": "McClurg",
"slug": "lesleymcclurg",
"email": "lmcclurg@KQED.org",
"display_author_email": false,
"staff_mastheads": [],
"title": "KQED Health Correspondent",
"bio": "Lesley McClurg is a health correspondent and fill-in host whose work is regularly rebroadcast on NPR and PBS programs. She’s earned multiple regional Emmy awards, a national and a regional Edward R. Murrow award, and was named Best Beat Reporter by the Association of Health Care Journalists. The Society of Professional Journalists has recognized her work several times, and the Society of Environmental Journalists spotlighted her coverage of California’s historic drought.\r\n\r\nBefore joining KQED in 2016, Lesley covered food and sustainability for Capital Public Radio, environmental issues for Colorado Public Radio, and reported for KUOW and KCTS 9 in Seattle. Away from the newsroom, she loves skiing with her daughter, mountain biking with her partner, and playing with Ollie, the family’s goldendoodle. On deadline, she runs almost entirely on chocolate chips.\r\n\r\n ",
"avatar": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/bab49e972ea10c774fe0f5e29dba1722b158f7c0d58a360923d1389d380b2978?s=600&d=blank&r=g",
"twitter": "lesleywmcclurg",
"bluesky": null,
"facebook": null,
"instagram": null,
"linkedin": null,
"sites": [
{
"site": "arts",
"roles": [
"subscriber"
]
},
{
"site": "news",
"roles": [
"subscriber"
]
},
{
"site": "futureofyou",
"roles": [
"subscriber"
]
},
{
"site": "stateofhealth",
"roles": [
"subscriber"
]
},
{
"site": "science",
"roles": [
"subscriber"
]
},
{
"site": "quest",
"roles": [
"subscriber"
]
},
{
"site": "forum",
"roles": [
"subscriber"
]
},
{
"site": "liveblog",
"roles": [
"subscriber"
]
}
],
"headData": {
"title": "Lesley McClurg | KQED",
"description": "KQED Health Correspondent",
"ogImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/bab49e972ea10c774fe0f5e29dba1722b158f7c0d58a360923d1389d380b2978?s=600&d=blank&r=g",
"twImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/bab49e972ea10c774fe0f5e29dba1722b158f7c0d58a360923d1389d380b2978?s=600&d=blank&r=g"
},
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/author/lesleymcclurg"
},
"amontecillo": {
"type": "authors",
"id": "11649",
"meta": {
"index": "authors_1716337520",
"id": "11649",
"found": true
},
"name": "Alan Montecillo",
"firstName": "Alan",
"lastName": "Montecillo",
"slug": "amontecillo",
"email": "amontecillo@kqed.org",
"display_author_email": false,
"staff_mastheads": [
"news"
],
"title": "KQED Contributor",
"bio": "Alan Montecillo is the senior editor of \u003cem>\u003ca href=\"http://kqed.org/thebay\">The Bay\u003c/a>, \u003c/em> KQED's local news podcast. Before moving to the Bay Area, he worked as a senior talk show producer for WILL in Champaign-Urbana, Illinois and at Oregon Public Broadcasting in Portland, Oregon. He has won journalism awards from the Society of Professional Journalists Northern California, the Public Media Journalists Association, The Signal Awards, and has also received a regional Edward R. Murrow award. Alan is a Filipino American from Hong Kong and a graduate of Reed College.",
"avatar": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/268f53a2066899ea9efdd8a5900218b17c822d9862cbc9326cccec53ef41d349?s=600&d=blank&r=g",
"twitter": "alanmontecillo",
"bluesky": null,
"facebook": null,
"instagram": null,
"linkedin": null,
"sites": [
{
"site": "",
"roles": [
"editor"
]
},
{
"site": "news",
"roles": [
"editor",
"manage_categories"
]
}
],
"headData": {
"title": "Alan Montecillo | KQED",
"description": "KQED Contributor",
"ogImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/268f53a2066899ea9efdd8a5900218b17c822d9862cbc9326cccec53ef41d349?s=600&d=blank&r=g",
"twImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/268f53a2066899ea9efdd8a5900218b17c822d9862cbc9326cccec53ef41d349?s=600&d=blank&r=g"
},
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/author/amontecillo"
},
"abandlamudi": {
"type": "authors",
"id": "11672",
"meta": {
"index": "authors_1716337520",
"id": "11672",
"found": true
},
"name": "Adhiti Bandlamudi",
"firstName": "Adhiti",
"lastName": "Bandlamudi",
"slug": "abandlamudi",
"email": "abandlamudi@kqed.org",
"display_author_email": false,
"staff_mastheads": [
"news"
],
"title": "KQED Housing Reporter",
"bio": "Adhiti Bandlamudi reports for KQED's Housing desk. She focuses on how housing gets built across the Bay Area. Before joining KQED in 2020, she reported for WUNC in Durham, North Carolina, WABE in Atlanta, Georgia and Capital Public Radio in Sacramento. In 2017, she was awarded a Kroc Fellowship at NPR where she reported on everything from sprinkles to the Golden State Killer's arrest. When she's not reporting, she's baking new recipes in her kitchen or watching movies with friends and family. She's originally from Georgia and has strong opinions about Great British Bake Off.",
"avatar": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/868129c8b257bb99a3500e2c86a65400?s=600&d=mm&r=g",
"twitter": "oddity_adhiti",
"facebook": null,
"instagram": null,
"linkedin": null,
"sites": [
{
"site": "arts",
"roles": [
"author"
]
},
{
"site": "news",
"roles": [
"editor"
]
},
{
"site": "liveblog",
"roles": [
"author"
]
}
],
"headData": {
"title": "Adhiti Bandlamudi | KQED",
"description": "KQED Housing Reporter",
"ogImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/868129c8b257bb99a3500e2c86a65400?s=600&d=mm&r=g",
"twImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/868129c8b257bb99a3500e2c86a65400?s=600&d=mm&r=g"
},
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/author/abandlamudi"
},
"ibloom": {
"type": "authors",
"id": "11805",
"meta": {
"index": "authors_1716337520",
"id": "11805",
"found": true
},
"name": "Izzy Bloom",
"firstName": "Izzy",
"lastName": "Bloom",
"slug": "ibloom",
"email": "ibloom@kqed.org",
"display_author_email": false,
"staff_mastheads": [],
"title": "KQED Reporter & Producer",
"bio": "Izzy is a reporter and producer on KQED's California Politics & Government Desk. She joined the desk in 2024 to produce Political Breakdown, covering local and national elections and attending the RNC and DNC in Milwaukee and Chicago. \r\n\r\nBefore that, Izzy was a producer on The California Report and reported long-form stories for The California Report Magazine. She was a finalist for the Third Coast/Richard H. Driehaus Foundation Competition and was awarded for her reporting on indigenous land back by the Society of Professional Journalists. Izzy received her master's in journalism from the University of California, Berkeley.",
"avatar": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/cc4d272ca430783ee1a8efac470a6b1e0fdd082c3beb61da019801d0ff751c8c?s=600&d=blank&r=g",
"twitter": null,
"bluesky": null,
"facebook": null,
"instagram": null,
"linkedin": null,
"sites": [
{
"site": "news",
"roles": [
"editor"
]
},
{
"site": "perspectives",
"roles": [
"editor"
]
}
],
"headData": {
"title": "Izzy Bloom | KQED",
"description": "KQED Reporter & Producer",
"ogImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/cc4d272ca430783ee1a8efac470a6b1e0fdd082c3beb61da019801d0ff751c8c?s=600&d=blank&r=g",
"twImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/cc4d272ca430783ee1a8efac470a6b1e0fdd082c3beb61da019801d0ff751c8c?s=600&d=blank&r=g"
},
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/author/ibloom"
},
"pbartolone": {
"type": "authors",
"id": "11879",
"meta": {
"index": "authors_1716337520",
"id": "11879",
"found": true
},
"name": "Pauline Bartolone",
"firstName": "Pauline",
"lastName": "Bartolone",
"slug": "pbartolone",
"email": "pbartolone@kqed.org",
"display_author_email": false,
"staff_mastheads": [],
"title": "KQED Contributor",
"bio": "Pauline Bartolone has been a journalist for two decades, specializing in longform audio storytelling. Before editing and producing for podcasts like Bay Curious, she was a health care journalist for public radio and print outlets such as CalMatters and Kaiser Health News. Her reporting has won several regional Edward R. Murrow awards, national recognition from the Society of Professional Journalists and a first-place prize from the Association of Health Care Journalists.\r\n\r\nPauline’s work has aired frequently on National Public Radio, and bylines have appeared in The Los Angeles Times, CNN.com, Washingtonpost.com, USA Today and Scientific American.\r\n\r\nPauline has lived in Northern California for 20 years. Her other passions are crafts (now done in collaboration with her daughter) and the Brazilian martial art of capoeira.",
"avatar": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/95001c30374b0d3878007af9cf1e120a?s=600&d=blank&r=g",
"twitter": "pbartolone",
"facebook": null,
"instagram": null,
"linkedin": null,
"sites": [
{
"site": "news",
"roles": [
"editor"
]
},
{
"site": "podcasts",
"roles": [
"subscriber"
]
}
],
"headData": {
"title": "Pauline Bartolone | KQED",
"description": "KQED Contributor",
"ogImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/95001c30374b0d3878007af9cf1e120a?s=600&d=blank&r=g",
"twImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/95001c30374b0d3878007af9cf1e120a?s=600&d=blank&r=g"
},
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/author/pbartolone"
},
"gglueck": {
"type": "authors",
"id": "11946",
"meta": {
"index": "authors_1716337520",
"id": "11946",
"found": true
},
"name": "Gabriela Glueck",
"firstName": "Gabriela",
"lastName": "Glueck",
"slug": "gglueck",
"email": "gglueck@kqed.org",
"display_author_email": false,
"staff_mastheads": [
"news"
],
"title": "KQED Contributor",
"bio": null,
"avatar": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/ec62b7e3f7727ce1070cc7046dde80271d1e63cf2178d6194f68bb8d1440f841?s=600&d=blank&r=g",
"twitter": null,
"bluesky": null,
"facebook": null,
"instagram": null,
"linkedin": null,
"sites": [
{
"site": "news",
"roles": [
"editor"
]
}
],
"headData": {
"title": "Gabriela Glueck | KQED",
"description": "KQED Contributor",
"ogImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/ec62b7e3f7727ce1070cc7046dde80271d1e63cf2178d6194f68bb8d1440f841?s=600&d=blank&r=g",
"twImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/ec62b7e3f7727ce1070cc7046dde80271d1e63cf2178d6194f68bb8d1440f841?s=600&d=blank&r=g"
},
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/author/gglueck"
}
},
"pagesReducer": {
"root-site_propfest": {
"type": "pages",
"id": "root-site_16821",
"meta": {
"index": "pages_1716337520",
"site": "root-site",
"id": "16821",
"score": 0
},
"slug": "propfest",
"title": "Prop Fest 2026",
"headTitle": "Prop Fest 2026 | KQED",
"pagePath": "propfest",
"pageMeta": {
"sticky": false,
"WpPageTemplate": "page-topic-editorial",
"excludeFromSiteSearch": "Include"
},
"headData": {
"title": "Prop Fest 2026 | KQED",
"description": "If reading through the statewide ballot propositions has made your head spin, you are in the right place! From Oct. 1 - 16, Bay Curious is exploring the 12 statewide ballot propositions in our 12-part Prop. Fest series.",
"ogTitle": "",
"ogDescription": "",
"ogImgId": "",
"twTitle": "",
"twDescription": "",
"twImgId": "",
"socialDescription": "If reading through the statewide ballot propositions has made your head spin, you are in the right place! From Oct. 1 - 16, Bay Curious is exploring the 12 statewide ballot propositions in our 12-part Prop. Fest series."
},
"labelTerm": {
"site": ""
},
"publishDate": 1601397132,
"content": "\u003cp>If reading through the California ballot propositions has made your head spin, you are in the right place! From Sept. 28th – Oct 9th, the teams from Bay Curious and The Bay podcasts are exploring the 14 statewide ballot propositions in our Prop Fest series. Check The Bay and Bay Curious podcast feeds every weekday for new episodes or get caught up below.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\n\u003cp>[ad fullwidth]\u003c/p>\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n",
"blocks": [
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>If reading through the California ballot propositions has made your head spin, you are in the right place! From Sept. 28th – Oct 9th, the teams from Bay Curious and The Bay podcasts are exploring the 14 statewide ballot propositions in our Prop Fest series. Check The Bay and Bay Curious podcast feeds every weekday for new episodes or get caught up below.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>If reading through the California ballot propositions has made your head spin, you are in the right place! From Sept. 28th – Oct 9th, the teams from Bay Curious and The Bay podcasts are exploring the 14 statewide ballot propositions in our Prop Fest series. Check The Bay and Bay Curious podcast feeds every weekday for new episodes or get caught up below.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "kqed/post-list",
"attrs": {
"query": "posts/?tag=bay-curious-prop-fest,prop-fest&queryId=106f3a9a435",
"useSSR": true,
"seeMore": true,
"metadata": {
"blockVisibility": false
}
},
"innerHTML": "",
"innerContent": [],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "kqed/ad",
"attrs": [],
"innerHTML": "",
"innerContent": [],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "kqed/ad",
"attrs": {
"format": "fullwidth"
},
"innerBlocks": [],
"innerHTML": "",
"innerContent": []
}
],
"status": "publish",
"parent": 0,
"modified": 1787768496,
"format": "standard",
"path": "/root-site/16821/propfest",
"audioTrackLength": null,
"parsedContent": [
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>\u003cp>If reading through the California ballot propositions has made your head spin, you are in the right place! From Sept. 28th – Oct 9th, the teams from Bay Curious and The Bay podcasts are exploring the 14 statewide ballot propositions in our Prop Fest series. Check The Bay and Bay Curious podcast feeds every weekday for new episodes or get caught up below.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\u003c/div>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
},
{
"type": "component",
"content": "",
"name": "ad",
"attributes": {
"named": {
"label": "fullwidth"
},
"numeric": [
"fullwidth"
]
}
},
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>\u003c/p>\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n\u003c/div>\u003c/p>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
}
],
"label": "root-site",
"isLoading": false
}
},
"pfsSessionReducer": {},
"postsReducer": {
"stream_live": {
"type": "live",
"id": "stream_live",
"audioUrl": "https://streams.kqed.org/kqedradio",
"title": "Live Stream",
"excerpt": "Live Stream information currently unavailable.",
"link": "/radio",
"featImg": "",
"label": {
"name": "KQED Live",
"link": "/"
}
},
"stream_kqedNewscast": {
"type": "posts",
"id": "stream_kqedNewscast",
"audioUrl": "https://www.kqed.org/.stream/anon/radio/RDnews/newscast.mp3?_=1",
"title": "KQED Newscast",
"featImg": "",
"label": {
"name": "88.5 FM",
"link": "/"
}
},
"news_12102167": {
"type": "posts",
"id": "news_12102167",
"meta": {
"index": "posts_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "12102167",
"score": null,
"sort": [
1791540000000
]
},
"guestAuthors": [],
"slug": "prop-45-faster-environmental-reviews-for-certain-projects",
"title": "Prop 45: Faster Environmental Reviews for Certain Projects",
"publishDate": 1791540000,
"format": "standard",
"headTitle": "Prop 45: Faster Environmental Reviews for Certain Projects | KQED",
"labelTerm": {},
"content": "\n\u003ch2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">\u003cstrong>Episode Transcript:\u003c/strong>\u003c/h2>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:00:00] \u003c/em>In 1970, as California was building freeways and developing dams and levees, Governor Ronald Reagan signed the California Environmental Quality Act into law. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:00:10] \u003c/em>CEQA, as it’s known, requires public agencies to consider the environmental impact of big projects. How rivers could be impacted by new dams and levees, or how local marshland could face more noise pollution. It’s a way of saying, look before you leap, or in this case, build. But housing advocates have often taken issue with CEQa. Arguing that it’s been used to block or stall much needed development here in California. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:00:43] \u003c/em>Now, Prop 45 seeks to change the landmark statute by tightening the timeframe for the environmental review process. Those who oppose the proposition aren’t just worried about what it means for the environment, but also whether it can open the door to more data centers. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:01:02] \u003c/em>I’m Ericka Cruz Guevara, host of The Bay. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:01:06] \u003c/em>And I’m Olivia Ellen Price, host of Bay Curious, and you made it to the final edition of PropFest 2026. This has been a collaboration between the Bay and Bay Curios, and this is the 14th and final prop. Are you ready, Ericka? \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:01:22] \u003c/em>I sure am, Olivia. Here’s how Prop 45 will read on your ballot. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:01:30] \u003c/em>Prop 45, modifies environmental review for certain projects. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:01:36] \u003c/em>Here to walk us through Proposition 45 is KQED’s climate reporter Laura Klivans. Hey Laura.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Laura Klivans: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:01:43] \u003c/em>Hello \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:01:44] \u003c/em>So Laura, Prop 45 would overhaul the California Environmental Quality Act. First, what is the California environmental quality act, otherwise known as CEQA? \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Laura Klivans: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:01:58] \u003c/em>So CEQA is this major California environmental law, and it was passed in 1970 under then-Governor Reagan. And the goal was to require government agencies to study and share potential environmental impacts of public projects like dams and highways and power plants and to do what was possible to reduce or mitigate those impacts. Over time, there have been many lawsuits around it, and it is now applicable to not just public projects, but private ones. Proponents view this law as an essential environmental law for California to protect our environment and think about longer term consequences to building. Critics do not like CEQA because they say it offers people with special interests the opportunity to delay and block projects in the name of the environment. So therefore it’s been like very controversial. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:02:55] \u003c/em>Private projects as in… Maybe a new apartment building or a new housing complex?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Laura Klivans: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:03:02] \u003c/em>Yeah \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:03:04] \u003c/em>So Prop 45 would make some tweaks to CEQA. How exactly could CEQA change under Prop 45? \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Laura Klivans: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:03:11] \u003c/em>So the proposition is saying let’s speed up the environmental reviews for certain projects that it calls essential. So those would be things like housing or clean energy, not including nuclear, hospitals, clinics, schools, fire, wildfire risk reductions, like things that sound really important, transportation, and here’s an interesting category, broadband access. We’ll come back to why that’s so interesting. So Prop 45 would put a timeline on CEQA review for these essential categories I mentioned. It would set a 365 day time limit on environmental reviews for these projects. It would require courts to rule on CEQA related lawsuits within 270 days. And then it also changes some other details. So like here’s an example of one, a government agency that’s overseeing a review. They would need to specify all the information that they’d like to get from the application, from the builder, at the time that it needs to be submitted, rather than going back to the builder again and again and saying, we need more info for this and more info for that. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:04:22] \u003c/em>Who put this on the ballot and why are we as voters being asked to potentially make some changes to CEQA?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Laura Klivans: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:04:29] \u003c/em>So the California Chamber of Commerce has sponsored this proposition, and they represent businesses, they advocate for them, they lobby for them. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Jennifer Barrera: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:04:38] \u003c/em>The CEQA law was well-intentioned, but we have seen, obviously, the law be abused and misused in order to block projects by groups who don’t want to see any development, don’t want to any growth here in California. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Laura Klivans: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:04:50] \u003c/em>Jennifer Barrera is the CEO of the California Chamber of Commerce, and she is saying we have an issue with growth, nothing’s affordable here, and this would basically advance projects that they designated as essential more quickly and easily. It would streamline legal challenges, reduce frivolous lawsuits, things like that. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Jennifer Barrera: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:05:10] \u003c/em>When we talk about delay, and I’ll keep going back to housing just because it is such an important point of our affordability crisis and a part of this ballot initiative, but when you delay ultimate housing, I mean that creates inequity in our population. That creates losers with regards to those who can’t afford and those who can’t afford. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Laura Klivans: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:05:28] \u003c/em>Proponents say, you know, you’re still going to have environmental review, we’re just going to put like a shot clock on it, as they say. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:05:38] \u003c/em>So you mentioned the California Chamber of Commerce. Who else is in favor of this measure?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Laura Klivans: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:05:45] \u003c/em>There are groups that represent places that need to build, like hospitals or some housing organizations and some building industries, like the workers. Also notably, Buffy Wicks, she’s a California Assembly member, and she is one of the people who championed change last year to CEQA. That has exempted housing that is already on developed areas from CEQA review. So that was a major reform that already happened last year. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:06:17] \u003c/em>We’ll have more on Prop 45 with KQED’s Laura Klivans, right after this break. By the way, did you know that KQED is funded almost entirely by everyday listeners just like you? Consider becoming a sustaining KQED member by going to donate.kqed.org/podcasts. We’ll be right back.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:06:46] \u003c/em>So you have some folks who say that these changes to CEQA are necessary in order to address this housing crisis that we’re in, in part. Who is coming out in opposition to this measure and what are their arguments?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Laura Klivans: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:06:59] \u003c/em>There are a bunch of other folks who are against this, like environmental groups, environmental justice groups, health groups, unions that represent teachers and firefighters, for example, are against us. One major argument is that, hey, this is too broad. This is our landmark environmental regulation. Let’s keep it. And state Senator Catherine Blakespear represents northern San Diego and part of Orange County and has come out in opposition. She chairs the Senate Environmental Quality Committee.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Sen. Catherine Blakespear: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:07:27] \u003c/em>It’s really important that California continue to be a bulwark against the backsliding and we continue to fight climate change and to protect our environment.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Laura Klivans: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:07:36] \u003c/em>She’s saying it’s going to allow for more homes to be built in something called the wildland urban interface, which is like basically places that butt up against beautiful nature areas, but are therefore very fire prone. And so she and some other state legislators are saying this is a terrible idea. We don’t need to build more housing in those areas. And this would allow for that. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Sen. Catherine Blakespear: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:08:01] \u003c/em>It really just goes way too far and creates these very big loopholes and changes our system of CEQA and our environmental review, which is our landmark environmental laws in California since the 1970s. And it is far, far too broad. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:08:16] \u003c/em>I think we all know that it takes a long time to build housing in California and that one of the main arguments for Prop 45 is the idea that we need to build more housing more quickly. What about pro-housing or YIMBY (Yes In My Backyard) groups? What do they think about this measure? \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Laura Klivans: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:08:35] \u003c/em>Yeah, so it’s mixed. There are some housing groups that support Proposition 45. And then, actually, interestingly, this one large group, California YMBY, YIMBY stands for ‘Yes in My Backyard,’ they have come out with no position on this. They are neutral. That’s because they see both reasons to support this measure and reasons to oppose it. And on the one hand, it could fast track sprawl, which is not something they support, so. Maybe it makes it easier to build a highway, makes it easy to build housing that is not in a dense or already populated area. On the other hand, it might make it easier to build clean energy and clean energy infrastructure, which is something that they would support. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:09:23] \u003c/em>So we’ve been talking about CEQA in the context of building more housing, but it of course applies to all kinds of projects in California. And when it comes to Prop 45, there’s actually one specific kind of project that has made its way into the debate and that’s data centers? Can you explain why data centers have become part of the conversation around Prop 45?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Laura Klivans: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:09:48] \u003c/em>Yes, so people who support Prop 45 say this does not apply to data centers. And opponents, people who are saying no to this proposition, they say, oh, but it could. Look at the broadband access category. The language is broad enough that it could be construed to include data centers, Opponents are also saying, listen, the people who wrote this made carve-outs for what it doesn’t make exclusions for. There’s this huge category of transportation And it says in the language that it doesn’t include high-speed rail. There’s a category for clean energy. Also in the Language for Prop 45, it says that doesn’t including nuclear. So if this truly does not include data centers, wouldn’t the people who wrote this get ahead of that and write, this doesn’t included data centers in the language? And the people that wrote it are saying, well, we weren’t thinking of that because broadband access doesn’t includes data centers. That’s just as simple as that. So that is up in the air. And now data centers is such a wild issue now, and it’s really, we’ve seen it explode politically, that that has impacted this proposition. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:10:55] \u003c/em>Enough people are worried about it that they are, I don’t know, seeing data centers in Prop 45 and adding it to the debate, it sounds like. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Laura Klivans: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:11:03] \u003c/em>Right. Right. And then this is super interesting. So pulling from the Public Policy Institute of California showed support among likely voters was at 73% in July and in September it is 49 percent. In that time, the data center conversation started happening. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:11:26] \u003c/em>Let’s talk about campaign spending here, Laura. What are we seeing on the pro-Prop 45 side in terms of spending? \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Laura Klivans: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:11:35] \u003c/em>There’s a lot of money. When I checked last, over $40 million. We see a lot of Silicon Valley tech people, Google executives, like the former CEO, Eric Schmidt, and more. We also see money coming in from the building trades. And then against, still some money there, $15 million. But this was interesting when I was looking at the money because one of the top donors is Wendy Schmidt, who is married to Eric Schmidt. And she has put $5 million in against Prop 45. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Laura Klivans: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:12:06] \u003c/em>Laura, thank you so much. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Laura Klivans: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:12:08] \u003c/em>Thank you for having me.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:12:13] \u003c/em>In a nutshell, a yes vote on this measure means environmental reviews can be expedited for certain projects. A no vote means projects would continue to use existing project review and court challenge procedures under CEQA. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:12:30] \u003c/em>We made it to the finish line, y’all. Thanks so much for joining us on this wild ride. We hope you’re feeling more prepared than ever to cast your ballot this November.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:12:38] \u003c/em>And if you don’t, you can always go back and listen to the entire Prop Fest series again at kqed.org/propfest. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:12:48] \u003c/em>Do us a favor and send Prop Fest to one friend right now. Word of mouth really helps us grow our shows. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:12:57] \u003c/em>Prop Fest is made possible thanks to Katrina Schwartz Pauline Bartolone Anna Casalme Olivia Allen Price Gabriela Glick Christopher Beale, Alan Montecillo and me, Ericka Cruz Guevarra\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:13:11] \u003c/em>We get extra support from Maha Sanad, Katie Springer, Jen Chien. Ethan Toven Lindsey. And everyone on Team KQED. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:13:20] \u003c/em>Our show is made in San Francisco at member-supported KQED. Support for the Bay is provided in part by the Osher Production Fund. Some members of the KQED podcast team are represented by the Screen Actors Guild, American Federation of Television and Radio Artists, San Francisco, Northern California Local. I’m Ericka Cruz Guevara.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:13:42] \u003c/em>And I’m Olivia Allen Price. Good luck with your ballot. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n",
"blocks": [
{
"blockName": "core/heading",
"attrs": {
"text": "Episode Transcript:",
"level": 2
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003ch2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">\u003cstrong>Episode Transcript:\u003c/strong>\u003c/h2>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003ch2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">\u003cstrong>Episode Transcript:\u003c/strong>\u003c/h2>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:00:00] \u003c/em>In 1970, as California was building freeways and developing dams and levees, Governor Ronald Reagan signed the California Environmental Quality Act into law. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:00:00] \u003c/em>In 1970, as California was building freeways and developing dams and levees, Governor Ronald Reagan signed the California Environmental Quality Act into law. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:00:10] \u003c/em>CEQA, as it’s known, requires public agencies to consider the environmental impact of big projects. How rivers could be impacted by new dams and levees, or how local marshland could face more noise pollution. It’s a way of saying, look before you leap, or in this case, build. But housing advocates have often taken issue with CEQa. Arguing that it’s been used to block or stall much needed development here in California. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:00:10] \u003c/em>CEQA, as it’s known, requires public agencies to consider the environmental impact of big projects. How rivers could be impacted by new dams and levees, or how local marshland could face more noise pollution. It’s a way of saying, look before you leap, or in this case, build. But housing advocates have often taken issue with CEQa. Arguing that it’s been used to block or stall much needed development here in California. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:00:43] \u003c/em>Now, Prop 45 seeks to change the landmark statute by tightening the timeframe for the environmental review process. Those who oppose the proposition aren’t just worried about what it means for the environment, but also whether it can open the door to more data centers. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:00:43] \u003c/em>Now, Prop 45 seeks to change the landmark statute by tightening the timeframe for the environmental review process. Those who oppose the proposition aren’t just worried about what it means for the environment, but also whether it can open the door to more data centers. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:01:02] \u003c/em>I’m Ericka Cruz Guevara, host of The Bay. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:01:02] \u003c/em>I’m Ericka Cruz Guevara, host of The Bay. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:01:06] \u003c/em>And I’m Olivia Ellen Price, host of Bay Curious, and you made it to the final edition of PropFest 2026. This has been a collaboration between the Bay and Bay Curios, and this is the 14th and final prop. Are you ready, Ericka? \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:01:06] \u003c/em>And I’m Olivia Ellen Price, host of Bay Curious, and you made it to the final edition of PropFest 2026. This has been a collaboration between the Bay and Bay Curios, and this is the 14th and final prop. Are you ready, Ericka? \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:01:22] \u003c/em>I sure am, Olivia. Here’s how Prop 45 will read on your ballot. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:01:22] \u003c/em>I sure am, Olivia. Here’s how Prop 45 will read on your ballot. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:01:30] \u003c/em>Prop 45, modifies environmental review for certain projects. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:01:30] \u003c/em>Prop 45, modifies environmental review for certain projects. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:01:36] \u003c/em>Here to walk us through Proposition 45 is KQED’s climate reporter Laura Klivans. Hey Laura.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:01:36] \u003c/em>Here to walk us through Proposition 45 is KQED’s climate reporter Laura Klivans. Hey Laura.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Laura Klivans: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:01:43] \u003c/em>Hello \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Laura Klivans: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:01:43] \u003c/em>Hello \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:01:44] \u003c/em>So Laura, Prop 45 would overhaul the California Environmental Quality Act. First, what is the California environmental quality act, otherwise known as CEQA? \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:01:44] \u003c/em>So Laura, Prop 45 would overhaul the California Environmental Quality Act. First, what is the California environmental quality act, otherwise known as CEQA? \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Laura Klivans: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:01:58] \u003c/em>So CEQA is this major California environmental law, and it was passed in 1970 under then-Governor Reagan. And the goal was to require government agencies to study and share potential environmental impacts of public projects like dams and highways and power plants and to do what was possible to reduce or mitigate those impacts. Over time, there have been many lawsuits around it, and it is now applicable to not just public projects, but private ones. Proponents view this law as an essential environmental law for California to protect our environment and think about longer term consequences to building. Critics do not like CEQA because they say it offers people with special interests the opportunity to delay and block projects in the name of the environment. So therefore it’s been like very controversial. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Laura Klivans: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:01:58] \u003c/em>So CEQA is this major California environmental law, and it was passed in 1970 under then-Governor Reagan. And the goal was to require government agencies to study and share potential environmental impacts of public projects like dams and highways and power plants and to do what was possible to reduce or mitigate those impacts. Over time, there have been many lawsuits around it, and it is now applicable to not just public projects, but private ones. Proponents view this law as an essential environmental law for California to protect our environment and think about longer term consequences to building. Critics do not like CEQA because they say it offers people with special interests the opportunity to delay and block projects in the name of the environment. So therefore it’s been like very controversial. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:02:55] \u003c/em>Private projects as in… Maybe a new apartment building or a new housing complex?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:02:55] \u003c/em>Private projects as in… Maybe a new apartment building or a new housing complex?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Laura Klivans: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:03:02] \u003c/em>Yeah \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Laura Klivans: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:03:02] \u003c/em>Yeah \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:03:04] \u003c/em>So Prop 45 would make some tweaks to CEQA. How exactly could CEQA change under Prop 45? \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:03:04] \u003c/em>So Prop 45 would make some tweaks to CEQA. How exactly could CEQA change under Prop 45? \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Laura Klivans: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:03:11] \u003c/em>So the proposition is saying let’s speed up the environmental reviews for certain projects that it calls essential. So those would be things like housing or clean energy, not including nuclear, hospitals, clinics, schools, fire, wildfire risk reductions, like things that sound really important, transportation, and here’s an interesting category, broadband access. We’ll come back to why that’s so interesting. So Prop 45 would put a timeline on CEQA review for these essential categories I mentioned. It would set a 365 day time limit on environmental reviews for these projects. It would require courts to rule on CEQA related lawsuits within 270 days. And then it also changes some other details. So like here’s an example of one, a government agency that’s overseeing a review. They would need to specify all the information that they’d like to get from the application, from the builder, at the time that it needs to be submitted, rather than going back to the builder again and again and saying, we need more info for this and more info for that. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Laura Klivans: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:03:11] \u003c/em>So the proposition is saying let’s speed up the environmental reviews for certain projects that it calls essential. So those would be things like housing or clean energy, not including nuclear, hospitals, clinics, schools, fire, wildfire risk reductions, like things that sound really important, transportation, and here’s an interesting category, broadband access. We’ll come back to why that’s so interesting. So Prop 45 would put a timeline on CEQA review for these essential categories I mentioned. It would set a 365 day time limit on environmental reviews for these projects. It would require courts to rule on CEQA related lawsuits within 270 days. And then it also changes some other details. So like here’s an example of one, a government agency that’s overseeing a review. They would need to specify all the information that they’d like to get from the application, from the builder, at the time that it needs to be submitted, rather than going back to the builder again and again and saying, we need more info for this and more info for that. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:04:22] \u003c/em>Who put this on the ballot and why are we as voters being asked to potentially make some changes to CEQA?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:04:22] \u003c/em>Who put this on the ballot and why are we as voters being asked to potentially make some changes to CEQA?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Laura Klivans: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:04:29] \u003c/em>So the California Chamber of Commerce has sponsored this proposition, and they represent businesses, they advocate for them, they lobby for them. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Laura Klivans: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:04:29] \u003c/em>So the California Chamber of Commerce has sponsored this proposition, and they represent businesses, they advocate for them, they lobby for them. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Jennifer Barrera: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:04:38] \u003c/em>The CEQA law was well-intentioned, but we have seen, obviously, the law be abused and misused in order to block projects by groups who don’t want to see any development, don’t want to any growth here in California. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Jennifer Barrera: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:04:38] \u003c/em>The CEQA law was well-intentioned, but we have seen, obviously, the law be abused and misused in order to block projects by groups who don’t want to see any development, don’t want to any growth here in California. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Laura Klivans: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:04:50] \u003c/em>Jennifer Barrera is the CEO of the California Chamber of Commerce, and she is saying we have an issue with growth, nothing’s affordable here, and this would basically advance projects that they designated as essential more quickly and easily. It would streamline legal challenges, reduce frivolous lawsuits, things like that. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Laura Klivans: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:04:50] \u003c/em>Jennifer Barrera is the CEO of the California Chamber of Commerce, and she is saying we have an issue with growth, nothing’s affordable here, and this would basically advance projects that they designated as essential more quickly and easily. It would streamline legal challenges, reduce frivolous lawsuits, things like that. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Jennifer Barrera: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:05:10] \u003c/em>When we talk about delay, and I’ll keep going back to housing just because it is such an important point of our affordability crisis and a part of this ballot initiative, but when you delay ultimate housing, I mean that creates inequity in our population. That creates losers with regards to those who can’t afford and those who can’t afford. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Jennifer Barrera: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:05:10] \u003c/em>When we talk about delay, and I’ll keep going back to housing just because it is such an important point of our affordability crisis and a part of this ballot initiative, but when you delay ultimate housing, I mean that creates inequity in our population. That creates losers with regards to those who can’t afford and those who can’t afford. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Laura Klivans: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:05:28] \u003c/em>Proponents say, you know, you’re still going to have environmental review, we’re just going to put like a shot clock on it, as they say. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Laura Klivans: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:05:28] \u003c/em>Proponents say, you know, you’re still going to have environmental review, we’re just going to put like a shot clock on it, as they say. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:05:38] \u003c/em>So you mentioned the California Chamber of Commerce. Who else is in favor of this measure?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:05:38] \u003c/em>So you mentioned the California Chamber of Commerce. Who else is in favor of this measure?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Laura Klivans: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:05:45] \u003c/em>There are groups that represent places that need to build, like hospitals or some housing organizations and some building industries, like the workers. Also notably, Buffy Wicks, she’s a California Assembly member, and she is one of the people who championed change last year to CEQA. That has exempted housing that is already on developed areas from CEQA review. So that was a major reform that already happened last year. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Laura Klivans: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:05:45] \u003c/em>There are groups that represent places that need to build, like hospitals or some housing organizations and some building industries, like the workers. Also notably, Buffy Wicks, she’s a California Assembly member, and she is one of the people who championed change last year to CEQA. That has exempted housing that is already on developed areas from CEQA review. So that was a major reform that already happened last year. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:06:17] \u003c/em>We’ll have more on Prop 45 with KQED’s Laura Klivans, right after this break. By the way, did you know that KQED is funded almost entirely by everyday listeners just like you? Consider becoming a sustaining KQED member by going to donate.kqed.org/podcasts. We’ll be right back.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:06:17] \u003c/em>We’ll have more on Prop 45 with KQED’s Laura Klivans, right after this break. By the way, did you know that KQED is funded almost entirely by everyday listeners just like you? Consider becoming a sustaining KQED member by going to donate.kqed.org/podcasts. We’ll be right back.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:06:46] \u003c/em>So you have some folks who say that these changes to CEQA are necessary in order to address this housing crisis that we’re in, in part. Who is coming out in opposition to this measure and what are their arguments?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:06:46] \u003c/em>So you have some folks who say that these changes to CEQA are necessary in order to address this housing crisis that we’re in, in part. Who is coming out in opposition to this measure and what are their arguments?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Laura Klivans: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:06:59] \u003c/em>There are a bunch of other folks who are against this, like environmental groups, environmental justice groups, health groups, unions that represent teachers and firefighters, for example, are against us. One major argument is that, hey, this is too broad. This is our landmark environmental regulation. Let’s keep it. And state Senator Catherine Blakespear represents northern San Diego and part of Orange County and has come out in opposition. She chairs the Senate Environmental Quality Committee.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Laura Klivans: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:06:59] \u003c/em>There are a bunch of other folks who are against this, like environmental groups, environmental justice groups, health groups, unions that represent teachers and firefighters, for example, are against us. One major argument is that, hey, this is too broad. This is our landmark environmental regulation. Let’s keep it. And state Senator Catherine Blakespear represents northern San Diego and part of Orange County and has come out in opposition. She chairs the Senate Environmental Quality Committee.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Sen. Catherine Blakespear: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:07:27] \u003c/em>It’s really important that California continue to be a bulwark against the backsliding and we continue to fight climate change and to protect our environment.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Sen. Catherine Blakespear: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:07:27] \u003c/em>It’s really important that California continue to be a bulwark against the backsliding and we continue to fight climate change and to protect our environment.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Laura Klivans: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:07:36] \u003c/em>She’s saying it’s going to allow for more homes to be built in something called the wildland urban interface, which is like basically places that butt up against beautiful nature areas, but are therefore very fire prone. And so she and some other state legislators are saying this is a terrible idea. We don’t need to build more housing in those areas. And this would allow for that. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Laura Klivans: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:07:36] \u003c/em>She’s saying it’s going to allow for more homes to be built in something called the wildland urban interface, which is like basically places that butt up against beautiful nature areas, but are therefore very fire prone. And so she and some other state legislators are saying this is a terrible idea. We don’t need to build more housing in those areas. And this would allow for that. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Sen. Catherine Blakespear: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:08:01] \u003c/em>It really just goes way too far and creates these very big loopholes and changes our system of CEQA and our environmental review, which is our landmark environmental laws in California since the 1970s. And it is far, far too broad. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Sen. Catherine Blakespear: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:08:01] \u003c/em>It really just goes way too far and creates these very big loopholes and changes our system of CEQA and our environmental review, which is our landmark environmental laws in California since the 1970s. And it is far, far too broad. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:08:16] \u003c/em>I think we all know that it takes a long time to build housing in California and that one of the main arguments for Prop 45 is the idea that we need to build more housing more quickly. What about pro-housing or YIMBY (Yes In My Backyard) groups? What do they think about this measure? \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:08:16] \u003c/em>I think we all know that it takes a long time to build housing in California and that one of the main arguments for Prop 45 is the idea that we need to build more housing more quickly. What about pro-housing or YIMBY (Yes In My Backyard) groups? What do they think about this measure? \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Laura Klivans: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:08:35] \u003c/em>Yeah, so it’s mixed. There are some housing groups that support Proposition 45. And then, actually, interestingly, this one large group, California YMBY, YIMBY stands for ‘Yes in My Backyard,’ they have come out with no position on this. They are neutral. That’s because they see both reasons to support this measure and reasons to oppose it. And on the one hand, it could fast track sprawl, which is not something they support, so. Maybe it makes it easier to build a highway, makes it easy to build housing that is not in a dense or already populated area. On the other hand, it might make it easier to build clean energy and clean energy infrastructure, which is something that they would support. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Laura Klivans: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:08:35] \u003c/em>Yeah, so it’s mixed. There are some housing groups that support Proposition 45. And then, actually, interestingly, this one large group, California YMBY, YIMBY stands for ‘Yes in My Backyard,’ they have come out with no position on this. They are neutral. That’s because they see both reasons to support this measure and reasons to oppose it. And on the one hand, it could fast track sprawl, which is not something they support, so. Maybe it makes it easier to build a highway, makes it easy to build housing that is not in a dense or already populated area. On the other hand, it might make it easier to build clean energy and clean energy infrastructure, which is something that they would support. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:09:23] \u003c/em>So we’ve been talking about CEQA in the context of building more housing, but it of course applies to all kinds of projects in California. And when it comes to Prop 45, there’s actually one specific kind of project that has made its way into the debate and that’s data centers? Can you explain why data centers have become part of the conversation around Prop 45?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:09:23] \u003c/em>So we’ve been talking about CEQA in the context of building more housing, but it of course applies to all kinds of projects in California. And when it comes to Prop 45, there’s actually one specific kind of project that has made its way into the debate and that’s data centers? Can you explain why data centers have become part of the conversation around Prop 45?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Laura Klivans: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:09:48] \u003c/em>Yes, so people who support Prop 45 say this does not apply to data centers. And opponents, people who are saying no to this proposition, they say, oh, but it could. Look at the broadband access category. The language is broad enough that it could be construed to include data centers, Opponents are also saying, listen, the people who wrote this made carve-outs for what it doesn’t make exclusions for. There’s this huge category of transportation And it says in the language that it doesn’t include high-speed rail. There’s a category for clean energy. Also in the Language for Prop 45, it says that doesn’t including nuclear. So if this truly does not include data centers, wouldn’t the people who wrote this get ahead of that and write, this doesn’t included data centers in the language? And the people that wrote it are saying, well, we weren’t thinking of that because broadband access doesn’t includes data centers. That’s just as simple as that. So that is up in the air. And now data centers is such a wild issue now, and it’s really, we’ve seen it explode politically, that that has impacted this proposition. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Laura Klivans: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:09:48] \u003c/em>Yes, so people who support Prop 45 say this does not apply to data centers. And opponents, people who are saying no to this proposition, they say, oh, but it could. Look at the broadband access category. The language is broad enough that it could be construed to include data centers, Opponents are also saying, listen, the people who wrote this made carve-outs for what it doesn’t make exclusions for. There’s this huge category of transportation And it says in the language that it doesn’t include high-speed rail. There’s a category for clean energy. Also in the Language for Prop 45, it says that doesn’t including nuclear. So if this truly does not include data centers, wouldn’t the people who wrote this get ahead of that and write, this doesn’t included data centers in the language? And the people that wrote it are saying, well, we weren’t thinking of that because broadband access doesn’t includes data centers. That’s just as simple as that. So that is up in the air. And now data centers is such a wild issue now, and it’s really, we’ve seen it explode politically, that that has impacted this proposition. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:10:55] \u003c/em>Enough people are worried about it that they are, I don’t know, seeing data centers in Prop 45 and adding it to the debate, it sounds like. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:10:55] \u003c/em>Enough people are worried about it that they are, I don’t know, seeing data centers in Prop 45 and adding it to the debate, it sounds like. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Laura Klivans: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:11:03] \u003c/em>Right. Right. And then this is super interesting. So pulling from the Public Policy Institute of California showed support among likely voters was at 73% in July and in September it is 49 percent. In that time, the data center conversation started happening. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Laura Klivans: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:11:03] \u003c/em>Right. Right. And then this is super interesting. So pulling from the Public Policy Institute of California showed support among likely voters was at 73% in July and in September it is 49 percent. In that time, the data center conversation started happening. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:11:26] \u003c/em>Let’s talk about campaign spending here, Laura. What are we seeing on the pro-Prop 45 side in terms of spending? \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:11:26] \u003c/em>Let’s talk about campaign spending here, Laura. What are we seeing on the pro-Prop 45 side in terms of spending? \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Laura Klivans: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:11:35] \u003c/em>There’s a lot of money. When I checked last, over $40 million. We see a lot of Silicon Valley tech people, Google executives, like the former CEO, Eric Schmidt, and more. We also see money coming in from the building trades. And then against, still some money there, $15 million. But this was interesting when I was looking at the money because one of the top donors is Wendy Schmidt, who is married to Eric Schmidt. And she has put $5 million in against Prop 45. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Laura Klivans: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:11:35] \u003c/em>There’s a lot of money. When I checked last, over $40 million. We see a lot of Silicon Valley tech people, Google executives, like the former CEO, Eric Schmidt, and more. We also see money coming in from the building trades. And then against, still some money there, $15 million. But this was interesting when I was looking at the money because one of the top donors is Wendy Schmidt, who is married to Eric Schmidt. And she has put $5 million in against Prop 45. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Laura Klivans: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:12:06] \u003c/em>Laura, thank you so much. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Laura Klivans: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:12:06] \u003c/em>Laura, thank you so much. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Laura Klivans: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:12:08] \u003c/em>Thank you for having me.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Laura Klivans: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:12:08] \u003c/em>Thank you for having me.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:12:13] \u003c/em>In a nutshell, a yes vote on this measure means environmental reviews can be expedited for certain projects. A no vote means projects would continue to use existing project review and court challenge procedures under CEQA. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:12:13] \u003c/em>In a nutshell, a yes vote on this measure means environmental reviews can be expedited for certain projects. A no vote means projects would continue to use existing project review and court challenge procedures under CEQA. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:12:30] \u003c/em>We made it to the finish line, y’all. Thanks so much for joining us on this wild ride. We hope you’re feeling more prepared than ever to cast your ballot this November.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:12:30] \u003c/em>We made it to the finish line, y’all. Thanks so much for joining us on this wild ride. We hope you’re feeling more prepared than ever to cast your ballot this November.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:12:38] \u003c/em>And if you don’t, you can always go back and listen to the entire Prop Fest series again at kqed.org/propfest. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:12:38] \u003c/em>And if you don’t, you can always go back and listen to the entire Prop Fest series again at kqed.org/propfest. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:12:48] \u003c/em>Do us a favor and send Prop Fest to one friend right now. Word of mouth really helps us grow our shows. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:12:48] \u003c/em>Do us a favor and send Prop Fest to one friend right now. Word of mouth really helps us grow our shows. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:12:57] \u003c/em>Prop Fest is made possible thanks to Katrina Schwartz Pauline Bartolone Anna Casalme Olivia Allen Price Gabriela Glick Christopher Beale, Alan Montecillo and me, Ericka Cruz Guevarra\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:12:57] \u003c/em>Prop Fest is made possible thanks to Katrina Schwartz Pauline Bartolone Anna Casalme Olivia Allen Price Gabriela Glick Christopher Beale, Alan Montecillo and me, Ericka Cruz Guevarra\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:13:11] \u003c/em>We get extra support from Maha Sanad, Katie Springer, Jen Chien. Ethan Toven Lindsey. And everyone on Team KQED. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:13:11] \u003c/em>We get extra support from Maha Sanad, Katie Springer, Jen Chien. Ethan Toven Lindsey. And everyone on Team KQED. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:13:20] \u003c/em>Our show is made in San Francisco at member-supported KQED. Support for the Bay is provided in part by the Osher Production Fund. Some members of the KQED podcast team are represented by the Screen Actors Guild, American Federation of Television and Radio Artists, San Francisco, Northern California Local. I’m Ericka Cruz Guevara.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:13:20] \u003c/em>Our show is made in San Francisco at member-supported KQED. Support for the Bay is provided in part by the Osher Production Fund. Some members of the KQED podcast team are represented by the Screen Actors Guild, American Federation of Television and Radio Artists, San Francisco, Northern California Local. I’m Ericka Cruz Guevara.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:13:42] \u003c/em>And I’m Olivia Allen Price. Good luck with your ballot. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:13:42] \u003c/em>And I’m Olivia Allen Price. Good luck with your ballot. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
}
],
"excerpt": "Prop 45 would speed up or limit reviews under CEQA, the California Environmental Quality Act.",
"status": "publish",
"parent": 0,
"modified": 1791314201,
"stats": {
"hasAudio": false,
"hasVideo": false,
"hasChartOrMap": false,
"iframeSrcs": [],
"hasGoogleForm": false,
"hasGallery": false,
"hasHearkenModule": false,
"hasPolis": false,
"paragraphCount": 48,
"wordCount": 2432
},
"headData": {
"title": "Prop 45: Faster Environmental Reviews for Certain Projects | KQED",
"description": "Prop 45 would speed up or limit reviews under CEQA, the California Environmental Quality Act.",
"ogTitle": "",
"ogDescription": "",
"ogImgId": "",
"twTitle": "",
"twDescription": "",
"twImgId": "",
"socialDescription": "Prop 45 would speed up or limit reviews under CEQA, the California Environmental Quality Act.",
"schema": {
"@context": "https://schema.org",
"@type": "NewsArticle",
"headline": "Prop 45: Faster Environmental Reviews for Certain Projects",
"datePublished": "2026-10-09T03:00:00-07:00",
"dateModified": "2026-10-06T12:16:41-07:00",
"image": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"isAccessibleForFree": "True",
"publisher": {
"@type": "NewsMediaOrganization",
"@id": "https://www.kqed.org/#organization",
"name": "KQED",
"logo": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"url": "https://www.kqed.org",
"sameAs": [
"https://www.facebook.com/KQED",
"https://twitter.com/KQED",
"https://www.instagram.com/kqed/",
"https://www.tiktok.com/@kqedofficial",
"https://www.linkedin.com/company/kqed",
"https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCeC0IOo7i1P_61zVUWbJ4nw"
]
}
}
},
"primaryCategory": {
"termId": 33520,
"slug": "podcast",
"name": "Podcast"
},
"source": "Prop Fest 2026",
"sourceUrl": "https://www.kqed.org/propfest",
"audioUrl": "https://www.podtrac.com/pts/redirect.mp3/traffic.megaphone.fm/KQINC8976262826.mp3",
"sticky": false,
"templateType": "standard",
"featuredImageType": "standard",
"excludeFromSiteSearch": "Include",
"articleAge": "0",
"path": "/news/12102167/prop-45-faster-environmental-reviews-for-certain-projects",
"audioTrackLength": null,
"parsedContent": [
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>\n\u003ch2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">\u003cstrong>Episode Transcript:\u003c/strong>\u003c/h2>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:00:00] \u003c/em>In 1970, as California was building freeways and developing dams and levees, Governor Ronald Reagan signed the California Environmental Quality Act into law. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:00:10] \u003c/em>CEQA, as it’s known, requires public agencies to consider the environmental impact of big projects. How rivers could be impacted by new dams and levees, or how local marshland could face more noise pollution. It’s a way of saying, look before you leap, or in this case, build. But housing advocates have often taken issue with CEQa. Arguing that it’s been used to block or stall much needed development here in California. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:00:43] \u003c/em>Now, Prop 45 seeks to change the landmark statute by tightening the timeframe for the environmental review process. Those who oppose the proposition aren’t just worried about what it means for the environment, but also whether it can open the door to more data centers. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:01:02] \u003c/em>I’m Ericka Cruz Guevara, host of The Bay. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:01:06] \u003c/em>And I’m Olivia Ellen Price, host of Bay Curious, and you made it to the final edition of PropFest 2026. This has been a collaboration between the Bay and Bay Curios, and this is the 14th and final prop. Are you ready, Ericka? \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:01:22] \u003c/em>I sure am, Olivia. Here’s how Prop 45 will read on your ballot. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:01:30] \u003c/em>Prop 45, modifies environmental review for certain projects. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:01:36] \u003c/em>Here to walk us through Proposition 45 is KQED’s climate reporter Laura Klivans. Hey Laura.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Laura Klivans: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:01:43] \u003c/em>Hello \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:01:44] \u003c/em>So Laura, Prop 45 would overhaul the California Environmental Quality Act. First, what is the California environmental quality act, otherwise known as CEQA? \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Laura Klivans: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:01:58] \u003c/em>So CEQA is this major California environmental law, and it was passed in 1970 under then-Governor Reagan. And the goal was to require government agencies to study and share potential environmental impacts of public projects like dams and highways and power plants and to do what was possible to reduce or mitigate those impacts. Over time, there have been many lawsuits around it, and it is now applicable to not just public projects, but private ones. Proponents view this law as an essential environmental law for California to protect our environment and think about longer term consequences to building. Critics do not like CEQA because they say it offers people with special interests the opportunity to delay and block projects in the name of the environment. So therefore it’s been like very controversial. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:02:55] \u003c/em>Private projects as in… Maybe a new apartment building or a new housing complex?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Laura Klivans: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:03:02] \u003c/em>Yeah \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:03:04] \u003c/em>So Prop 45 would make some tweaks to CEQA. How exactly could CEQA change under Prop 45? \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Laura Klivans: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:03:11] \u003c/em>So the proposition is saying let’s speed up the environmental reviews for certain projects that it calls essential. So those would be things like housing or clean energy, not including nuclear, hospitals, clinics, schools, fire, wildfire risk reductions, like things that sound really important, transportation, and here’s an interesting category, broadband access. We’ll come back to why that’s so interesting. So Prop 45 would put a timeline on CEQA review for these essential categories I mentioned. It would set a 365 day time limit on environmental reviews for these projects. It would require courts to rule on CEQA related lawsuits within 270 days. And then it also changes some other details. So like here’s an example of one, a government agency that’s overseeing a review. They would need to specify all the information that they’d like to get from the application, from the builder, at the time that it needs to be submitted, rather than going back to the builder again and again and saying, we need more info for this and more info for that. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:04:22] \u003c/em>Who put this on the ballot and why are we as voters being asked to potentially make some changes to CEQA?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Laura Klivans: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:04:29] \u003c/em>So the California Chamber of Commerce has sponsored this proposition, and they represent businesses, they advocate for them, they lobby for them. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Jennifer Barrera: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:04:38] \u003c/em>The CEQA law was well-intentioned, but we have seen, obviously, the law be abused and misused in order to block projects by groups who don’t want to see any development, don’t want to any growth here in California. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Laura Klivans: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:04:50] \u003c/em>Jennifer Barrera is the CEO of the California Chamber of Commerce, and she is saying we have an issue with growth, nothing’s affordable here, and this would basically advance projects that they designated as essential more quickly and easily. It would streamline legal challenges, reduce frivolous lawsuits, things like that. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Jennifer Barrera: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:05:10] \u003c/em>When we talk about delay, and I’ll keep going back to housing just because it is such an important point of our affordability crisis and a part of this ballot initiative, but when you delay ultimate housing, I mean that creates inequity in our population. That creates losers with regards to those who can’t afford and those who can’t afford. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Laura Klivans: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:05:28] \u003c/em>Proponents say, you know, you’re still going to have environmental review, we’re just going to put like a shot clock on it, as they say. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:05:38] \u003c/em>So you mentioned the California Chamber of Commerce. Who else is in favor of this measure?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Laura Klivans: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:05:45] \u003c/em>There are groups that represent places that need to build, like hospitals or some housing organizations and some building industries, like the workers. Also notably, Buffy Wicks, she’s a California Assembly member, and she is one of the people who championed change last year to CEQA. That has exempted housing that is already on developed areas from CEQA review. So that was a major reform that already happened last year. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:06:17] \u003c/em>We’ll have more on Prop 45 with KQED’s Laura Klivans, right after this break. By the way, did you know that KQED is funded almost entirely by everyday listeners just like you? Consider becoming a sustaining KQED member by going to donate.kqed.org/podcasts. We’ll be right back.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:06:46] \u003c/em>So you have some folks who say that these changes to CEQA are necessary in order to address this housing crisis that we’re in, in part. Who is coming out in opposition to this measure and what are their arguments?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Laura Klivans: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:06:59] \u003c/em>There are a bunch of other folks who are against this, like environmental groups, environmental justice groups, health groups, unions that represent teachers and firefighters, for example, are against us. One major argument is that, hey, this is too broad. This is our landmark environmental regulation. Let’s keep it. And state Senator Catherine Blakespear represents northern San Diego and part of Orange County and has come out in opposition. She chairs the Senate Environmental Quality Committee.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Sen. Catherine Blakespear: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:07:27] \u003c/em>It’s really important that California continue to be a bulwark against the backsliding and we continue to fight climate change and to protect our environment.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Laura Klivans: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:07:36] \u003c/em>She’s saying it’s going to allow for more homes to be built in something called the wildland urban interface, which is like basically places that butt up against beautiful nature areas, but are therefore very fire prone. And so she and some other state legislators are saying this is a terrible idea. We don’t need to build more housing in those areas. And this would allow for that. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Sen. Catherine Blakespear: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:08:01] \u003c/em>It really just goes way too far and creates these very big loopholes and changes our system of CEQA and our environmental review, which is our landmark environmental laws in California since the 1970s. And it is far, far too broad. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:08:16] \u003c/em>I think we all know that it takes a long time to build housing in California and that one of the main arguments for Prop 45 is the idea that we need to build more housing more quickly. What about pro-housing or YIMBY (Yes In My Backyard) groups? What do they think about this measure? \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Laura Klivans: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:08:35] \u003c/em>Yeah, so it’s mixed. There are some housing groups that support Proposition 45. And then, actually, interestingly, this one large group, California YMBY, YIMBY stands for ‘Yes in My Backyard,’ they have come out with no position on this. They are neutral. That’s because they see both reasons to support this measure and reasons to oppose it. And on the one hand, it could fast track sprawl, which is not something they support, so. Maybe it makes it easier to build a highway, makes it easy to build housing that is not in a dense or already populated area. On the other hand, it might make it easier to build clean energy and clean energy infrastructure, which is something that they would support. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:09:23] \u003c/em>So we’ve been talking about CEQA in the context of building more housing, but it of course applies to all kinds of projects in California. And when it comes to Prop 45, there’s actually one specific kind of project that has made its way into the debate and that’s data centers? Can you explain why data centers have become part of the conversation around Prop 45?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Laura Klivans: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:09:48] \u003c/em>Yes, so people who support Prop 45 say this does not apply to data centers. And opponents, people who are saying no to this proposition, they say, oh, but it could. Look at the broadband access category. The language is broad enough that it could be construed to include data centers, Opponents are also saying, listen, the people who wrote this made carve-outs for what it doesn’t make exclusions for. There’s this huge category of transportation And it says in the language that it doesn’t include high-speed rail. There’s a category for clean energy. Also in the Language for Prop 45, it says that doesn’t including nuclear. So if this truly does not include data centers, wouldn’t the people who wrote this get ahead of that and write, this doesn’t included data centers in the language? And the people that wrote it are saying, well, we weren’t thinking of that because broadband access doesn’t includes data centers. That’s just as simple as that. So that is up in the air. And now data centers is such a wild issue now, and it’s really, we’ve seen it explode politically, that that has impacted this proposition. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:10:55] \u003c/em>Enough people are worried about it that they are, I don’t know, seeing data centers in Prop 45 and adding it to the debate, it sounds like. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Laura Klivans: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:11:03] \u003c/em>Right. Right. And then this is super interesting. So pulling from the Public Policy Institute of California showed support among likely voters was at 73% in July and in September it is 49 percent. In that time, the data center conversation started happening. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:11:26] \u003c/em>Let’s talk about campaign spending here, Laura. What are we seeing on the pro-Prop 45 side in terms of spending? \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Laura Klivans: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:11:35] \u003c/em>There’s a lot of money. When I checked last, over $40 million. We see a lot of Silicon Valley tech people, Google executives, like the former CEO, Eric Schmidt, and more. We also see money coming in from the building trades. And then against, still some money there, $15 million. But this was interesting when I was looking at the money because one of the top donors is Wendy Schmidt, who is married to Eric Schmidt. And she has put $5 million in against Prop 45. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Laura Klivans: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:12:06] \u003c/em>Laura, thank you so much. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Laura Klivans: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:12:08] \u003c/em>Thank you for having me.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:12:13] \u003c/em>In a nutshell, a yes vote on this measure means environmental reviews can be expedited for certain projects. A no vote means projects would continue to use existing project review and court challenge procedures under CEQA. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:12:30] \u003c/em>We made it to the finish line, y’all. Thanks so much for joining us on this wild ride. We hope you’re feeling more prepared than ever to cast your ballot this November.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:12:38] \u003c/em>And if you don’t, you can always go back and listen to the entire Prop Fest series again at kqed.org/propfest. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:12:48] \u003c/em>Do us a favor and send Prop Fest to one friend right now. Word of mouth really helps us grow our shows. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:12:57] \u003c/em>Prop Fest is made possible thanks to Katrina Schwartz Pauline Bartolone Anna Casalme Olivia Allen Price Gabriela Glick Christopher Beale, Alan Montecillo and me, Ericka Cruz Guevarra\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:13:11] \u003c/em>We get extra support from Maha Sanad, Katie Springer, Jen Chien. Ethan Toven Lindsey. And everyone on Team KQED. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:13:20] \u003c/em>Our show is made in San Francisco at member-supported KQED. Support for the Bay is provided in part by the Osher Production Fund. Some members of the KQED podcast team are represented by the Screen Actors Guild, American Federation of Television and Radio Artists, San Francisco, Northern California Local. I’m Ericka Cruz Guevara.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:13:42] \u003c/em>And I’m Olivia Allen Price. Good luck with your ballot. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n\u003c/div>\u003c/p>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
}
],
"link": "/news/12102167/prop-45-faster-environmental-reviews-for-certain-projects",
"authors": [
"8654",
"8648",
"11946",
"11649"
],
"programs": [
"news_33523",
"news_34552"
],
"series": [
"news_17986"
],
"categories": [
"news_19906",
"news_6266",
"news_8",
"news_33520"
],
"tags": [
"news_4248",
"news_20023",
"news_1775",
"news_28645",
"news_22598"
],
"featImg": "news_12050791",
"label": "source_news_12102167"
},
"news_12102004": {
"type": "posts",
"id": "news_12102004",
"meta": {
"index": "posts_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "12102004",
"score": null,
"sort": [
1791453600000
]
},
"guestAuthors": [],
"slug": "prop-44-requires-health-clinics-to-spend-more-on-patient-care",
"title": "Prop 44: Requires Health Clinics to Spend More on Patient Care",
"publishDate": 1791453600,
"format": "standard",
"headTitle": "Prop 44: Requires Health Clinics to Spend More on Patient Care | KQED",
"labelTerm": {},
"content": "\n\u003ch2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Transcript\u003c/h2>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>There are about 2,000 community clinics providing health care here in California.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>These clinics typically serve patients who don’t have any other options. Low-income people or those who are under-insured often go to these clinics for things like vaccines, mental health, and social services.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>They’re also funded in part by our tax dollars. But one union says these clinics aren’t spending enough of their money on patients. And that’s where Proposition 44 comes in.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Prop 44 would force community health clinics to spend 90% of their revenue on health care services or face penalties from the state.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>Will Prop 44 help make healthcare dollars go where they belong? Or could it lead these clinics to cut services or even shut down entirely?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>That’s for you to decide.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>I’m Ericka Cruz Guevarra, host of The Bay.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And I’m Olivia Allen-Price, host of Bay Curious.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>And welcome back to Prop Fest, a collaboration between The Bay and Bay Curious. Today, we’re walking you through Proposition 44. Here’s how it reads on your ballot.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Speaker: \u003c/strong>Prop 44 requires community health clinics spend 90% of revenue on program services.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>Here to help us break this all down is KQED health correspondent, Lesley McClurg. Hey there, Lesley!\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Lesley McClurg: \u003c/strong>Hello.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>What exactly would Prop 44 change for these clinics?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Lesley McClurg: \u003c/strong>The clinics would have to prove that they are spending 90% of their revenue, so they are tax-funded clinics, so they would have to prove they’re spending 90 percent of that money on health care services, so basically medical offerings for their patients. At the end of the day, the attorney general would decide on exactly what qualifies within that 90%. If the clinics don’t comply, they would face fines. Although the penalties that they would have to pay could be returned to them if they were able to hit that 90% quota spending target basically within five years.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>Lesley, who put Proposition 44 on the ballot, and what is the problem that they say they’re trying to solve with Prop 44?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Lesley McClurg: \u003c/strong>The proponents of Prop 44 are SEIU, United Health Care Workers West, which is the union that represents health care workers.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Renee Saldana: \u003c/strong>I’d like to remind folks that community clinics were started with the mission of serving some of the folks in California that need these services the most.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Lesley McClurg: \u003c/strong>I spoke with Renee Saldana, the press secretary for the union, and she said the union is really trying to ensure that clinics are investing their money correctly.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Renee Saldana: \u003c/strong>It’s essentially anything that would help patients receive care or the direct care itself. So this includes medical visits, lab tests and x-rays, preventative care, of course, like vaccines and screenings, mammograms, things like outreach, transportation, language interpretation…\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Lesley McClurg: \u003c/strong>They have found that some clinics are using their revenue poorly, maybe even wasting it on anything that the union says could be, say, unnecessary administrative costs. So they’re spending too much on running the clinic rather than putting that money towards patients. Maybe spending too much on fundraising. But the main thing that they’re pointing out is potentially executive compensation, so over bloated salaries for the top, for the people who are running these clinics.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Renee Saldana: \u003c/strong>So I think a lot of Californians really understand how important these clinics are to our healthcare system and they wanna make sure that they are prioritizing patients by spending our public dollars where the dollars are needed most, which is directly on patient care and other mission-related services.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Lesley McClurg: \u003c/strong>The California Legislative Analyst’s Office, which is a nonpartisan fiscal advisor, notes that these clinics currently spend, on average, about 80% of their revenue on healthcare services, although it does vary and depend on each individual clinic. But the yes on 44 or the union believes that that really should be 90% across the board.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>And do they also mention, I mean, these cuts that we’ve seen to health care at the federal level as a reason also to pass this?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Lesley McClurg: \u003c/strong>Absolutely. So you’ve got this H.R.1, which is the federal bill, it’s also been called, you know, the big, beautiful bill. But basically, the Trump administration is heavily cutting federal funding for medical care. And so these clinics are going to be hurting and working on a much tighter budget. And so the union is arguing that they need to ensure that these clinics are using their budgets as well as possible so that best care can reach patients. Since it’s a really hard time to ensure that everybody has the medical care that they need under these federal cuts.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Renee Saldana: \u003c/strong>Again, all we want is that these clinics are able to stay open when these health care cuts from H.R.1 really hit California next year.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>So you have SEIU, the union that represents many healthcare workers in favor of Prop 44. Any other groups in favor of this measure?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Lesley McClurg: \u003c/strong>The only group that I’m aware of is the California Labor Federation is also in favor.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>We’ll have more on Prop 44 right after this. By the way, did you know that KQED is funded almost entirely by listeners just like you? Join the thousands of everyday listeners who help make this work happen. Just go to donate.kqed.org/podcasts. We’ll be right back. And we’re back talking about Prop 44 with KQED health correspondent, Lesley McClurg. Lesley, this measure has a long list of opponents actually, tell me a little bit more about who’s against Prop 44 and what their argument is?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Lesley McClurg: \u003c/strong>So it’s made up mostly of medical groups, although there are other groups in addition to the medical groups. But you’ve got the California Primary Care Association, the California Medical Association. You’ve got Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California. You’ve got the the California Hospital Association. And they are all worried that at the end of the day the clinics would fail to meet the spending threshold and that the non-compliance fees that these clinics would ultimately be forced to pay would end up leading to either significantly reduced services at these clinics or even force some of these clinics to close.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Mark Shotwell: \u003c/strong>Health centers do a great job of managing those funds, getting high quality healthcare outcomes and this ballot measure would really erode our ability to do that.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Lesley McClurg: \u003c/strong>I spoke specifically with Mark Shotwell. He’s the CEO of Ritter Center. This is a nonprofit who serves a largely unhoused population in San Rafael. And he says about 30% of their costs under his… and this is his opinion, would not qualify as quote health care services.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Mark Shotwell: \u003c/strong>Things like telehealth services, patient navigation, transportation to ensure that people get to their necessary medical appointments or translation services.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Lesley McClurg: \u003c/strong>He said these are wraparound services like education, housing, home health care. These are all services that he worries would not qualify as direct medical care, you know, offerings and that they would end up, the clinic, Ritter Clinic would end paying kind of precious dollars on penalties when they’re already operating on a really tight budget.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Mark Shotwell: \u003c/strong>They’ve decided to focus on CEO or executive salaries and that somehow that’s a problem that we’re not having money go to the patients. It also doesn’t include things like human resources or accounting or IT. So these are all necessary services to run a health clinic. And we have the oversight of family members, boards, the state of California, the federal government. These are highly regulated environments to ensure that patients are getting the very best services, so it’s also unnecessary.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>So then, Lesley, if Prop 44 actually passes, then 90% of the revenue at these clinics must be spent on healthcare services, as you said. But it seems like the yes and the no sides aren’t really on the same page about what exactly falls under the umbrella of healthcare services. You have Renee on the yes side who’s saying it covers anything related to patient care, but then you have Mark on the no side who says, that this would threaten really essential services at his clinic, so what exactly am I supposed to make of this as a voter?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Lesley McClurg: \u003c/strong>Yeah, it’s not clear. The yes and no sides are telling me very different things about how this 90% would be defined. The LAO says that the state attorney general would be able to define in more detail which kinds of expenses would qualify. The proposition is not quite as simple as it looks on the ballot. You also have a background that I think is important to know about, which is that there has been pressure to unionize these clinics and some of these clinics have said no to that pressure. There’s an argument from the opponents that this bill is a push or kind of like a political pressure to be like, okay, we’re going to put this thing on the ballot, that’s not going to, that’s going to be really hard for you to meet, if you don’t unionize. Now the union denies that that is part of their agenda, but the opponents arguing that that could potentially be at play here and there has been a past, there’s a history here of SEIU, has filed ballot measures in the past for organizations that have resisted unionization. This includes a series of recent measures that would have placed new regulations on dialysis clinics. So that there is a history there of SEIU doing this. And again, they’re denying it in this moment, but potentially that’s also at play.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>What’s going on with campaign spending on Prop 44 on both the yes and the no sides?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Lesley McClurg: \u003c/strong>According to CalMatters, who has been reporting on this, they note that SEIU has raised $16.9 million, and the opponents, all those different medical groups, et cetera, have raised about $37.5 million. So more than twice as much has been raised by the opponents.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>Well Lesley, I appreciate you for breaking this one down for us. Thank you so much.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Lesley McClurg: \u003c/strong>Thank you.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>In a nutshell, a yes vote on this measure means certain private non-profit health care clinics would have to spend at least 90% of their revenue each year on providing health care services or face a fine. A no vote on the measure means this new requirement on health care clinic spending would not go into effect.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>That’s it for our latest episode of PropFest, a collaboration between The Bay and Bay Curious. You’re almost to the finish line.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>KQED.org/propfest is the place to return for all these PropFest breakdowns, and if this series is helping you, do us a favor and tell one friend about it.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Word of mouth really helps our shows grow. PropFest is made possible thanks to Katrina Schwartz, Pauline Bartolone, Anna Casalme, Olivia Allen-Price:, Gabriela Glueck. Christopher Beale, Alan Montecillo.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>And me, Ericka Cruz Guevarra. We get extra support from Maha Sanad, Katie Springer, Jen Chien, Ethan Toven-Lindsey and everyone on Team KQED.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>Our show is made in San Francisco at member-supported KQED. Support for The Bay is provided in part by the Osher Production Fund. Some members of the KQED podcast team are represented by the Screen Actors Guild, American Federation of Television and Radio Artists, San Francisco, Northern California Local.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>I’m Ericka Cruz Guevarra.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And I’m Olivia Allen-Price:. Thanks for listening.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cem>Some members of the KQED podcast team are represented by The Screen Actors Guild, American Federation of Television and Radio Artists, San Francisco-Northern California Local.\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n",
"blocks": [
{
"blockName": "core/heading",
"attrs": {
"text": "Transcript",
"level": 2
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003ch2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Transcript\u003c/h2>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003ch2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Transcript\u003c/h2>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>There are about 2,000 community clinics providing health care here in California.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>There are about 2,000 community clinics providing health care here in California.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>These clinics typically serve patients who don’t have any other options. Low-income people or those who are under-insured often go to these clinics for things like vaccines, mental health, and social services.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>These clinics typically serve patients who don’t have any other options. Low-income people or those who are under-insured often go to these clinics for things like vaccines, mental health, and social services.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>They’re also funded in part by our tax dollars. But one union says these clinics aren’t spending enough of their money on patients. And that’s where Proposition 44 comes in.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>They’re also funded in part by our tax dollars. But one union says these clinics aren’t spending enough of their money on patients. And that’s where Proposition 44 comes in.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Prop 44 would force community health clinics to spend 90% of their revenue on health care services or face penalties from the state.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Prop 44 would force community health clinics to spend 90% of their revenue on health care services or face penalties from the state.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>Will Prop 44 help make healthcare dollars go where they belong? Or could it lead these clinics to cut services or even shut down entirely?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>Will Prop 44 help make healthcare dollars go where they belong? Or could it lead these clinics to cut services or even shut down entirely?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>That’s for you to decide.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>That’s for you to decide.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>I’m Ericka Cruz Guevarra, host of The Bay.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>I’m Ericka Cruz Guevarra, host of The Bay.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And I’m Olivia Allen-Price, host of Bay Curious.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And I’m Olivia Allen-Price, host of Bay Curious.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>And welcome back to Prop Fest, a collaboration between The Bay and Bay Curious. Today, we’re walking you through Proposition 44. Here’s how it reads on your ballot.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>And welcome back to Prop Fest, a collaboration between The Bay and Bay Curious. Today, we’re walking you through Proposition 44. Here’s how it reads on your ballot.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Speaker: \u003c/strong>Prop 44 requires community health clinics spend 90% of revenue on program services.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Speaker: \u003c/strong>Prop 44 requires community health clinics spend 90% of revenue on program services.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>Here to help us break this all down is KQED health correspondent, Lesley McClurg. Hey there, Lesley!\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>Here to help us break this all down is KQED health correspondent, Lesley McClurg. Hey there, Lesley!\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Lesley McClurg: \u003c/strong>Hello.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Lesley McClurg: \u003c/strong>Hello.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>What exactly would Prop 44 change for these clinics?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>What exactly would Prop 44 change for these clinics?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Lesley McClurg: \u003c/strong>The clinics would have to prove that they are spending 90% of their revenue, so they are tax-funded clinics, so they would have to prove they’re spending 90 percent of that money on health care services, so basically medical offerings for their patients. At the end of the day, the attorney general would decide on exactly what qualifies within that 90%. If the clinics don’t comply, they would face fines. Although the penalties that they would have to pay could be returned to them if they were able to hit that 90% quota spending target basically within five years.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Lesley McClurg: \u003c/strong>The clinics would have to prove that they are spending 90% of their revenue, so they are tax-funded clinics, so they would have to prove they’re spending 90 percent of that money on health care services, so basically medical offerings for their patients. At the end of the day, the attorney general would decide on exactly what qualifies within that 90%. If the clinics don’t comply, they would face fines. Although the penalties that they would have to pay could be returned to them if they were able to hit that 90% quota spending target basically within five years.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>Lesley, who put Proposition 44 on the ballot, and what is the problem that they say they’re trying to solve with Prop 44?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>Lesley, who put Proposition 44 on the ballot, and what is the problem that they say they’re trying to solve with Prop 44?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Lesley McClurg: \u003c/strong>The proponents of Prop 44 are SEIU, United Health Care Workers West, which is the union that represents health care workers.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Lesley McClurg: \u003c/strong>The proponents of Prop 44 are SEIU, United Health Care Workers West, which is the union that represents health care workers.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Renee Saldana: \u003c/strong>I’d like to remind folks that community clinics were started with the mission of serving some of the folks in California that need these services the most.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Renee Saldana: \u003c/strong>I’d like to remind folks that community clinics were started with the mission of serving some of the folks in California that need these services the most.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Lesley McClurg: \u003c/strong>I spoke with Renee Saldana, the press secretary for the union, and she said the union is really trying to ensure that clinics are investing their money correctly.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Lesley McClurg: \u003c/strong>I spoke with Renee Saldana, the press secretary for the union, and she said the union is really trying to ensure that clinics are investing their money correctly.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Renee Saldana: \u003c/strong>It’s essentially anything that would help patients receive care or the direct care itself. So this includes medical visits, lab tests and x-rays, preventative care, of course, like vaccines and screenings, mammograms, things like outreach, transportation, language interpretation…\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Renee Saldana: \u003c/strong>It’s essentially anything that would help patients receive care or the direct care itself. So this includes medical visits, lab tests and x-rays, preventative care, of course, like vaccines and screenings, mammograms, things like outreach, transportation, language interpretation…\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Lesley McClurg: \u003c/strong>They have found that some clinics are using their revenue poorly, maybe even wasting it on anything that the union says could be, say, unnecessary administrative costs. So they’re spending too much on running the clinic rather than putting that money towards patients. Maybe spending too much on fundraising. But the main thing that they’re pointing out is potentially executive compensation, so over bloated salaries for the top, for the people who are running these clinics.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Lesley McClurg: \u003c/strong>They have found that some clinics are using their revenue poorly, maybe even wasting it on anything that the union says could be, say, unnecessary administrative costs. So they’re spending too much on running the clinic rather than putting that money towards patients. Maybe spending too much on fundraising. But the main thing that they’re pointing out is potentially executive compensation, so over bloated salaries for the top, for the people who are running these clinics.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Renee Saldana: \u003c/strong>So I think a lot of Californians really understand how important these clinics are to our healthcare system and they wanna make sure that they are prioritizing patients by spending our public dollars where the dollars are needed most, which is directly on patient care and other mission-related services.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Renee Saldana: \u003c/strong>So I think a lot of Californians really understand how important these clinics are to our healthcare system and they wanna make sure that they are prioritizing patients by spending our public dollars where the dollars are needed most, which is directly on patient care and other mission-related services.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Lesley McClurg: \u003c/strong>The California Legislative Analyst’s Office, which is a nonpartisan fiscal advisor, notes that these clinics currently spend, on average, about 80% of their revenue on healthcare services, although it does vary and depend on each individual clinic. But the yes on 44 or the union believes that that really should be 90% across the board.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Lesley McClurg: \u003c/strong>The California Legislative Analyst’s Office, which is a nonpartisan fiscal advisor, notes that these clinics currently spend, on average, about 80% of their revenue on healthcare services, although it does vary and depend on each individual clinic. But the yes on 44 or the union believes that that really should be 90% across the board.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>And do they also mention, I mean, these cuts that we’ve seen to health care at the federal level as a reason also to pass this?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>And do they also mention, I mean, these cuts that we’ve seen to health care at the federal level as a reason also to pass this?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Lesley McClurg: \u003c/strong>Absolutely. So you’ve got this H.R.1, which is the federal bill, it’s also been called, you know, the big, beautiful bill. But basically, the Trump administration is heavily cutting federal funding for medical care. And so these clinics are going to be hurting and working on a much tighter budget. And so the union is arguing that they need to ensure that these clinics are using their budgets as well as possible so that best care can reach patients. Since it’s a really hard time to ensure that everybody has the medical care that they need under these federal cuts.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Lesley McClurg: \u003c/strong>Absolutely. So you’ve got this H.R.1, which is the federal bill, it’s also been called, you know, the big, beautiful bill. But basically, the Trump administration is heavily cutting federal funding for medical care. And so these clinics are going to be hurting and working on a much tighter budget. And so the union is arguing that they need to ensure that these clinics are using their budgets as well as possible so that best care can reach patients. Since it’s a really hard time to ensure that everybody has the medical care that they need under these federal cuts.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Renee Saldana: \u003c/strong>Again, all we want is that these clinics are able to stay open when these health care cuts from H.R.1 really hit California next year.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Renee Saldana: \u003c/strong>Again, all we want is that these clinics are able to stay open when these health care cuts from H.R.1 really hit California next year.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>So you have SEIU, the union that represents many healthcare workers in favor of Prop 44. Any other groups in favor of this measure?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>So you have SEIU, the union that represents many healthcare workers in favor of Prop 44. Any other groups in favor of this measure?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Lesley McClurg: \u003c/strong>The only group that I’m aware of is the California Labor Federation is also in favor.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Lesley McClurg: \u003c/strong>The only group that I’m aware of is the California Labor Federation is also in favor.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>We’ll have more on Prop 44 right after this. By the way, did you know that KQED is funded almost entirely by listeners just like you? Join the thousands of everyday listeners who help make this work happen. Just go to donate.kqed.org/podcasts. We’ll be right back. And we’re back talking about Prop 44 with KQED health correspondent, Lesley McClurg. Lesley, this measure has a long list of opponents actually, tell me a little bit more about who’s against Prop 44 and what their argument is?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>We’ll have more on Prop 44 right after this. By the way, did you know that KQED is funded almost entirely by listeners just like you? Join the thousands of everyday listeners who help make this work happen. Just go to donate.kqed.org/podcasts. We’ll be right back. And we’re back talking about Prop 44 with KQED health correspondent, Lesley McClurg. Lesley, this measure has a long list of opponents actually, tell me a little bit more about who’s against Prop 44 and what their argument is?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Lesley McClurg: \u003c/strong>So it’s made up mostly of medical groups, although there are other groups in addition to the medical groups. But you’ve got the California Primary Care Association, the California Medical Association. You’ve got Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California. You’ve got the the California Hospital Association. And they are all worried that at the end of the day the clinics would fail to meet the spending threshold and that the non-compliance fees that these clinics would ultimately be forced to pay would end up leading to either significantly reduced services at these clinics or even force some of these clinics to close.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Lesley McClurg: \u003c/strong>So it’s made up mostly of medical groups, although there are other groups in addition to the medical groups. But you’ve got the California Primary Care Association, the California Medical Association. You’ve got Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California. You’ve got the the California Hospital Association. And they are all worried that at the end of the day the clinics would fail to meet the spending threshold and that the non-compliance fees that these clinics would ultimately be forced to pay would end up leading to either significantly reduced services at these clinics or even force some of these clinics to close.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Mark Shotwell: \u003c/strong>Health centers do a great job of managing those funds, getting high quality healthcare outcomes and this ballot measure would really erode our ability to do that.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Mark Shotwell: \u003c/strong>Health centers do a great job of managing those funds, getting high quality healthcare outcomes and this ballot measure would really erode our ability to do that.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Lesley McClurg: \u003c/strong>I spoke specifically with Mark Shotwell. He’s the CEO of Ritter Center. This is a nonprofit who serves a largely unhoused population in San Rafael. And he says about 30% of their costs under his… and this is his opinion, would not qualify as quote health care services.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Lesley McClurg: \u003c/strong>I spoke specifically with Mark Shotwell. He’s the CEO of Ritter Center. This is a nonprofit who serves a largely unhoused population in San Rafael. And he says about 30% of their costs under his… and this is his opinion, would not qualify as quote health care services.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Mark Shotwell: \u003c/strong>Things like telehealth services, patient navigation, transportation to ensure that people get to their necessary medical appointments or translation services.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Mark Shotwell: \u003c/strong>Things like telehealth services, patient navigation, transportation to ensure that people get to their necessary medical appointments or translation services.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Lesley McClurg: \u003c/strong>He said these are wraparound services like education, housing, home health care. These are all services that he worries would not qualify as direct medical care, you know, offerings and that they would end up, the clinic, Ritter Clinic would end paying kind of precious dollars on penalties when they’re already operating on a really tight budget.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Lesley McClurg: \u003c/strong>He said these are wraparound services like education, housing, home health care. These are all services that he worries would not qualify as direct medical care, you know, offerings and that they would end up, the clinic, Ritter Clinic would end paying kind of precious dollars on penalties when they’re already operating on a really tight budget.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Mark Shotwell: \u003c/strong>They’ve decided to focus on CEO or executive salaries and that somehow that’s a problem that we’re not having money go to the patients. It also doesn’t include things like human resources or accounting or IT. So these are all necessary services to run a health clinic. And we have the oversight of family members, boards, the state of California, the federal government. These are highly regulated environments to ensure that patients are getting the very best services, so it’s also unnecessary.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Mark Shotwell: \u003c/strong>They’ve decided to focus on CEO or executive salaries and that somehow that’s a problem that we’re not having money go to the patients. It also doesn’t include things like human resources or accounting or IT. So these are all necessary services to run a health clinic. And we have the oversight of family members, boards, the state of California, the federal government. These are highly regulated environments to ensure that patients are getting the very best services, so it’s also unnecessary.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>So then, Lesley, if Prop 44 actually passes, then 90% of the revenue at these clinics must be spent on healthcare services, as you said. But it seems like the yes and the no sides aren’t really on the same page about what exactly falls under the umbrella of healthcare services. You have Renee on the yes side who’s saying it covers anything related to patient care, but then you have Mark on the no side who says, that this would threaten really essential services at his clinic, so what exactly am I supposed to make of this as a voter?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>So then, Lesley, if Prop 44 actually passes, then 90% of the revenue at these clinics must be spent on healthcare services, as you said. But it seems like the yes and the no sides aren’t really on the same page about what exactly falls under the umbrella of healthcare services. You have Renee on the yes side who’s saying it covers anything related to patient care, but then you have Mark on the no side who says, that this would threaten really essential services at his clinic, so what exactly am I supposed to make of this as a voter?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Lesley McClurg: \u003c/strong>Yeah, it’s not clear. The yes and no sides are telling me very different things about how this 90% would be defined. The LAO says that the state attorney general would be able to define in more detail which kinds of expenses would qualify. The proposition is not quite as simple as it looks on the ballot. You also have a background that I think is important to know about, which is that there has been pressure to unionize these clinics and some of these clinics have said no to that pressure. There’s an argument from the opponents that this bill is a push or kind of like a political pressure to be like, okay, we’re going to put this thing on the ballot, that’s not going to, that’s going to be really hard for you to meet, if you don’t unionize. Now the union denies that that is part of their agenda, but the opponents arguing that that could potentially be at play here and there has been a past, there’s a history here of SEIU, has filed ballot measures in the past for organizations that have resisted unionization. This includes a series of recent measures that would have placed new regulations on dialysis clinics. So that there is a history there of SEIU doing this. And again, they’re denying it in this moment, but potentially that’s also at play.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Lesley McClurg: \u003c/strong>Yeah, it’s not clear. The yes and no sides are telling me very different things about how this 90% would be defined. The LAO says that the state attorney general would be able to define in more detail which kinds of expenses would qualify. The proposition is not quite as simple as it looks on the ballot. You also have a background that I think is important to know about, which is that there has been pressure to unionize these clinics and some of these clinics have said no to that pressure. There’s an argument from the opponents that this bill is a push or kind of like a political pressure to be like, okay, we’re going to put this thing on the ballot, that’s not going to, that’s going to be really hard for you to meet, if you don’t unionize. Now the union denies that that is part of their agenda, but the opponents arguing that that could potentially be at play here and there has been a past, there’s a history here of SEIU, has filed ballot measures in the past for organizations that have resisted unionization. This includes a series of recent measures that would have placed new regulations on dialysis clinics. So that there is a history there of SEIU doing this. And again, they’re denying it in this moment, but potentially that’s also at play.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>What’s going on with campaign spending on Prop 44 on both the yes and the no sides?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>What’s going on with campaign spending on Prop 44 on both the yes and the no sides?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Lesley McClurg: \u003c/strong>According to CalMatters, who has been reporting on this, they note that SEIU has raised $16.9 million, and the opponents, all those different medical groups, et cetera, have raised about $37.5 million. So more than twice as much has been raised by the opponents.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Lesley McClurg: \u003c/strong>According to CalMatters, who has been reporting on this, they note that SEIU has raised $16.9 million, and the opponents, all those different medical groups, et cetera, have raised about $37.5 million. So more than twice as much has been raised by the opponents.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>Well Lesley, I appreciate you for breaking this one down for us. Thank you so much.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>Well Lesley, I appreciate you for breaking this one down for us. Thank you so much.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Lesley McClurg: \u003c/strong>Thank you.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Lesley McClurg: \u003c/strong>Thank you.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>In a nutshell, a yes vote on this measure means certain private non-profit health care clinics would have to spend at least 90% of their revenue each year on providing health care services or face a fine. A no vote on the measure means this new requirement on health care clinic spending would not go into effect.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>In a nutshell, a yes vote on this measure means certain private non-profit health care clinics would have to spend at least 90% of their revenue each year on providing health care services or face a fine. A no vote on the measure means this new requirement on health care clinic spending would not go into effect.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>That’s it for our latest episode of PropFest, a collaboration between The Bay and Bay Curious. You’re almost to the finish line.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>That’s it for our latest episode of PropFest, a collaboration between The Bay and Bay Curious. You’re almost to the finish line.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>KQED.org/propfest is the place to return for all these PropFest breakdowns, and if this series is helping you, do us a favor and tell one friend about it.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>KQED.org/propfest is the place to return for all these PropFest breakdowns, and if this series is helping you, do us a favor and tell one friend about it.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Word of mouth really helps our shows grow. PropFest is made possible thanks to Katrina Schwartz, Pauline Bartolone, Anna Casalme, Olivia Allen-Price:, Gabriela Glueck. Christopher Beale, Alan Montecillo.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Word of mouth really helps our shows grow. PropFest is made possible thanks to Katrina Schwartz, Pauline Bartolone, Anna Casalme, Olivia Allen-Price:, Gabriela Glueck. Christopher Beale, Alan Montecillo.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>And me, Ericka Cruz Guevarra. We get extra support from Maha Sanad, Katie Springer, Jen Chien, Ethan Toven-Lindsey and everyone on Team KQED.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>And me, Ericka Cruz Guevarra. We get extra support from Maha Sanad, Katie Springer, Jen Chien, Ethan Toven-Lindsey and everyone on Team KQED.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>Our show is made in San Francisco at member-supported KQED. Support for The Bay is provided in part by the Osher Production Fund. Some members of the KQED podcast team are represented by the Screen Actors Guild, American Federation of Television and Radio Artists, San Francisco, Northern California Local.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>Our show is made in San Francisco at member-supported KQED. Support for The Bay is provided in part by the Osher Production Fund. Some members of the KQED podcast team are represented by the Screen Actors Guild, American Federation of Television and Radio Artists, San Francisco, Northern California Local.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>I’m Ericka Cruz Guevarra.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>I’m Ericka Cruz Guevarra.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And I’m Olivia Allen-Price:. Thanks for listening.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And I’m Olivia Allen-Price:. Thanks for listening.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cem>Some members of the KQED podcast team are represented by The Screen Actors Guild, American Federation of Television and Radio Artists, San Francisco-Northern California Local.\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cem>Some members of the KQED podcast team are represented by The Screen Actors Guild, American Federation of Television and Radio Artists, San Francisco-Northern California Local.\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
}
],
"excerpt": "Prop 44 would require community health clinics to spend at least 90% of revenue on health care services.",
"status": "publish",
"parent": 0,
"modified": 1791308198,
"stats": {
"hasAudio": false,
"hasVideo": false,
"hasChartOrMap": false,
"iframeSrcs": [],
"hasGoogleForm": false,
"hasGallery": false,
"hasHearkenModule": false,
"hasPolis": false,
"paragraphCount": 49,
"wordCount": 2147
},
"headData": {
"title": "Prop 44: Requires Health Clinics to Spend More on Patient Care | KQED",
"description": "Prop 44 would require community health clinics to spend at least 90% of revenue on health care services.",
"ogTitle": "",
"ogDescription": "",
"ogImgId": "",
"twTitle": "",
"twDescription": "",
"twImgId": "",
"socialDescription": "Prop 44 would require community health clinics to spend at least 90% of revenue on health care services.",
"schema": {
"@context": "https://schema.org",
"@type": "NewsArticle",
"headline": "Prop 44: Requires Health Clinics to Spend More on Patient Care",
"datePublished": "2026-10-08T03:00:00-07:00",
"dateModified": "2026-10-06T10:36:38-07:00",
"image": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"isAccessibleForFree": "True",
"publisher": {
"@type": "NewsMediaOrganization",
"@id": "https://www.kqed.org/#organization",
"name": "KQED",
"logo": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"url": "https://www.kqed.org",
"sameAs": [
"https://www.facebook.com/KQED",
"https://twitter.com/KQED",
"https://www.instagram.com/kqed/",
"https://www.tiktok.com/@kqedofficial",
"https://www.linkedin.com/company/kqed",
"https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCeC0IOo7i1P_61zVUWbJ4nw"
]
}
}
},
"primaryCategory": {
"termId": 33520,
"slug": "podcast",
"name": "Podcast"
},
"source": "Prop Fest 2026",
"sourceUrl": "https://www.kqed.org/propfest",
"audioUrl": "https://www.podtrac.com/pts/redirect.mp3/traffic.megaphone.fm/KQINC3564270102.mp3",
"sticky": false,
"templateType": "standard",
"featuredImageType": "standard",
"excludeFromSiteSearch": "Include",
"articleAge": "0",
"path": "/news/12102004/prop-44-requires-health-clinics-to-spend-more-on-patient-care",
"audioTrackLength": null,
"parsedContent": [
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>\n\u003ch2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Transcript\u003c/h2>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>There are about 2,000 community clinics providing health care here in California.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>These clinics typically serve patients who don’t have any other options. Low-income people or those who are under-insured often go to these clinics for things like vaccines, mental health, and social services.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>They’re also funded in part by our tax dollars. But one union says these clinics aren’t spending enough of their money on patients. And that’s where Proposition 44 comes in.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Prop 44 would force community health clinics to spend 90% of their revenue on health care services or face penalties from the state.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>Will Prop 44 help make healthcare dollars go where they belong? Or could it lead these clinics to cut services or even shut down entirely?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>That’s for you to decide.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>I’m Ericka Cruz Guevarra, host of The Bay.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And I’m Olivia Allen-Price, host of Bay Curious.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>And welcome back to Prop Fest, a collaboration between The Bay and Bay Curious. Today, we’re walking you through Proposition 44. Here’s how it reads on your ballot.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Speaker: \u003c/strong>Prop 44 requires community health clinics spend 90% of revenue on program services.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>Here to help us break this all down is KQED health correspondent, Lesley McClurg. Hey there, Lesley!\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Lesley McClurg: \u003c/strong>Hello.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>What exactly would Prop 44 change for these clinics?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Lesley McClurg: \u003c/strong>The clinics would have to prove that they are spending 90% of their revenue, so they are tax-funded clinics, so they would have to prove they’re spending 90 percent of that money on health care services, so basically medical offerings for their patients. At the end of the day, the attorney general would decide on exactly what qualifies within that 90%. If the clinics don’t comply, they would face fines. Although the penalties that they would have to pay could be returned to them if they were able to hit that 90% quota spending target basically within five years.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>Lesley, who put Proposition 44 on the ballot, and what is the problem that they say they’re trying to solve with Prop 44?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Lesley McClurg: \u003c/strong>The proponents of Prop 44 are SEIU, United Health Care Workers West, which is the union that represents health care workers.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Renee Saldana: \u003c/strong>I’d like to remind folks that community clinics were started with the mission of serving some of the folks in California that need these services the most.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Lesley McClurg: \u003c/strong>I spoke with Renee Saldana, the press secretary for the union, and she said the union is really trying to ensure that clinics are investing their money correctly.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Renee Saldana: \u003c/strong>It’s essentially anything that would help patients receive care or the direct care itself. So this includes medical visits, lab tests and x-rays, preventative care, of course, like vaccines and screenings, mammograms, things like outreach, transportation, language interpretation…\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Lesley McClurg: \u003c/strong>They have found that some clinics are using their revenue poorly, maybe even wasting it on anything that the union says could be, say, unnecessary administrative costs. So they’re spending too much on running the clinic rather than putting that money towards patients. Maybe spending too much on fundraising. But the main thing that they’re pointing out is potentially executive compensation, so over bloated salaries for the top, for the people who are running these clinics.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Renee Saldana: \u003c/strong>So I think a lot of Californians really understand how important these clinics are to our healthcare system and they wanna make sure that they are prioritizing patients by spending our public dollars where the dollars are needed most, which is directly on patient care and other mission-related services.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Lesley McClurg: \u003c/strong>The California Legislative Analyst’s Office, which is a nonpartisan fiscal advisor, notes that these clinics currently spend, on average, about 80% of their revenue on healthcare services, although it does vary and depend on each individual clinic. But the yes on 44 or the union believes that that really should be 90% across the board.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>And do they also mention, I mean, these cuts that we’ve seen to health care at the federal level as a reason also to pass this?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Lesley McClurg: \u003c/strong>Absolutely. So you’ve got this H.R.1, which is the federal bill, it’s also been called, you know, the big, beautiful bill. But basically, the Trump administration is heavily cutting federal funding for medical care. And so these clinics are going to be hurting and working on a much tighter budget. And so the union is arguing that they need to ensure that these clinics are using their budgets as well as possible so that best care can reach patients. Since it’s a really hard time to ensure that everybody has the medical care that they need under these federal cuts.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Renee Saldana: \u003c/strong>Again, all we want is that these clinics are able to stay open when these health care cuts from H.R.1 really hit California next year.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>So you have SEIU, the union that represents many healthcare workers in favor of Prop 44. Any other groups in favor of this measure?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Lesley McClurg: \u003c/strong>The only group that I’m aware of is the California Labor Federation is also in favor.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>We’ll have more on Prop 44 right after this. By the way, did you know that KQED is funded almost entirely by listeners just like you? Join the thousands of everyday listeners who help make this work happen. Just go to donate.kqed.org/podcasts. We’ll be right back. And we’re back talking about Prop 44 with KQED health correspondent, Lesley McClurg. Lesley, this measure has a long list of opponents actually, tell me a little bit more about who’s against Prop 44 and what their argument is?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Lesley McClurg: \u003c/strong>So it’s made up mostly of medical groups, although there are other groups in addition to the medical groups. But you’ve got the California Primary Care Association, the California Medical Association. You’ve got Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California. You’ve got the the California Hospital Association. And they are all worried that at the end of the day the clinics would fail to meet the spending threshold and that the non-compliance fees that these clinics would ultimately be forced to pay would end up leading to either significantly reduced services at these clinics or even force some of these clinics to close.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Mark Shotwell: \u003c/strong>Health centers do a great job of managing those funds, getting high quality healthcare outcomes and this ballot measure would really erode our ability to do that.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Lesley McClurg: \u003c/strong>I spoke specifically with Mark Shotwell. He’s the CEO of Ritter Center. This is a nonprofit who serves a largely unhoused population in San Rafael. And he says about 30% of their costs under his… and this is his opinion, would not qualify as quote health care services.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Mark Shotwell: \u003c/strong>Things like telehealth services, patient navigation, transportation to ensure that people get to their necessary medical appointments or translation services.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Lesley McClurg: \u003c/strong>He said these are wraparound services like education, housing, home health care. These are all services that he worries would not qualify as direct medical care, you know, offerings and that they would end up, the clinic, Ritter Clinic would end paying kind of precious dollars on penalties when they’re already operating on a really tight budget.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Mark Shotwell: \u003c/strong>They’ve decided to focus on CEO or executive salaries and that somehow that’s a problem that we’re not having money go to the patients. It also doesn’t include things like human resources or accounting or IT. So these are all necessary services to run a health clinic. And we have the oversight of family members, boards, the state of California, the federal government. These are highly regulated environments to ensure that patients are getting the very best services, so it’s also unnecessary.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>So then, Lesley, if Prop 44 actually passes, then 90% of the revenue at these clinics must be spent on healthcare services, as you said. But it seems like the yes and the no sides aren’t really on the same page about what exactly falls under the umbrella of healthcare services. You have Renee on the yes side who’s saying it covers anything related to patient care, but then you have Mark on the no side who says, that this would threaten really essential services at his clinic, so what exactly am I supposed to make of this as a voter?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Lesley McClurg: \u003c/strong>Yeah, it’s not clear. The yes and no sides are telling me very different things about how this 90% would be defined. The LAO says that the state attorney general would be able to define in more detail which kinds of expenses would qualify. The proposition is not quite as simple as it looks on the ballot. You also have a background that I think is important to know about, which is that there has been pressure to unionize these clinics and some of these clinics have said no to that pressure. There’s an argument from the opponents that this bill is a push or kind of like a political pressure to be like, okay, we’re going to put this thing on the ballot, that’s not going to, that’s going to be really hard for you to meet, if you don’t unionize. Now the union denies that that is part of their agenda, but the opponents arguing that that could potentially be at play here and there has been a past, there’s a history here of SEIU, has filed ballot measures in the past for organizations that have resisted unionization. This includes a series of recent measures that would have placed new regulations on dialysis clinics. So that there is a history there of SEIU doing this. And again, they’re denying it in this moment, but potentially that’s also at play.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>What’s going on with campaign spending on Prop 44 on both the yes and the no sides?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Lesley McClurg: \u003c/strong>According to CalMatters, who has been reporting on this, they note that SEIU has raised $16.9 million, and the opponents, all those different medical groups, et cetera, have raised about $37.5 million. So more than twice as much has been raised by the opponents.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>Well Lesley, I appreciate you for breaking this one down for us. Thank you so much.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Lesley McClurg: \u003c/strong>Thank you.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>In a nutshell, a yes vote on this measure means certain private non-profit health care clinics would have to spend at least 90% of their revenue each year on providing health care services or face a fine. A no vote on the measure means this new requirement on health care clinic spending would not go into effect.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>That’s it for our latest episode of PropFest, a collaboration between The Bay and Bay Curious. You’re almost to the finish line.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>KQED.org/propfest is the place to return for all these PropFest breakdowns, and if this series is helping you, do us a favor and tell one friend about it.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Word of mouth really helps our shows grow. PropFest is made possible thanks to Katrina Schwartz, Pauline Bartolone, Anna Casalme, Olivia Allen-Price:, Gabriela Glueck. Christopher Beale, Alan Montecillo.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>And me, Ericka Cruz Guevarra. We get extra support from Maha Sanad, Katie Springer, Jen Chien, Ethan Toven-Lindsey and everyone on Team KQED.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>Our show is made in San Francisco at member-supported KQED. Support for The Bay is provided in part by the Osher Production Fund. Some members of the KQED podcast team are represented by the Screen Actors Guild, American Federation of Television and Radio Artists, San Francisco, Northern California Local.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>I’m Ericka Cruz Guevarra.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And I’m Olivia Allen-Price:. Thanks for listening.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cem>Some members of the KQED podcast team are represented by The Screen Actors Guild, American Federation of Television and Radio Artists, San Francisco-Northern California Local.\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n\u003c/div>\u003c/p>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
}
],
"link": "/news/12102004/prop-44-requires-health-clinics-to-spend-more-on-patient-care",
"authors": [
"8654",
"11229",
"11946",
"11649"
],
"programs": [
"news_34552",
"news_33523"
],
"series": [
"news_17986"
],
"categories": [
"news_457",
"news_8",
"news_33520"
],
"tags": [
"news_35118",
"news_33812",
"news_28645",
"news_22598"
],
"featImg": "news_12061658",
"label": "source_news_12102004"
},
"news_12102140": {
"type": "posts",
"id": "news_12102140",
"meta": {
"index": "posts_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "12102140",
"score": null,
"sort": [
1791367200000
]
},
"guestAuthors": [],
"slug": "prop-43-raises-voter-threshold-for-some-local-tax-measures",
"title": "Prop 43: Raises Voter Threshold for Some Local Tax Measures",
"publishDate": 1791367200,
"format": "standard",
"headTitle": "Prop 43: Raises Voter Threshold for Some Local Tax Measures | KQED",
"labelTerm": {},
"content": "\n\u003ch2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Transcript\u003c/h2>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price \u003c/strong>[00:00:00] How much support do you think something should have to pass? 50% plus one? A simple majority? Or much more, like two-thirds in favor?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:00:11] Now in California, certain tax measures only require a simple majority of yes votes, while others require more.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price \u003c/strong>[00:00:20] And that all depends on how the tax got on the ballot in the first place.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:00:26] If a special tax put on a ballot by citizens through signature gathering, it only needs a simple majority to pass. A special tax is a tax for a specific purpose, like policing, housing, or homeless services.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price \u003c/strong>[00:00:41] But Proposition 43 would raise that threshold and require more support for special tax measures, even if citizens put it on the ballot.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price \u003c/strong>[00:00:52] I’m Olivia Allen-Price, host of Bay Curious.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:00:55] And I’m Ericka Cruz Guevarra, host of The Bay.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price \u003c/strong>[00:00:58] Welcome to Prop Fest, a collaboration between The Bay and Bay Curious. We’re back at it again with another prop breakdown to get you prepped to vote with confidence this November.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:01:09] Today, we’re walking you through Proposition 43. Here’s how it reads on your ballot.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Voiceover \u003c/strong>[00:01:14] Prop 43 limits voters’ ability to raise revenues for local government services.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:01:24] Here to break down Prop 43 for us is KQED’s politics and government correspondent, Guy Marzorati.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:01:30] Hey.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:01:30] Guy. Hey. Guy, let’s just dive in here. What is Prop 43 all about?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:01:35] Yeah, so Proposition 43 is all about raising the voter threshold for citizen initiatives to pass at the local level. So what does that mean? If there is a ballot measure placed on the ballot through citizens gathering signatures, this would require that measure to get two thirds support. So super majority support. If the tax measure is asking voters to raise taxes for a specific issue. And what this measure is in response to. Is what we’ve seen over the last decade where through a series of court decisions, it’s become easier to pass taxes on the local level if citizens through the signature process are bringing a tax proposal to the ballot instead of having elected officials place taxes on a ballot directly.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:02:21] And what’s the difference between a general tax and a special tax?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:02:25] So a general tax is a tax that could go fund anything. It goes into the city or county’s general fund and elected officials can decide how to spend it however they want. A special tax says this money, if the tax passes, has to go to this specific thing. So maybe it has to build new housing or maybe it had to go fund police and fire. But there’s a specific written description of what the tax would go to that really governs how it’s used. So again, special taxes, money that’s going towards a specific thing, if those are placed on the ballot by elected officials, they require a two thirds vote. And that is how it used to be for any special tax for a long time, until about 2017 when there was a court decision that said, actually, if voters gather signatures and put a special tax on the ballot, it only requires a majority vote. What Proposition 43 does is return it to how it used to be where any special tax that’s on the ballot locally will require a two-thirds support.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:03:31] And why is there a difference there?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:03:34] Yeah, so this was really just a court interpretation of the law that had been on the books. Proposition 13, which is passed by California voters in the late 70s, said that these special taxes placed on the ballot by local government needed a two thirds vote to pass. And what the court questioned was whether the word government actually applied to the entire citizenry. So folks who are collecting signatures to put things on the They said, well, that doesn’t count as government putting it on the ballot. So that’s when you started to see the difference and you started see some real effects even here in the Bay Area. Look at Proposition C, for example, in San Francisco, 2018. This was a really high profile campaign around raising business taxes specifically to fund homelessness. Now, this was a special tax. The money that was collected had to go towards homelessness services, but it was put on the ballot through the signature process. And as a result, it was able to pass, even though the measure did not get two-thirds support, it got just over 60% support, but it able to take effect and bringing a lot of money to the city. For homelessness services. You even see it on the ballot in the Bay Area this year when voters are considering this region-wide transportation measure that’s only gonna require a majority vote to raise the sales tax to fund to fund BART, to fund Muni, Caltrain, because it was put on the ballet by a group of citizen signatures.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:05:06] That’s interesting. So whatever happens with Prop 43 has the potential to change how we vote on these kinds of measures you were just talking about.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:05:14] Exactly. Now it wouldn’t affect anything that’s on the ballot this year.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:05:18] Mm-hmm\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:05:19] But if Prop 43 passes, those could be kind of the last of their kind and going forward, we would end up in a situation where those kind of campaigns who are asking for tax increases for very specific purposes would need a two-thirds support.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:05:39] I mean, obviously those are big issues and big measures facing us here in the Bay Area. I mean is this push for a super majority vote on tax measures like this a new idea?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:05:53] No, this is not a new idea. It’s actually something that has been pushed by anti-tax groups ever since those decisions following 2017. And these groups, the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, most notably, have argued that the courts betrayed the purpose of Prop 13, that they went and created this kind of loophole that allowed these local tax increases with a majority vote when that was never meant to be the purpose, you know, behind this provision in Prop 13.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:06:26] You mentioned earlier the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association coming out for this, I mean I feel like that’s a name that I just hear often, but I mean who are they exactly and how might California voters sort of make sense of who this association is and what else they’ve been responsible for?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:06:45] Yeah, so the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, probably the most notable group in support of Proposition 43, and that goes back to their name, Howard Jarves. He was the proponent of Prop 13, the measure that limited property taxes and other taxes in the late 70s.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Voiceover\u003c/strong>[00:07:02] A thunderous response for Howard Jarvis, the 75-year-old millionaire who’s been campaigning for 15 years against taxes. This time Jarvis has done it, succeeded with America’s first tax revolution since T was tipped into Boston Harbor.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:07:18] And this is a group that ever since has been committed to reducing taxes in California, and they see Prop 43 as the next important step to do that.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Howard Jarvis \u003c/strong>[00:07:28] We have proven that here in California that we, the people, not the politicians, are still the boss.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:07:38] So, you know, you have those anti-tax groups who have been pushing against this and now they hope to change it with Proposition 43.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:07:52] We’ll have more on Proposition 43 right after this break. By the way, if you appreciate the work we’re doing here on PropFest, consider becoming a KQED sustaining member. Just go to donate.kqed.org slash podcasts. We’ll be right back.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:08:12] Well, let’s talk about the politics of this a little bit more. I mean, how did Prop 43 even get on the ballot in the first place? Who’s really behind it?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:08:24] The way this got on the ballot is kind of a long and winding road, but I’ll start at the end. This measure was placed on the ballot by the state legislature in a bill written by Democratic Assembly member Buffy Wicks from the East Bay.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Buffy Wicks \u003c/strong>[00:08:41] Thank you, Mr. Speaker and members, I rise to present ACA 22.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:08:44] Now the twist to this is that Buffy Wicks opposes this. She opposes the measure that she wrote to get this on the ballot. And the reason for that is that the measure she wrote was really a way to get anti-tax groups to remove a different proposal that they had already qualified for the ballot\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:09:04] Okay, what was the original measure that got taken off?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:09:08] You had anti-tax groups like the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association team up with developers and real estate interests to qualify a measure for the ballot earlier this year. And that measure both would have made these changes to the two-thirds requirements for local taxes. They also would have limited real estate transfer taxes, which are a tax that’s assessed when a real estate sale is made. So when a building is sold, when a home is sold in many cases. Local cities and counties apply transfer taxes on really expensive real estate sales. And developers have said this has gotten out of hand and it’s actually hurting development in the state. So the measure that they qualified both would have made this change on local taxes. It also would have capped real estate transfer taxes and it would have gone back and retroactively eliminated many real estate transferred taxes. And Jon Coupal, who’s president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association. Talked about why his group thinks this is important in an interview on KQED’s political breakdown.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Jon Coupal \u003c/strong>[00:10:12] We had a very expressed prohibition in the state constitution against real estate transfer taxes. And whenever the courts create a loophole, we have to come back and shut the door.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:10:24] Now this was seen by opponents as a really bad result for local governments, not only because it would have limited the ability to raise taxes going forward, but also cities rely on those transfer taxes. So there was an effort to try to negotiate and get this measure off the ballot.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Buffy Wicks \u003c/strong>[00:10:41] Politics is about choices and we often must navigate challenging decisions. Big picture, the vote today protects vital resources for our local communities and it removes the greatest threat to our cities and their fiscal health which is the Taxpayer Protection Act.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:10:56] So Buffy Wicks, in trying to craft this deal, basically wrote the measure that they committed to keeping on the ballot in exchange for getting the harsher limits on transfer taxes off of it. So she wrote it, it passed the legislature, it got placed on the ballet, and then she immediately made clear, I do not support this idea. This was just the only way I could get a proposal that I viewed as worse off of the ballot.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:11:24] Who else is coming out for prop 43?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:11:27] Yeah, so in addition to the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, we also have broad support across the Republican landscape in California. The California Republican Party supports Proposition 43. A bunch of other anti-tax groups also have jumped on board. And so you have kind of seen a partisan split in support and opposition to 43.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:11:50] Who else is coming out against Prop 43?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:11:54] So we’ve seen the California Democratic Party oppose Proposition 43 and also a lot of groups with ties to local government, which is no surprise. They feel like Prop 43 is gonna make it harder to get the revenue needed to run local governments. So for example, the California State Association of Counties, which represents county governments across the state and SCIU California, which a union that represents a lot local government employees. Who potentially could stand to lose if it’s harder for governments to raise revenue in the future.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:12:24] Guy, what is spending looking like for Proposition 43?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:12:29] So we’re seeing spending in support on paper far more than spending in opposition. Over $14 million spent in support of this. I should just say though that a lot of that money was spent before this idea actually made it onto the ballot. So back when the measure looked a lot different and it had the provisions around transfer taxes, we haven’t seen, for example, big spenders on this like the California Business Roundtable who poured in more than $9 million in support of this earlier in the year. They haven’t continued to spend after this final measure was on the ballot. So it’s unclear whether that big spending gap is actually gonna persist in practice through November.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:13:12] This one is this a little bit of a doozy. So I guess for voters, any advice as they just try and make sense of this particular ballot measure?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:13:23] Yeah, there’s definitely a lot of kind of twists and turns and complications into how this got onto the ballot. But I guess just to break down the arguments, supporters of prop 43 say if you want to tax residents for specific needs, there should be a broad support for that idea. It should be a two thirds support. If you’re going to raise taxes for a very earmarked cause, whether that be homelessness, public safety, whatever it is, it should be broad support behind it. And they want that two thirds requirement. On those local taxes. Opponents say this is not the time to make it harder for cities, for counties, for local governments to get revenue. A lot of cities and counties are already struggling with their budget. And by passing Proposition 43, it would be harder for citizens to bring tax measures on the ballot to bring more money into those local government coffers.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cem>Some members of the KQED podcast team are represented by The Screen Actors Guild, American Federation of Television and Radio Artists, San Francisco-Northern California Local.\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n",
"blocks": [
{
"blockName": "core/heading",
"attrs": {
"text": "Transcript",
"level": 2
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003ch2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Transcript\u003c/h2>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003ch2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Transcript\u003c/h2>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price \u003c/strong>[00:00:00] How much support do you think something should have to pass? 50% plus one? A simple majority? Or much more, like two-thirds in favor?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price \u003c/strong>[00:00:00] How much support do you think something should have to pass? 50% plus one? A simple majority? Or much more, like two-thirds in favor?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:00:11] Now in California, certain tax measures only require a simple majority of yes votes, while others require more.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:00:11] Now in California, certain tax measures only require a simple majority of yes votes, while others require more.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price \u003c/strong>[00:00:20] And that all depends on how the tax got on the ballot in the first place.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price \u003c/strong>[00:00:20] And that all depends on how the tax got on the ballot in the first place.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:00:26] If a special tax put on a ballot by citizens through signature gathering, it only needs a simple majority to pass. A special tax is a tax for a specific purpose, like policing, housing, or homeless services.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:00:26] If a special tax put on a ballot by citizens through signature gathering, it only needs a simple majority to pass. A special tax is a tax for a specific purpose, like policing, housing, or homeless services.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price \u003c/strong>[00:00:41] But Proposition 43 would raise that threshold and require more support for special tax measures, even if citizens put it on the ballot.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price \u003c/strong>[00:00:41] But Proposition 43 would raise that threshold and require more support for special tax measures, even if citizens put it on the ballot.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price \u003c/strong>[00:00:52] I’m Olivia Allen-Price, host of Bay Curious.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price \u003c/strong>[00:00:52] I’m Olivia Allen-Price, host of Bay Curious.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:00:55] And I’m Ericka Cruz Guevarra, host of The Bay.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:00:55] And I’m Ericka Cruz Guevarra, host of The Bay.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price \u003c/strong>[00:00:58] Welcome to Prop Fest, a collaboration between The Bay and Bay Curious. We’re back at it again with another prop breakdown to get you prepped to vote with confidence this November.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price \u003c/strong>[00:00:58] Welcome to Prop Fest, a collaboration between The Bay and Bay Curious. We’re back at it again with another prop breakdown to get you prepped to vote with confidence this November.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:01:09] Today, we’re walking you through Proposition 43. Here’s how it reads on your ballot.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:01:09] Today, we’re walking you through Proposition 43. Here’s how it reads on your ballot.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Voiceover \u003c/strong>[00:01:14] Prop 43 limits voters’ ability to raise revenues for local government services.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Voiceover \u003c/strong>[00:01:14] Prop 43 limits voters’ ability to raise revenues for local government services.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:01:24] Here to break down Prop 43 for us is KQED’s politics and government correspondent, Guy Marzorati.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:01:24] Here to break down Prop 43 for us is KQED’s politics and government correspondent, Guy Marzorati.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:01:30] Hey.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:01:30] Hey.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:01:30] Guy. Hey. Guy, let’s just dive in here. What is Prop 43 all about?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:01:30] Guy. Hey. Guy, let’s just dive in here. What is Prop 43 all about?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:01:35] Yeah, so Proposition 43 is all about raising the voter threshold for citizen initiatives to pass at the local level. So what does that mean? If there is a ballot measure placed on the ballot through citizens gathering signatures, this would require that measure to get two thirds support. So super majority support. If the tax measure is asking voters to raise taxes for a specific issue. And what this measure is in response to. Is what we’ve seen over the last decade where through a series of court decisions, it’s become easier to pass taxes on the local level if citizens through the signature process are bringing a tax proposal to the ballot instead of having elected officials place taxes on a ballot directly.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:01:35] Yeah, so Proposition 43 is all about raising the voter threshold for citizen initiatives to pass at the local level. So what does that mean? If there is a ballot measure placed on the ballot through citizens gathering signatures, this would require that measure to get two thirds support. So super majority support. If the tax measure is asking voters to raise taxes for a specific issue. And what this measure is in response to. Is what we’ve seen over the last decade where through a series of court decisions, it’s become easier to pass taxes on the local level if citizens through the signature process are bringing a tax proposal to the ballot instead of having elected officials place taxes on a ballot directly.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:02:21] And what’s the difference between a general tax and a special tax?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:02:21] And what’s the difference between a general tax and a special tax?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:02:25] So a general tax is a tax that could go fund anything. It goes into the city or county’s general fund and elected officials can decide how to spend it however they want. A special tax says this money, if the tax passes, has to go to this specific thing. So maybe it has to build new housing or maybe it had to go fund police and fire. But there’s a specific written description of what the tax would go to that really governs how it’s used. So again, special taxes, money that’s going towards a specific thing, if those are placed on the ballot by elected officials, they require a two thirds vote. And that is how it used to be for any special tax for a long time, until about 2017 when there was a court decision that said, actually, if voters gather signatures and put a special tax on the ballot, it only requires a majority vote. What Proposition 43 does is return it to how it used to be where any special tax that’s on the ballot locally will require a two-thirds support.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:02:25] So a general tax is a tax that could go fund anything. It goes into the city or county’s general fund and elected officials can decide how to spend it however they want. A special tax says this money, if the tax passes, has to go to this specific thing. So maybe it has to build new housing or maybe it had to go fund police and fire. But there’s a specific written description of what the tax would go to that really governs how it’s used. So again, special taxes, money that’s going towards a specific thing, if those are placed on the ballot by elected officials, they require a two thirds vote. And that is how it used to be for any special tax for a long time, until about 2017 when there was a court decision that said, actually, if voters gather signatures and put a special tax on the ballot, it only requires a majority vote. What Proposition 43 does is return it to how it used to be where any special tax that’s on the ballot locally will require a two-thirds support.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:03:31] And why is there a difference there?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:03:31] And why is there a difference there?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:03:34] Yeah, so this was really just a court interpretation of the law that had been on the books. Proposition 13, which is passed by California voters in the late 70s, said that these special taxes placed on the ballot by local government needed a two thirds vote to pass. And what the court questioned was whether the word government actually applied to the entire citizenry. So folks who are collecting signatures to put things on the They said, well, that doesn’t count as government putting it on the ballot. So that’s when you started to see the difference and you started see some real effects even here in the Bay Area. Look at Proposition C, for example, in San Francisco, 2018. This was a really high profile campaign around raising business taxes specifically to fund homelessness. Now, this was a special tax. The money that was collected had to go towards homelessness services, but it was put on the ballot through the signature process. And as a result, it was able to pass, even though the measure did not get two-thirds support, it got just over 60% support, but it able to take effect and bringing a lot of money to the city. For homelessness services. You even see it on the ballot in the Bay Area this year when voters are considering this region-wide transportation measure that’s only gonna require a majority vote to raise the sales tax to fund to fund BART, to fund Muni, Caltrain, because it was put on the ballet by a group of citizen signatures.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:03:34] Yeah, so this was really just a court interpretation of the law that had been on the books. Proposition 13, which is passed by California voters in the late 70s, said that these special taxes placed on the ballot by local government needed a two thirds vote to pass. And what the court questioned was whether the word government actually applied to the entire citizenry. So folks who are collecting signatures to put things on the They said, well, that doesn’t count as government putting it on the ballot. So that’s when you started to see the difference and you started see some real effects even here in the Bay Area. Look at Proposition C, for example, in San Francisco, 2018. This was a really high profile campaign around raising business taxes specifically to fund homelessness. Now, this was a special tax. The money that was collected had to go towards homelessness services, but it was put on the ballot through the signature process. And as a result, it was able to pass, even though the measure did not get two-thirds support, it got just over 60% support, but it able to take effect and bringing a lot of money to the city. For homelessness services. You even see it on the ballot in the Bay Area this year when voters are considering this region-wide transportation measure that’s only gonna require a majority vote to raise the sales tax to fund to fund BART, to fund Muni, Caltrain, because it was put on the ballet by a group of citizen signatures.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:05:06] That’s interesting. So whatever happens with Prop 43 has the potential to change how we vote on these kinds of measures you were just talking about.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:05:06] That’s interesting. So whatever happens with Prop 43 has the potential to change how we vote on these kinds of measures you were just talking about.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:05:14] Exactly. Now it wouldn’t affect anything that’s on the ballot this year.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:05:14] Exactly. Now it wouldn’t affect anything that’s on the ballot this year.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:05:18] Mm-hmm\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:05:18] Mm-hmm\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:05:19] But if Prop 43 passes, those could be kind of the last of their kind and going forward, we would end up in a situation where those kind of campaigns who are asking for tax increases for very specific purposes would need a two-thirds support.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:05:19] But if Prop 43 passes, those could be kind of the last of their kind and going forward, we would end up in a situation where those kind of campaigns who are asking for tax increases for very specific purposes would need a two-thirds support.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:05:39] I mean, obviously those are big issues and big measures facing us here in the Bay Area. I mean is this push for a super majority vote on tax measures like this a new idea?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:05:39] I mean, obviously those are big issues and big measures facing us here in the Bay Area. I mean is this push for a super majority vote on tax measures like this a new idea?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:05:53] No, this is not a new idea. It’s actually something that has been pushed by anti-tax groups ever since those decisions following 2017. And these groups, the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, most notably, have argued that the courts betrayed the purpose of Prop 13, that they went and created this kind of loophole that allowed these local tax increases with a majority vote when that was never meant to be the purpose, you know, behind this provision in Prop 13.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:05:53] No, this is not a new idea. It’s actually something that has been pushed by anti-tax groups ever since those decisions following 2017. And these groups, the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, most notably, have argued that the courts betrayed the purpose of Prop 13, that they went and created this kind of loophole that allowed these local tax increases with a majority vote when that was never meant to be the purpose, you know, behind this provision in Prop 13.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:06:26] You mentioned earlier the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association coming out for this, I mean I feel like that’s a name that I just hear often, but I mean who are they exactly and how might California voters sort of make sense of who this association is and what else they’ve been responsible for?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:06:26] You mentioned earlier the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association coming out for this, I mean I feel like that’s a name that I just hear often, but I mean who are they exactly and how might California voters sort of make sense of who this association is and what else they’ve been responsible for?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:06:45] Yeah, so the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, probably the most notable group in support of Proposition 43, and that goes back to their name, Howard Jarves. He was the proponent of Prop 13, the measure that limited property taxes and other taxes in the late 70s.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:06:45] Yeah, so the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, probably the most notable group in support of Proposition 43, and that goes back to their name, Howard Jarves. He was the proponent of Prop 13, the measure that limited property taxes and other taxes in the late 70s.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Voiceover\u003c/strong>[00:07:02] A thunderous response for Howard Jarvis, the 75-year-old millionaire who’s been campaigning for 15 years against taxes. This time Jarvis has done it, succeeded with America’s first tax revolution since T was tipped into Boston Harbor.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Voiceover\u003c/strong>[00:07:02] A thunderous response for Howard Jarvis, the 75-year-old millionaire who’s been campaigning for 15 years against taxes. This time Jarvis has done it, succeeded with America’s first tax revolution since T was tipped into Boston Harbor.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:07:18] And this is a group that ever since has been committed to reducing taxes in California, and they see Prop 43 as the next important step to do that.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:07:18] And this is a group that ever since has been committed to reducing taxes in California, and they see Prop 43 as the next important step to do that.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Howard Jarvis \u003c/strong>[00:07:28] We have proven that here in California that we, the people, not the politicians, are still the boss.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Howard Jarvis \u003c/strong>[00:07:28] We have proven that here in California that we, the people, not the politicians, are still the boss.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:07:38] So, you know, you have those anti-tax groups who have been pushing against this and now they hope to change it with Proposition 43.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:07:38] So, you know, you have those anti-tax groups who have been pushing against this and now they hope to change it with Proposition 43.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:07:52] We’ll have more on Proposition 43 right after this break. By the way, if you appreciate the work we’re doing here on PropFest, consider becoming a KQED sustaining member. Just go to donate.kqed.org slash podcasts. We’ll be right back.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:07:52] We’ll have more on Proposition 43 right after this break. By the way, if you appreciate the work we’re doing here on PropFest, consider becoming a KQED sustaining member. Just go to donate.kqed.org slash podcasts. We’ll be right back.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:08:12] Well, let’s talk about the politics of this a little bit more. I mean, how did Prop 43 even get on the ballot in the first place? Who’s really behind it?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:08:12] Well, let’s talk about the politics of this a little bit more. I mean, how did Prop 43 even get on the ballot in the first place? Who’s really behind it?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:08:24] The way this got on the ballot is kind of a long and winding road, but I’ll start at the end. This measure was placed on the ballot by the state legislature in a bill written by Democratic Assembly member Buffy Wicks from the East Bay.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:08:24] The way this got on the ballot is kind of a long and winding road, but I’ll start at the end. This measure was placed on the ballot by the state legislature in a bill written by Democratic Assembly member Buffy Wicks from the East Bay.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Buffy Wicks \u003c/strong>[00:08:41] Thank you, Mr. Speaker and members, I rise to present ACA 22.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Buffy Wicks \u003c/strong>[00:08:41] Thank you, Mr. Speaker and members, I rise to present ACA 22.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:08:44] Now the twist to this is that Buffy Wicks opposes this. She opposes the measure that she wrote to get this on the ballot. And the reason for that is that the measure she wrote was really a way to get anti-tax groups to remove a different proposal that they had already qualified for the ballot\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:08:44] Now the twist to this is that Buffy Wicks opposes this. She opposes the measure that she wrote to get this on the ballot. And the reason for that is that the measure she wrote was really a way to get anti-tax groups to remove a different proposal that they had already qualified for the ballot\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:09:04] Okay, what was the original measure that got taken off?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:09:04] Okay, what was the original measure that got taken off?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:09:08] You had anti-tax groups like the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association team up with developers and real estate interests to qualify a measure for the ballot earlier this year. And that measure both would have made these changes to the two-thirds requirements for local taxes. They also would have limited real estate transfer taxes, which are a tax that’s assessed when a real estate sale is made. So when a building is sold, when a home is sold in many cases. Local cities and counties apply transfer taxes on really expensive real estate sales. And developers have said this has gotten out of hand and it’s actually hurting development in the state. So the measure that they qualified both would have made this change on local taxes. It also would have capped real estate transfer taxes and it would have gone back and retroactively eliminated many real estate transferred taxes. And Jon Coupal, who’s president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association. Talked about why his group thinks this is important in an interview on KQED’s political breakdown.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:09:08] You had anti-tax groups like the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association team up with developers and real estate interests to qualify a measure for the ballot earlier this year. And that measure both would have made these changes to the two-thirds requirements for local taxes. They also would have limited real estate transfer taxes, which are a tax that’s assessed when a real estate sale is made. So when a building is sold, when a home is sold in many cases. Local cities and counties apply transfer taxes on really expensive real estate sales. And developers have said this has gotten out of hand and it’s actually hurting development in the state. So the measure that they qualified both would have made this change on local taxes. It also would have capped real estate transfer taxes and it would have gone back and retroactively eliminated many real estate transferred taxes. And Jon Coupal, who’s president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association. Talked about why his group thinks this is important in an interview on KQED’s political breakdown.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Jon Coupal \u003c/strong>[00:10:12] We had a very expressed prohibition in the state constitution against real estate transfer taxes. And whenever the courts create a loophole, we have to come back and shut the door.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Jon Coupal \u003c/strong>[00:10:12] We had a very expressed prohibition in the state constitution against real estate transfer taxes. And whenever the courts create a loophole, we have to come back and shut the door.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:10:24] Now this was seen by opponents as a really bad result for local governments, not only because it would have limited the ability to raise taxes going forward, but also cities rely on those transfer taxes. So there was an effort to try to negotiate and get this measure off the ballot.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:10:24] Now this was seen by opponents as a really bad result for local governments, not only because it would have limited the ability to raise taxes going forward, but also cities rely on those transfer taxes. So there was an effort to try to negotiate and get this measure off the ballot.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Buffy Wicks \u003c/strong>[00:10:41] Politics is about choices and we often must navigate challenging decisions. Big picture, the vote today protects vital resources for our local communities and it removes the greatest threat to our cities and their fiscal health which is the Taxpayer Protection Act.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Buffy Wicks \u003c/strong>[00:10:41] Politics is about choices and we often must navigate challenging decisions. Big picture, the vote today protects vital resources for our local communities and it removes the greatest threat to our cities and their fiscal health which is the Taxpayer Protection Act.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:10:56] So Buffy Wicks, in trying to craft this deal, basically wrote the measure that they committed to keeping on the ballot in exchange for getting the harsher limits on transfer taxes off of it. So she wrote it, it passed the legislature, it got placed on the ballet, and then she immediately made clear, I do not support this idea. This was just the only way I could get a proposal that I viewed as worse off of the ballot.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:10:56] So Buffy Wicks, in trying to craft this deal, basically wrote the measure that they committed to keeping on the ballot in exchange for getting the harsher limits on transfer taxes off of it. So she wrote it, it passed the legislature, it got placed on the ballet, and then she immediately made clear, I do not support this idea. This was just the only way I could get a proposal that I viewed as worse off of the ballot.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:11:24] Who else is coming out for prop 43?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:11:24] Who else is coming out for prop 43?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:11:27] Yeah, so in addition to the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, we also have broad support across the Republican landscape in California. The California Republican Party supports Proposition 43. A bunch of other anti-tax groups also have jumped on board. And so you have kind of seen a partisan split in support and opposition to 43.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:11:27] Yeah, so in addition to the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, we also have broad support across the Republican landscape in California. The California Republican Party supports Proposition 43. A bunch of other anti-tax groups also have jumped on board. And so you have kind of seen a partisan split in support and opposition to 43.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:11:50] Who else is coming out against Prop 43?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:11:50] Who else is coming out against Prop 43?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:11:54] So we’ve seen the California Democratic Party oppose Proposition 43 and also a lot of groups with ties to local government, which is no surprise. They feel like Prop 43 is gonna make it harder to get the revenue needed to run local governments. So for example, the California State Association of Counties, which represents county governments across the state and SCIU California, which a union that represents a lot local government employees. Who potentially could stand to lose if it’s harder for governments to raise revenue in the future.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:11:54] So we’ve seen the California Democratic Party oppose Proposition 43 and also a lot of groups with ties to local government, which is no surprise. They feel like Prop 43 is gonna make it harder to get the revenue needed to run local governments. So for example, the California State Association of Counties, which represents county governments across the state and SCIU California, which a union that represents a lot local government employees. Who potentially could stand to lose if it’s harder for governments to raise revenue in the future.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:12:24] Guy, what is spending looking like for Proposition 43?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:12:24] Guy, what is spending looking like for Proposition 43?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:12:29] So we’re seeing spending in support on paper far more than spending in opposition. Over $14 million spent in support of this. I should just say though that a lot of that money was spent before this idea actually made it onto the ballot. So back when the measure looked a lot different and it had the provisions around transfer taxes, we haven’t seen, for example, big spenders on this like the California Business Roundtable who poured in more than $9 million in support of this earlier in the year. They haven’t continued to spend after this final measure was on the ballot. So it’s unclear whether that big spending gap is actually gonna persist in practice through November.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:12:29] So we’re seeing spending in support on paper far more than spending in opposition. Over $14 million spent in support of this. I should just say though that a lot of that money was spent before this idea actually made it onto the ballot. So back when the measure looked a lot different and it had the provisions around transfer taxes, we haven’t seen, for example, big spenders on this like the California Business Roundtable who poured in more than $9 million in support of this earlier in the year. They haven’t continued to spend after this final measure was on the ballot. So it’s unclear whether that big spending gap is actually gonna persist in practice through November.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:13:12] This one is this a little bit of a doozy. So I guess for voters, any advice as they just try and make sense of this particular ballot measure?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:13:12] This one is this a little bit of a doozy. So I guess for voters, any advice as they just try and make sense of this particular ballot measure?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:13:23] Yeah, there’s definitely a lot of kind of twists and turns and complications into how this got onto the ballot. But I guess just to break down the arguments, supporters of prop 43 say if you want to tax residents for specific needs, there should be a broad support for that idea. It should be a two thirds support. If you’re going to raise taxes for a very earmarked cause, whether that be homelessness, public safety, whatever it is, it should be broad support behind it. And they want that two thirds requirement. On those local taxes. Opponents say this is not the time to make it harder for cities, for counties, for local governments to get revenue. A lot of cities and counties are already struggling with their budget. And by passing Proposition 43, it would be harder for citizens to bring tax measures on the ballot to bring more money into those local government coffers.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:13:23] Yeah, there’s definitely a lot of kind of twists and turns and complications into how this got onto the ballot. But I guess just to break down the arguments, supporters of prop 43 say if you want to tax residents for specific needs, there should be a broad support for that idea. It should be a two thirds support. If you’re going to raise taxes for a very earmarked cause, whether that be homelessness, public safety, whatever it is, it should be broad support behind it. And they want that two thirds requirement. On those local taxes. Opponents say this is not the time to make it harder for cities, for counties, for local governments to get revenue. A lot of cities and counties are already struggling with their budget. And by passing Proposition 43, it would be harder for citizens to bring tax measures on the ballot to bring more money into those local government coffers.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cem>Some members of the KQED podcast team are represented by The Screen Actors Guild, American Federation of Television and Radio Artists, San Francisco-Northern California Local.\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cem>Some members of the KQED podcast team are represented by The Screen Actors Guild, American Federation of Television and Radio Artists, San Francisco-Northern California Local.\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
}
],
"excerpt": "If passed, Prop 43 would make it harder for voters to approve citizen-led local tax measures.",
"status": "publish",
"parent": 0,
"modified": 1790793060,
"stats": {
"hasAudio": false,
"hasVideo": false,
"hasChartOrMap": false,
"iframeSrcs": [],
"hasGoogleForm": false,
"hasGallery": false,
"hasHearkenModule": false,
"hasPolis": false,
"paragraphCount": 50,
"wordCount": 2669
},
"headData": {
"title": "Prop 43: Raises Voter Threshold for Some Local Tax Measures | KQED",
"description": "If passed, Prop 43 would make it harder for voters to approve citizen-led local tax measures.",
"ogTitle": "",
"ogDescription": "",
"ogImgId": "",
"twTitle": "",
"twDescription": "",
"twImgId": "",
"socialDescription": "If passed, Prop 43 would make it harder for voters to approve citizen-led local tax measures.",
"schema": {
"@context": "https://schema.org",
"@type": "NewsArticle",
"headline": "Prop 43: Raises Voter Threshold for Some Local Tax Measures",
"datePublished": "2026-10-07T03:00:00-07:00",
"dateModified": "2026-09-30T11:31:00-07:00",
"image": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"isAccessibleForFree": "True",
"publisher": {
"@type": "NewsMediaOrganization",
"@id": "https://www.kqed.org/#organization",
"name": "KQED",
"logo": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"url": "https://www.kqed.org",
"sameAs": [
"https://www.facebook.com/KQED",
"https://twitter.com/KQED",
"https://www.instagram.com/kqed/",
"https://www.tiktok.com/@kqedofficial",
"https://www.linkedin.com/company/kqed",
"https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCeC0IOo7i1P_61zVUWbJ4nw"
]
}
}
},
"primaryCategory": {
"termId": 33520,
"slug": "podcast",
"name": "Podcast"
},
"source": "Prop Fest 2026",
"sourceUrl": "https://www.kqed.org/propfest",
"audioUrl": "https://www.podtrac.com/pts/redirect.mp3/traffic.megaphone.fm/KQINC5272960405.mp3",
"sticky": false,
"templateType": "standard",
"featuredImageType": "standard",
"excludeFromSiteSearch": "Include",
"articleAge": "0",
"path": "/news/12102140/prop-43-raises-voter-threshold-for-some-local-tax-measures",
"audioTrackLength": null,
"parsedContent": [
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>\n\u003ch2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Transcript\u003c/h2>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price \u003c/strong>[00:00:00] How much support do you think something should have to pass? 50% plus one? A simple majority? Or much more, like two-thirds in favor?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:00:11] Now in California, certain tax measures only require a simple majority of yes votes, while others require more.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price \u003c/strong>[00:00:20] And that all depends on how the tax got on the ballot in the first place.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:00:26] If a special tax put on a ballot by citizens through signature gathering, it only needs a simple majority to pass. A special tax is a tax for a specific purpose, like policing, housing, or homeless services.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price \u003c/strong>[00:00:41] But Proposition 43 would raise that threshold and require more support for special tax measures, even if citizens put it on the ballot.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price \u003c/strong>[00:00:52] I’m Olivia Allen-Price, host of Bay Curious.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:00:55] And I’m Ericka Cruz Guevarra, host of The Bay.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price \u003c/strong>[00:00:58] Welcome to Prop Fest, a collaboration between The Bay and Bay Curious. We’re back at it again with another prop breakdown to get you prepped to vote with confidence this November.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:01:09] Today, we’re walking you through Proposition 43. Here’s how it reads on your ballot.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Voiceover \u003c/strong>[00:01:14] Prop 43 limits voters’ ability to raise revenues for local government services.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:01:24] Here to break down Prop 43 for us is KQED’s politics and government correspondent, Guy Marzorati.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:01:30] Hey.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:01:30] Guy. Hey. Guy, let’s just dive in here. What is Prop 43 all about?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:01:35] Yeah, so Proposition 43 is all about raising the voter threshold for citizen initiatives to pass at the local level. So what does that mean? If there is a ballot measure placed on the ballot through citizens gathering signatures, this would require that measure to get two thirds support. So super majority support. If the tax measure is asking voters to raise taxes for a specific issue. And what this measure is in response to. Is what we’ve seen over the last decade where through a series of court decisions, it’s become easier to pass taxes on the local level if citizens through the signature process are bringing a tax proposal to the ballot instead of having elected officials place taxes on a ballot directly.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:02:21] And what’s the difference between a general tax and a special tax?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:02:25] So a general tax is a tax that could go fund anything. It goes into the city or county’s general fund and elected officials can decide how to spend it however they want. A special tax says this money, if the tax passes, has to go to this specific thing. So maybe it has to build new housing or maybe it had to go fund police and fire. But there’s a specific written description of what the tax would go to that really governs how it’s used. So again, special taxes, money that’s going towards a specific thing, if those are placed on the ballot by elected officials, they require a two thirds vote. And that is how it used to be for any special tax for a long time, until about 2017 when there was a court decision that said, actually, if voters gather signatures and put a special tax on the ballot, it only requires a majority vote. What Proposition 43 does is return it to how it used to be where any special tax that’s on the ballot locally will require a two-thirds support.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:03:31] And why is there a difference there?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:03:34] Yeah, so this was really just a court interpretation of the law that had been on the books. Proposition 13, which is passed by California voters in the late 70s, said that these special taxes placed on the ballot by local government needed a two thirds vote to pass. And what the court questioned was whether the word government actually applied to the entire citizenry. So folks who are collecting signatures to put things on the They said, well, that doesn’t count as government putting it on the ballot. So that’s when you started to see the difference and you started see some real effects even here in the Bay Area. Look at Proposition C, for example, in San Francisco, 2018. This was a really high profile campaign around raising business taxes specifically to fund homelessness. Now, this was a special tax. The money that was collected had to go towards homelessness services, but it was put on the ballot through the signature process. And as a result, it was able to pass, even though the measure did not get two-thirds support, it got just over 60% support, but it able to take effect and bringing a lot of money to the city. For homelessness services. You even see it on the ballot in the Bay Area this year when voters are considering this region-wide transportation measure that’s only gonna require a majority vote to raise the sales tax to fund to fund BART, to fund Muni, Caltrain, because it was put on the ballet by a group of citizen signatures.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:05:06] That’s interesting. So whatever happens with Prop 43 has the potential to change how we vote on these kinds of measures you were just talking about.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:05:14] Exactly. Now it wouldn’t affect anything that’s on the ballot this year.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:05:18] Mm-hmm\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:05:19] But if Prop 43 passes, those could be kind of the last of their kind and going forward, we would end up in a situation where those kind of campaigns who are asking for tax increases for very specific purposes would need a two-thirds support.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:05:39] I mean, obviously those are big issues and big measures facing us here in the Bay Area. I mean is this push for a super majority vote on tax measures like this a new idea?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:05:53] No, this is not a new idea. It’s actually something that has been pushed by anti-tax groups ever since those decisions following 2017. And these groups, the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, most notably, have argued that the courts betrayed the purpose of Prop 13, that they went and created this kind of loophole that allowed these local tax increases with a majority vote when that was never meant to be the purpose, you know, behind this provision in Prop 13.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:06:26] You mentioned earlier the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association coming out for this, I mean I feel like that’s a name that I just hear often, but I mean who are they exactly and how might California voters sort of make sense of who this association is and what else they’ve been responsible for?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:06:45] Yeah, so the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, probably the most notable group in support of Proposition 43, and that goes back to their name, Howard Jarves. He was the proponent of Prop 13, the measure that limited property taxes and other taxes in the late 70s.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Voiceover\u003c/strong>[00:07:02] A thunderous response for Howard Jarvis, the 75-year-old millionaire who’s been campaigning for 15 years against taxes. This time Jarvis has done it, succeeded with America’s first tax revolution since T was tipped into Boston Harbor.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:07:18] And this is a group that ever since has been committed to reducing taxes in California, and they see Prop 43 as the next important step to do that.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Howard Jarvis \u003c/strong>[00:07:28] We have proven that here in California that we, the people, not the politicians, are still the boss.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:07:38] So, you know, you have those anti-tax groups who have been pushing against this and now they hope to change it with Proposition 43.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:07:52] We’ll have more on Proposition 43 right after this break. By the way, if you appreciate the work we’re doing here on PropFest, consider becoming a KQED sustaining member. Just go to donate.kqed.org slash podcasts. We’ll be right back.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:08:12] Well, let’s talk about the politics of this a little bit more. I mean, how did Prop 43 even get on the ballot in the first place? Who’s really behind it?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:08:24] The way this got on the ballot is kind of a long and winding road, but I’ll start at the end. This measure was placed on the ballot by the state legislature in a bill written by Democratic Assembly member Buffy Wicks from the East Bay.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Buffy Wicks \u003c/strong>[00:08:41] Thank you, Mr. Speaker and members, I rise to present ACA 22.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:08:44] Now the twist to this is that Buffy Wicks opposes this. She opposes the measure that she wrote to get this on the ballot. And the reason for that is that the measure she wrote was really a way to get anti-tax groups to remove a different proposal that they had already qualified for the ballot\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:09:04] Okay, what was the original measure that got taken off?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:09:08] You had anti-tax groups like the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association team up with developers and real estate interests to qualify a measure for the ballot earlier this year. And that measure both would have made these changes to the two-thirds requirements for local taxes. They also would have limited real estate transfer taxes, which are a tax that’s assessed when a real estate sale is made. So when a building is sold, when a home is sold in many cases. Local cities and counties apply transfer taxes on really expensive real estate sales. And developers have said this has gotten out of hand and it’s actually hurting development in the state. So the measure that they qualified both would have made this change on local taxes. It also would have capped real estate transfer taxes and it would have gone back and retroactively eliminated many real estate transferred taxes. And Jon Coupal, who’s president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association. Talked about why his group thinks this is important in an interview on KQED’s political breakdown.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Jon Coupal \u003c/strong>[00:10:12] We had a very expressed prohibition in the state constitution against real estate transfer taxes. And whenever the courts create a loophole, we have to come back and shut the door.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:10:24] Now this was seen by opponents as a really bad result for local governments, not only because it would have limited the ability to raise taxes going forward, but also cities rely on those transfer taxes. So there was an effort to try to negotiate and get this measure off the ballot.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Buffy Wicks \u003c/strong>[00:10:41] Politics is about choices and we often must navigate challenging decisions. Big picture, the vote today protects vital resources for our local communities and it removes the greatest threat to our cities and their fiscal health which is the Taxpayer Protection Act.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:10:56] So Buffy Wicks, in trying to craft this deal, basically wrote the measure that they committed to keeping on the ballot in exchange for getting the harsher limits on transfer taxes off of it. So she wrote it, it passed the legislature, it got placed on the ballet, and then she immediately made clear, I do not support this idea. This was just the only way I could get a proposal that I viewed as worse off of the ballot.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:11:24] Who else is coming out for prop 43?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:11:27] Yeah, so in addition to the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, we also have broad support across the Republican landscape in California. The California Republican Party supports Proposition 43. A bunch of other anti-tax groups also have jumped on board. And so you have kind of seen a partisan split in support and opposition to 43.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:11:50] Who else is coming out against Prop 43?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:11:54] So we’ve seen the California Democratic Party oppose Proposition 43 and also a lot of groups with ties to local government, which is no surprise. They feel like Prop 43 is gonna make it harder to get the revenue needed to run local governments. So for example, the California State Association of Counties, which represents county governments across the state and SCIU California, which a union that represents a lot local government employees. Who potentially could stand to lose if it’s harder for governments to raise revenue in the future.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:12:24] Guy, what is spending looking like for Proposition 43?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:12:29] So we’re seeing spending in support on paper far more than spending in opposition. Over $14 million spent in support of this. I should just say though that a lot of that money was spent before this idea actually made it onto the ballot. So back when the measure looked a lot different and it had the provisions around transfer taxes, we haven’t seen, for example, big spenders on this like the California Business Roundtable who poured in more than $9 million in support of this earlier in the year. They haven’t continued to spend after this final measure was on the ballot. So it’s unclear whether that big spending gap is actually gonna persist in practice through November.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:13:12] This one is this a little bit of a doozy. So I guess for voters, any advice as they just try and make sense of this particular ballot measure?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:13:23] Yeah, there’s definitely a lot of kind of twists and turns and complications into how this got onto the ballot. But I guess just to break down the arguments, supporters of prop 43 say if you want to tax residents for specific needs, there should be a broad support for that idea. It should be a two thirds support. If you’re going to raise taxes for a very earmarked cause, whether that be homelessness, public safety, whatever it is, it should be broad support behind it. And they want that two thirds requirement. On those local taxes. Opponents say this is not the time to make it harder for cities, for counties, for local governments to get revenue. A lot of cities and counties are already struggling with their budget. And by passing Proposition 43, it would be harder for citizens to bring tax measures on the ballot to bring more money into those local government coffers.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cem>Some members of the KQED podcast team are represented by The Screen Actors Guild, American Federation of Television and Radio Artists, San Francisco-Northern California Local.\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n\u003c/div>\u003c/p>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
}
],
"link": "/news/12102140/prop-43-raises-voter-threshold-for-some-local-tax-measures",
"authors": [
"8654",
"227",
"11946",
"11649"
],
"programs": [
"news_33523",
"news_34552"
],
"series": [
"news_17986"
],
"categories": [
"news_1758",
"news_8",
"news_33520",
"news_13"
],
"tags": [
"news_33812",
"news_28645",
"news_423",
"news_22598"
],
"featImg": "news_12062350",
"label": "source_news_12102140"
},
"news_12101418": {
"type": "posts",
"id": "news_12101418",
"meta": {
"index": "posts_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "12101418",
"score": null,
"sort": [
1791281100000
]
},
"guestAuthors": [],
"slug": "prop-42-bans-new-state-taxes-on-personal-property",
"title": "Prop 42: Bans New State Taxes on Personal Property and Investments",
"publishDate": 1791281100,
"format": "standard",
"headTitle": "Prop 42: Bans New State Taxes on Personal Property and Investments | KQED",
"labelTerm": {},
"content": "\n\u003ch2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Episode Transcript:\u003c/h2>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price:\u003c/strong> Really wealthy people in America don’t just earn a regular paycheck and chuck those earnings into a savings account. Most of their net worth is tied up in assets like stocks and bonds.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>These assets are worth whatever the market says they’re worth on any given day. And if they increase in value…current law says that growth isn’t taxed while it sits there—it only gets taxed when an asset is actually sold.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price:\u003c/strong> Because the wealthy hold most of their fortunes as these paper assets, much of their growing wealth goes untaxed year after year. Is that a problem to fix? Or an essential part of the economy that keeps businesses humming?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra:\u003c/strong> How we tax \u003cem>wealth\u003c/em> is exactly what’s under discussion in Prop 42. Here’s how it reads on your ballot.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Voice Over:\u003c/strong> Prohibits new state personal property taxes and certain retroactive state taxes.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>(music)\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>I’m Erika Cruz-Gavarra, host of The Bay.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And I’m Olivia Allen-Price, host of Bay Curious. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>We are back with another edition of Prop Fest … where our teams at The Bay and Bay Curious break down each statewide proposition on the California ballot.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Today, we’re going through Proposition 42, which aims to prevent a wealth tax. Here to walk us through it is KQED political correspondent and co-host of the podcast, Political Breakdown, Marisa Lagos. Welcome, Marissa. Hey. Big picture. What is Prop 42 about?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos:\u003c/strong> Property too has to do with what taxes you pay on sort of what you own in California. This is specifically targeting monetary assets. So think about like you pay personal taxes on things like your car, right? Car registration is a type of tax. Part of that bill is based on the value of your car. You might pay property taxes, for example, right. But there are other types of personal property that aren’t taxed right now. And one big example is financial assets like stocks or investment accounts. So you’re not taxed on your retirement account just for having one, right? You get taxed that money when you take it out to spend it. People with stock portfolios are not tax on that either until they try to remove the money and you pay capital gains on whatever the increase has been. So, the investments themselves, though, are not taxed right now. Prop 42 wants to codify the status quo in the Constitution in California, basically by saying you cannot tax monetary assets. And it also does a second thing, which is what opponents say is the real reason it’s on the ballot, is it would prevent California from enacting any kind of new wealth tax on its citizens. Prop 40, of course, that billionaire tax that’s on ballot as well. Is exactly that. It’s a tax on people’s overall wealth, regardless of sort of where it sits.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>So this is a clap back to Prop 40, the billionaire tax.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Absolutely. This is one of two ballot measures actually before voters on this ballot that really seeks to undercut or potentially nullify altogether that proposed wealth tax on billionaires. So if Prop 41 or Prop 42 passes with more votes, they could essentially prevent the state from collecting the billionaire tax, even if that also passes.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>But\u003cstrong> \u003c/strong>Prop 42 isn’t just about billionaires. It bans new taxes on all wealth, and that includes stock portfolios, IRAs, 401Ks, 403Bs, stuff that a lot of everyday Californians have.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos:\u003c/strong> That’s right. And I think that’s what you’re going to be hearing from Prop 42 proponents is that this isn’t about billionaires. This is about your retirement account and, you know, protecting it. You know, I will say right now, we don’t, you know, there’s no serious proposals out there that I’ve seen to do something like this. Although when I talked to proponents, they did, you know, mention that there have been some attempts in the legislature, at least introductions of, you know, potential laws that would tax some assets. So. It’s not a totally like out there idea, but I think it’s hard to see this as only about, you know, that issue and all of our 401Ks when you would really have to climb a lot of hurdles in order to get a sort of tax on assets passed as it stands right now.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>So, aside from Prop 40, if you kind of put that to the side and just think about how California or the federal government do tax people in America. The income tax is primarily how things are done. But if we did want to raise taxes on high earners, super high earners, these billionaires, is there even a way to do it that isn’t through a wealth tax that looks at not liquid funds?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos:\u003c/strong> I don’t think so, because that’s how these folks have built their wealth. Once you get to that level of wealth, it’s largely because you got stock options from the company that you founded or invested in. And then because of the tax code we have, there’s no incentive to sell that. There’s an incentive not to sell it, right? And so I think that these, that is why we’re seeing something like this billionaire We’ve created a tax code that makes it very easy to avoid paying high taxes if you have this much money. And a lot of the ways that, you know, people sort of go about managing their wealth are with the intention of avoiding taxes that you would otherwise face.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>(music)\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>We’re going to take a quick break, but when we get back, more on Prop 42. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cem>Sponsor messages\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>All right, we’re back with Marisa Lagos talking about Proposition 42. Marisa, who is supporting this measure that makes it harder to tax wealth here in California, and why?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>So it’s really the same people that are supporting Prop 41 and that oppose Prop 40, the billionaire tax. Building a Better California, which is a PAC that was created by Sergey Brin and others, is funding the campaigns for this measure. They’ve raised almost $50 million to try to get Prop 42 over the finish line. So I sat down with Josh Rauh. He’s a Stanford University finance professor. He’s senior fellow at the Hoover Institution. And he thinks that leaving the door open for a wealth tax could cost the state.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Josh Rauh: \u003c/strong>We’re driving people away. We’re doing with the income taxes, and we’re doing it with this with the proposed wealth taxes So we would have to look for for for other measures economics is pretty clear about what some of the more efficient types of taxes are some of these have to do with consumption taxes meaning taxes on sales, which if you want to Make them progressive could be targeted towards luxury goods\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And there are some groups who are supporting this one who I wasn’t expecting, like California Professional Firefighters, the State Building and Construction Trades Council of California. Why are some of those folks supporting 42?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>I mean, what they would say is that they want to protect their retirement accounts, their pensions. You know, one of the trade offs you make being a public servant is often you might make a lower wage than you would in the private sector, but you have good retirement benefits. You have a decent sized pension fund.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Who is fighting this and why? \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Yeah, so SEIU, United Health Care Workers West is the biggest opposition. They’re the ones that wrote Prop 40, the billionaire tax, and they are obviously invested in ensuring not only that it passes, but that these competing measures do not undercut it. So they’re really using the Prop 40 campaign to also campaign against Prop 41 and Prop 42. And, you know, they say that this is not really about protecting average people’s retirement, that this essentially just a red herring to get normal California voters to vote for something that would nullify the wealth tax, the billionaire tax, and that, you know, that they’re essentially just using this threat of taxing your retirement account in order to convince you to do so. I spoke with Emanuel Sayez. He’s a professor of economics at the University of California, Berkeley. He actually helped craft Prop 40, the wealth tax proposal. And he thinks that these concerns about taxing all of our 401Ks are way overblown. He points out the legislature has had the ability to do that, to enact a wealth tax for decades and has never done so.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Emanuel Saez:\u003c/strong> It’s almost impossible to imagine that they would, by themselves, you know, increase one’s taxes. They are too scared of increasing taxes. Taxes in California are now increased almost suddenly through ballot initiatives.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>And that’s true. We rarely see the legislature and governor back tax increases. Most of the time, if they do, it’s to put it on the ballot in front of voters. I think the other thing to point out here is that even if this ballot measure passes, you can still go back to the voters and overturn it. So the idea that this is like putting your retirement in a lockbox and there will never be another attempt to do it, not totally true. You can always go back the voters and change things regardless of, you know, what they voted on before. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Now when it comes to campaign spending. What are we seeing on 42?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Well, the Yes on 42 side has raised and spent most of almost the 50 million dollars in their account. But we’re also seeing some crossover spending. As I said, building a better California, which is that PAC funded by the billionaires, is donating in all three campaigns. They’re putting money against Prop 40 through that PAC. They’re funding money for Props 41 and 42. And I would expect to see Building A Better California to continue. To contribute to the Yes on 42 campaign.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cem>Music starts\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>How do you think voters will be thinking about 40, 41, and 42? Do you think they’re always going to be connecting one to the other? Or could people be, you know, for or against the billionaire attacks and then find something they either like or don’t like in 41 or 42? How connected truly are these?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>The intention of the folks who wrote 41 and 42 is to not talk about the connection to the billionaire tax. They want to just promote what they see as good government measures, and they thought that this was the most politically expedient way to make an argument in a year where billionaires are not super popular, that essentially you don’t have to talk about Prop 40. You can just talk about these. I think on the other side, you’re going to see these labor unions really try to yoke all three measures in voters’ minds in order to ensure that if you support the billionaire tax, you don’t then take a second or third vote that undercuts it. But I think that that is sort of an open question. And given the uneven amount of money, how much more money you have to fight the billionaire tax from the billionaires, it’s going to be a challenge for the labor unions and others to make that case.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Marisa Lagos is a political correspondent at KQED and co-host of the podcast, Political Breakdown. Thanks, Marisa. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Thank you. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>In a nutshell, a vote yes on Prop 42 means you want no new taxes on investment accounts or personal assets. You also want no retroactive state taxes on paper assets. A no vote means that things stay as they are now.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>(music)\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>That’s it for our latest episode of PropFest. How we doing? How we feeling? Feeling smarter, feeling ready to vote? Well, there’s plenty more where that came from. From now until October 9th, the Bay and Bay Curious teams here at KQED are gonna be dropping breakdowns of all of the statewide propositions on your ballot this year to leave you feeling ready to vote this November. Stay locked in and make sure you’re subscribed to the Bay so you don’t miss out on the next ones.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>PrepFest is a collaboration between the Bay and Bay Curious podcasts. It’s produced by and me, Olivia Ellen Price.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>We get extra support from Katie Springer, Jen Chien, Maha Sanad, and Ethan Tovin-Lindsey.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>[00:12:38] And the whole KQED family. You can find audio and transcripts for this series at kqed.org slash prop fest.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>Our show is made in San Francisco at member-supported KQED. If you appreciate the work that we’re doing here on PropFest, please consider becoming a sustaining member of KQEd. We can’t do this work without you. Just go to donate.kqed.org slash podcasts. I’m Olivia Ellen Price. And I’m Erika Cruz Guevara. We’ll be back tomorrow with an explainer on Proposition 43, which would raise the threshold for special tax measures. We’ll see you then.\u003c/p>\n",
"blocks": [
{
"blockName": "core/heading",
"attrs": {
"text": "Episode Transcript:",
"level": 2
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003ch2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Episode Transcript:\u003c/h2>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003ch2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Episode Transcript:\u003c/h2>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price:\u003c/strong> Really wealthy people in America don’t just earn a regular paycheck and chuck those earnings into a savings account. Most of their net worth is tied up in assets like stocks and bonds.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price:\u003c/strong> Really wealthy people in America don’t just earn a regular paycheck and chuck those earnings into a savings account. Most of their net worth is tied up in assets like stocks and bonds.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>These assets are worth whatever the market says they’re worth on any given day. And if they increase in value…current law says that growth isn’t taxed while it sits there—it only gets taxed when an asset is actually sold.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>These assets are worth whatever the market says they’re worth on any given day. And if they increase in value…current law says that growth isn’t taxed while it sits there—it only gets taxed when an asset is actually sold.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price:\u003c/strong> Because the wealthy hold most of their fortunes as these paper assets, much of their growing wealth goes untaxed year after year. Is that a problem to fix? Or an essential part of the economy that keeps businesses humming?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price:\u003c/strong> Because the wealthy hold most of their fortunes as these paper assets, much of their growing wealth goes untaxed year after year. Is that a problem to fix? Or an essential part of the economy that keeps businesses humming?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra:\u003c/strong> How we tax \u003cem>wealth\u003c/em> is exactly what’s under discussion in Prop 42. Here’s how it reads on your ballot.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra:\u003c/strong> How we tax \u003cem>wealth\u003c/em> is exactly what’s under discussion in Prop 42. Here’s how it reads on your ballot.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Voice Over:\u003c/strong> Prohibits new state personal property taxes and certain retroactive state taxes.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Voice Over:\u003c/strong> Prohibits new state personal property taxes and certain retroactive state taxes.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>(music)\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>(music)\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>I’m Erika Cruz-Gavarra, host of The Bay.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>I’m Erika Cruz-Gavarra, host of The Bay.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And I’m Olivia Allen-Price, host of Bay Curious. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And I’m Olivia Allen-Price, host of Bay Curious. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>We are back with another edition of Prop Fest … where our teams at The Bay and Bay Curious break down each statewide proposition on the California ballot.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>We are back with another edition of Prop Fest … where our teams at The Bay and Bay Curious break down each statewide proposition on the California ballot.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Today, we’re going through Proposition 42, which aims to prevent a wealth tax. Here to walk us through it is KQED political correspondent and co-host of the podcast, Political Breakdown, Marisa Lagos. Welcome, Marissa. Hey. Big picture. What is Prop 42 about?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Today, we’re going through Proposition 42, which aims to prevent a wealth tax. Here to walk us through it is KQED political correspondent and co-host of the podcast, Political Breakdown, Marisa Lagos. Welcome, Marissa. Hey. Big picture. What is Prop 42 about?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos:\u003c/strong> Property too has to do with what taxes you pay on sort of what you own in California. This is specifically targeting monetary assets. So think about like you pay personal taxes on things like your car, right? Car registration is a type of tax. Part of that bill is based on the value of your car. You might pay property taxes, for example, right. But there are other types of personal property that aren’t taxed right now. And one big example is financial assets like stocks or investment accounts. So you’re not taxed on your retirement account just for having one, right? You get taxed that money when you take it out to spend it. People with stock portfolios are not tax on that either until they try to remove the money and you pay capital gains on whatever the increase has been. So, the investments themselves, though, are not taxed right now. Prop 42 wants to codify the status quo in the Constitution in California, basically by saying you cannot tax monetary assets. And it also does a second thing, which is what opponents say is the real reason it’s on the ballot, is it would prevent California from enacting any kind of new wealth tax on its citizens. Prop 40, of course, that billionaire tax that’s on ballot as well. Is exactly that. It’s a tax on people’s overall wealth, regardless of sort of where it sits.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos:\u003c/strong> Property too has to do with what taxes you pay on sort of what you own in California. This is specifically targeting monetary assets. So think about like you pay personal taxes on things like your car, right? Car registration is a type of tax. Part of that bill is based on the value of your car. You might pay property taxes, for example, right. But there are other types of personal property that aren’t taxed right now. And one big example is financial assets like stocks or investment accounts. So you’re not taxed on your retirement account just for having one, right? You get taxed that money when you take it out to spend it. People with stock portfolios are not tax on that either until they try to remove the money and you pay capital gains on whatever the increase has been. So, the investments themselves, though, are not taxed right now. Prop 42 wants to codify the status quo in the Constitution in California, basically by saying you cannot tax monetary assets. And it also does a second thing, which is what opponents say is the real reason it’s on the ballot, is it would prevent California from enacting any kind of new wealth tax on its citizens. Prop 40, of course, that billionaire tax that’s on ballot as well. Is exactly that. It’s a tax on people’s overall wealth, regardless of sort of where it sits.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>So this is a clap back to Prop 40, the billionaire tax.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>So this is a clap back to Prop 40, the billionaire tax.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Absolutely. This is one of two ballot measures actually before voters on this ballot that really seeks to undercut or potentially nullify altogether that proposed wealth tax on billionaires. So if Prop 41 or Prop 42 passes with more votes, they could essentially prevent the state from collecting the billionaire tax, even if that also passes.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Absolutely. This is one of two ballot measures actually before voters on this ballot that really seeks to undercut or potentially nullify altogether that proposed wealth tax on billionaires. So if Prop 41 or Prop 42 passes with more votes, they could essentially prevent the state from collecting the billionaire tax, even if that also passes.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>But\u003cstrong> \u003c/strong>Prop 42 isn’t just about billionaires. It bans new taxes on all wealth, and that includes stock portfolios, IRAs, 401Ks, 403Bs, stuff that a lot of everyday Californians have.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>But\u003cstrong> \u003c/strong>Prop 42 isn’t just about billionaires. It bans new taxes on all wealth, and that includes stock portfolios, IRAs, 401Ks, 403Bs, stuff that a lot of everyday Californians have.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos:\u003c/strong> That’s right. And I think that’s what you’re going to be hearing from Prop 42 proponents is that this isn’t about billionaires. This is about your retirement account and, you know, protecting it. You know, I will say right now, we don’t, you know, there’s no serious proposals out there that I’ve seen to do something like this. Although when I talked to proponents, they did, you know, mention that there have been some attempts in the legislature, at least introductions of, you know, potential laws that would tax some assets. So. It’s not a totally like out there idea, but I think it’s hard to see this as only about, you know, that issue and all of our 401Ks when you would really have to climb a lot of hurdles in order to get a sort of tax on assets passed as it stands right now.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos:\u003c/strong> That’s right. And I think that’s what you’re going to be hearing from Prop 42 proponents is that this isn’t about billionaires. This is about your retirement account and, you know, protecting it. You know, I will say right now, we don’t, you know, there’s no serious proposals out there that I’ve seen to do something like this. Although when I talked to proponents, they did, you know, mention that there have been some attempts in the legislature, at least introductions of, you know, potential laws that would tax some assets. So. It’s not a totally like out there idea, but I think it’s hard to see this as only about, you know, that issue and all of our 401Ks when you would really have to climb a lot of hurdles in order to get a sort of tax on assets passed as it stands right now.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>So, aside from Prop 40, if you kind of put that to the side and just think about how California or the federal government do tax people in America. The income tax is primarily how things are done. But if we did want to raise taxes on high earners, super high earners, these billionaires, is there even a way to do it that isn’t through a wealth tax that looks at not liquid funds?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>So, aside from Prop 40, if you kind of put that to the side and just think about how California or the federal government do tax people in America. The income tax is primarily how things are done. But if we did want to raise taxes on high earners, super high earners, these billionaires, is there even a way to do it that isn’t through a wealth tax that looks at not liquid funds?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos:\u003c/strong> I don’t think so, because that’s how these folks have built their wealth. Once you get to that level of wealth, it’s largely because you got stock options from the company that you founded or invested in. And then because of the tax code we have, there’s no incentive to sell that. There’s an incentive not to sell it, right? And so I think that these, that is why we’re seeing something like this billionaire We’ve created a tax code that makes it very easy to avoid paying high taxes if you have this much money. And a lot of the ways that, you know, people sort of go about managing their wealth are with the intention of avoiding taxes that you would otherwise face.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos:\u003c/strong> I don’t think so, because that’s how these folks have built their wealth. Once you get to that level of wealth, it’s largely because you got stock options from the company that you founded or invested in. And then because of the tax code we have, there’s no incentive to sell that. There’s an incentive not to sell it, right? And so I think that these, that is why we’re seeing something like this billionaire We’ve created a tax code that makes it very easy to avoid paying high taxes if you have this much money. And a lot of the ways that, you know, people sort of go about managing their wealth are with the intention of avoiding taxes that you would otherwise face.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>(music)\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>(music)\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>We’re going to take a quick break, but when we get back, more on Prop 42. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>We’re going to take a quick break, but when we get back, more on Prop 42. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cem>Sponsor messages\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cem>Sponsor messages\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>All right, we’re back with Marisa Lagos talking about Proposition 42. Marisa, who is supporting this measure that makes it harder to tax wealth here in California, and why?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>All right, we’re back with Marisa Lagos talking about Proposition 42. Marisa, who is supporting this measure that makes it harder to tax wealth here in California, and why?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>So it’s really the same people that are supporting Prop 41 and that oppose Prop 40, the billionaire tax. Building a Better California, which is a PAC that was created by Sergey Brin and others, is funding the campaigns for this measure. They’ve raised almost $50 million to try to get Prop 42 over the finish line. So I sat down with Josh Rauh. He’s a Stanford University finance professor. He’s senior fellow at the Hoover Institution. And he thinks that leaving the door open for a wealth tax could cost the state.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>So it’s really the same people that are supporting Prop 41 and that oppose Prop 40, the billionaire tax. Building a Better California, which is a PAC that was created by Sergey Brin and others, is funding the campaigns for this measure. They’ve raised almost $50 million to try to get Prop 42 over the finish line. So I sat down with Josh Rauh. He’s a Stanford University finance professor. He’s senior fellow at the Hoover Institution. And he thinks that leaving the door open for a wealth tax could cost the state.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Josh Rauh: \u003c/strong>We’re driving people away. We’re doing with the income taxes, and we’re doing it with this with the proposed wealth taxes So we would have to look for for for other measures economics is pretty clear about what some of the more efficient types of taxes are some of these have to do with consumption taxes meaning taxes on sales, which if you want to Make them progressive could be targeted towards luxury goods\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Josh Rauh: \u003c/strong>We’re driving people away. We’re doing with the income taxes, and we’re doing it with this with the proposed wealth taxes So we would have to look for for for other measures economics is pretty clear about what some of the more efficient types of taxes are some of these have to do with consumption taxes meaning taxes on sales, which if you want to Make them progressive could be targeted towards luxury goods\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And there are some groups who are supporting this one who I wasn’t expecting, like California Professional Firefighters, the State Building and Construction Trades Council of California. Why are some of those folks supporting 42?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And there are some groups who are supporting this one who I wasn’t expecting, like California Professional Firefighters, the State Building and Construction Trades Council of California. Why are some of those folks supporting 42?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>I mean, what they would say is that they want to protect their retirement accounts, their pensions. You know, one of the trade offs you make being a public servant is often you might make a lower wage than you would in the private sector, but you have good retirement benefits. You have a decent sized pension fund.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>I mean, what they would say is that they want to protect their retirement accounts, their pensions. You know, one of the trade offs you make being a public servant is often you might make a lower wage than you would in the private sector, but you have good retirement benefits. You have a decent sized pension fund.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Who is fighting this and why? \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Who is fighting this and why? \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Yeah, so SEIU, United Health Care Workers West is the biggest opposition. They’re the ones that wrote Prop 40, the billionaire tax, and they are obviously invested in ensuring not only that it passes, but that these competing measures do not undercut it. So they’re really using the Prop 40 campaign to also campaign against Prop 41 and Prop 42. And, you know, they say that this is not really about protecting average people’s retirement, that this essentially just a red herring to get normal California voters to vote for something that would nullify the wealth tax, the billionaire tax, and that, you know, that they’re essentially just using this threat of taxing your retirement account in order to convince you to do so. I spoke with Emanuel Sayez. He’s a professor of economics at the University of California, Berkeley. He actually helped craft Prop 40, the wealth tax proposal. And he thinks that these concerns about taxing all of our 401Ks are way overblown. He points out the legislature has had the ability to do that, to enact a wealth tax for decades and has never done so.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Yeah, so SEIU, United Health Care Workers West is the biggest opposition. They’re the ones that wrote Prop 40, the billionaire tax, and they are obviously invested in ensuring not only that it passes, but that these competing measures do not undercut it. So they’re really using the Prop 40 campaign to also campaign against Prop 41 and Prop 42. And, you know, they say that this is not really about protecting average people’s retirement, that this essentially just a red herring to get normal California voters to vote for something that would nullify the wealth tax, the billionaire tax, and that, you know, that they’re essentially just using this threat of taxing your retirement account in order to convince you to do so. I spoke with Emanuel Sayez. He’s a professor of economics at the University of California, Berkeley. He actually helped craft Prop 40, the wealth tax proposal. And he thinks that these concerns about taxing all of our 401Ks are way overblown. He points out the legislature has had the ability to do that, to enact a wealth tax for decades and has never done so.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Emanuel Saez:\u003c/strong> It’s almost impossible to imagine that they would, by themselves, you know, increase one’s taxes. They are too scared of increasing taxes. Taxes in California are now increased almost suddenly through ballot initiatives.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Emanuel Saez:\u003c/strong> It’s almost impossible to imagine that they would, by themselves, you know, increase one’s taxes. They are too scared of increasing taxes. Taxes in California are now increased almost suddenly through ballot initiatives.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>And that’s true. We rarely see the legislature and governor back tax increases. Most of the time, if they do, it’s to put it on the ballot in front of voters. I think the other thing to point out here is that even if this ballot measure passes, you can still go back to the voters and overturn it. So the idea that this is like putting your retirement in a lockbox and there will never be another attempt to do it, not totally true. You can always go back the voters and change things regardless of, you know, what they voted on before. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>And that’s true. We rarely see the legislature and governor back tax increases. Most of the time, if they do, it’s to put it on the ballot in front of voters. I think the other thing to point out here is that even if this ballot measure passes, you can still go back to the voters and overturn it. So the idea that this is like putting your retirement in a lockbox and there will never be another attempt to do it, not totally true. You can always go back the voters and change things regardless of, you know, what they voted on before. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Now when it comes to campaign spending. What are we seeing on 42?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Now when it comes to campaign spending. What are we seeing on 42?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Well, the Yes on 42 side has raised and spent most of almost the 50 million dollars in their account. But we’re also seeing some crossover spending. As I said, building a better California, which is that PAC funded by the billionaires, is donating in all three campaigns. They’re putting money against Prop 40 through that PAC. They’re funding money for Props 41 and 42. And I would expect to see Building A Better California to continue. To contribute to the Yes on 42 campaign.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Well, the Yes on 42 side has raised and spent most of almost the 50 million dollars in their account. But we’re also seeing some crossover spending. As I said, building a better California, which is that PAC funded by the billionaires, is donating in all three campaigns. They’re putting money against Prop 40 through that PAC. They’re funding money for Props 41 and 42. And I would expect to see Building A Better California to continue. To contribute to the Yes on 42 campaign.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cem>Music starts\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cem>Music starts\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>How do you think voters will be thinking about 40, 41, and 42? Do you think they’re always going to be connecting one to the other? Or could people be, you know, for or against the billionaire attacks and then find something they either like or don’t like in 41 or 42? How connected truly are these?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>How do you think voters will be thinking about 40, 41, and 42? Do you think they’re always going to be connecting one to the other? Or could people be, you know, for or against the billionaire attacks and then find something they either like or don’t like in 41 or 42? How connected truly are these?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>The intention of the folks who wrote 41 and 42 is to not talk about the connection to the billionaire tax. They want to just promote what they see as good government measures, and they thought that this was the most politically expedient way to make an argument in a year where billionaires are not super popular, that essentially you don’t have to talk about Prop 40. You can just talk about these. I think on the other side, you’re going to see these labor unions really try to yoke all three measures in voters’ minds in order to ensure that if you support the billionaire tax, you don’t then take a second or third vote that undercuts it. But I think that that is sort of an open question. And given the uneven amount of money, how much more money you have to fight the billionaire tax from the billionaires, it’s going to be a challenge for the labor unions and others to make that case.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>The intention of the folks who wrote 41 and 42 is to not talk about the connection to the billionaire tax. They want to just promote what they see as good government measures, and they thought that this was the most politically expedient way to make an argument in a year where billionaires are not super popular, that essentially you don’t have to talk about Prop 40. You can just talk about these. I think on the other side, you’re going to see these labor unions really try to yoke all three measures in voters’ minds in order to ensure that if you support the billionaire tax, you don’t then take a second or third vote that undercuts it. But I think that that is sort of an open question. And given the uneven amount of money, how much more money you have to fight the billionaire tax from the billionaires, it’s going to be a challenge for the labor unions and others to make that case.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Marisa Lagos is a political correspondent at KQED and co-host of the podcast, Political Breakdown. Thanks, Marisa. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Marisa Lagos is a political correspondent at KQED and co-host of the podcast, Political Breakdown. Thanks, Marisa. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Thank you. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Thank you. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>In a nutshell, a vote yes on Prop 42 means you want no new taxes on investment accounts or personal assets. You also want no retroactive state taxes on paper assets. A no vote means that things stay as they are now.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>In a nutshell, a vote yes on Prop 42 means you want no new taxes on investment accounts or personal assets. You also want no retroactive state taxes on paper assets. A no vote means that things stay as they are now.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>(music)\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>(music)\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>That’s it for our latest episode of PropFest. How we doing? How we feeling? Feeling smarter, feeling ready to vote? Well, there’s plenty more where that came from. From now until October 9th, the Bay and Bay Curious teams here at KQED are gonna be dropping breakdowns of all of the statewide propositions on your ballot this year to leave you feeling ready to vote this November. Stay locked in and make sure you’re subscribed to the Bay so you don’t miss out on the next ones.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>That’s it for our latest episode of PropFest. How we doing? How we feeling? Feeling smarter, feeling ready to vote? Well, there’s plenty more where that came from. From now until October 9th, the Bay and Bay Curious teams here at KQED are gonna be dropping breakdowns of all of the statewide propositions on your ballot this year to leave you feeling ready to vote this November. Stay locked in and make sure you’re subscribed to the Bay so you don’t miss out on the next ones.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>PrepFest is a collaboration between the Bay and Bay Curious podcasts. It’s produced by and me, Olivia Ellen Price.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>PrepFest is a collaboration between the Bay and Bay Curious podcasts. It’s produced by and me, Olivia Ellen Price.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>We get extra support from Katie Springer, Jen Chien, Maha Sanad, and Ethan Tovin-Lindsey.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>We get extra support from Katie Springer, Jen Chien, Maha Sanad, and Ethan Tovin-Lindsey.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>[00:12:38] And the whole KQED family. You can find audio and transcripts for this series at kqed.org slash prop fest.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>[00:12:38] And the whole KQED family. You can find audio and transcripts for this series at kqed.org slash prop fest.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>Our show is made in San Francisco at member-supported KQED. If you appreciate the work that we’re doing here on PropFest, please consider becoming a sustaining member of KQEd. We can’t do this work without you. Just go to donate.kqed.org slash podcasts. I’m Olivia Ellen Price. And I’m Erika Cruz Guevara. We’ll be back tomorrow with an explainer on Proposition 43, which would raise the threshold for special tax measures. We’ll see you then.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>Our show is made in San Francisco at member-supported KQED. If you appreciate the work that we’re doing here on PropFest, please consider becoming a sustaining member of KQEd. We can’t do this work without you. Just go to donate.kqed.org slash podcasts. I’m Olivia Ellen Price. And I’m Erika Cruz Guevara. We’ll be back tomorrow with an explainer on Proposition 43, which would raise the threshold for special tax measures. We’ll see you then.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
}
],
"excerpt": "Proposition 42 seeks to ban new state taxes on personal property like retirement investments.",
"status": "publish",
"parent": 0,
"modified": 1790720790,
"stats": {
"hasAudio": false,
"hasVideo": false,
"hasChartOrMap": false,
"iframeSrcs": [],
"hasGoogleForm": false,
"hasGallery": false,
"hasHearkenModule": false,
"hasPolis": false,
"paragraphCount": 43,
"wordCount": 2413
},
"headData": {
"title": "Prop 42: Bans New State Taxes on Personal Property and Investments | KQED",
"description": "Proposition 42 seeks to ban new state taxes on personal property like retirement investments.",
"ogTitle": "",
"ogDescription": "",
"ogImgId": "",
"twTitle": "",
"twDescription": "",
"twImgId": "",
"schema": {
"@context": "https://schema.org",
"@type": "NewsArticle",
"headline": "Prop 42: Bans New State Taxes on Personal Property and Investments",
"datePublished": "2026-10-06T03:05:00-07:00",
"dateModified": "2026-09-29T15:26:30-07:00",
"image": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"isAccessibleForFree": "True",
"publisher": {
"@type": "NewsMediaOrganization",
"@id": "https://www.kqed.org/#organization",
"name": "KQED",
"logo": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"url": "https://www.kqed.org",
"sameAs": [
"https://www.facebook.com/KQED",
"https://twitter.com/KQED",
"https://www.instagram.com/kqed/",
"https://www.tiktok.com/@kqedofficial",
"https://www.linkedin.com/company/kqed",
"https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCeC0IOo7i1P_61zVUWbJ4nw"
]
}
}
},
"primaryCategory": {
"termId": 31795,
"slug": "california",
"name": "California"
},
"source": "Prop Fest 2026",
"sourceUrl": "http://kqed.org/propfest",
"audioUrl": "https://www.podtrac.com/pts/redirect.mp3/pdst.fm/e/traffic.megaphone.fm/KQINC9185457141.mp3",
"sticky": false,
"templateType": "standard",
"featuredImageType": "standard",
"excludeFromSiteSearch": "Include",
"articleAge": "0",
"path": "/news/12101418/prop-42-bans-new-state-taxes-on-personal-property",
"audioTrackLength": null,
"parsedContent": [
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>\n\u003ch2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Episode Transcript:\u003c/h2>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price:\u003c/strong> Really wealthy people in America don’t just earn a regular paycheck and chuck those earnings into a savings account. Most of their net worth is tied up in assets like stocks and bonds.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>These assets are worth whatever the market says they’re worth on any given day. And if they increase in value…current law says that growth isn’t taxed while it sits there—it only gets taxed when an asset is actually sold.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price:\u003c/strong> Because the wealthy hold most of their fortunes as these paper assets, much of their growing wealth goes untaxed year after year. Is that a problem to fix? Or an essential part of the economy that keeps businesses humming?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra:\u003c/strong> How we tax \u003cem>wealth\u003c/em> is exactly what’s under discussion in Prop 42. Here’s how it reads on your ballot.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Voice Over:\u003c/strong> Prohibits new state personal property taxes and certain retroactive state taxes.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>(music)\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>I’m Erika Cruz-Gavarra, host of The Bay.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And I’m Olivia Allen-Price, host of Bay Curious. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>We are back with another edition of Prop Fest … where our teams at The Bay and Bay Curious break down each statewide proposition on the California ballot.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Today, we’re going through Proposition 42, which aims to prevent a wealth tax. Here to walk us through it is KQED political correspondent and co-host of the podcast, Political Breakdown, Marisa Lagos. Welcome, Marissa. Hey. Big picture. What is Prop 42 about?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos:\u003c/strong> Property too has to do with what taxes you pay on sort of what you own in California. This is specifically targeting monetary assets. So think about like you pay personal taxes on things like your car, right? Car registration is a type of tax. Part of that bill is based on the value of your car. You might pay property taxes, for example, right. But there are other types of personal property that aren’t taxed right now. And one big example is financial assets like stocks or investment accounts. So you’re not taxed on your retirement account just for having one, right? You get taxed that money when you take it out to spend it. People with stock portfolios are not tax on that either until they try to remove the money and you pay capital gains on whatever the increase has been. So, the investments themselves, though, are not taxed right now. Prop 42 wants to codify the status quo in the Constitution in California, basically by saying you cannot tax monetary assets. And it also does a second thing, which is what opponents say is the real reason it’s on the ballot, is it would prevent California from enacting any kind of new wealth tax on its citizens. Prop 40, of course, that billionaire tax that’s on ballot as well. Is exactly that. It’s a tax on people’s overall wealth, regardless of sort of where it sits.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>So this is a clap back to Prop 40, the billionaire tax.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Absolutely. This is one of two ballot measures actually before voters on this ballot that really seeks to undercut or potentially nullify altogether that proposed wealth tax on billionaires. So if Prop 41 or Prop 42 passes with more votes, they could essentially prevent the state from collecting the billionaire tax, even if that also passes.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>But\u003cstrong> \u003c/strong>Prop 42 isn’t just about billionaires. It bans new taxes on all wealth, and that includes stock portfolios, IRAs, 401Ks, 403Bs, stuff that a lot of everyday Californians have.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos:\u003c/strong> That’s right. And I think that’s what you’re going to be hearing from Prop 42 proponents is that this isn’t about billionaires. This is about your retirement account and, you know, protecting it. You know, I will say right now, we don’t, you know, there’s no serious proposals out there that I’ve seen to do something like this. Although when I talked to proponents, they did, you know, mention that there have been some attempts in the legislature, at least introductions of, you know, potential laws that would tax some assets. So. It’s not a totally like out there idea, but I think it’s hard to see this as only about, you know, that issue and all of our 401Ks when you would really have to climb a lot of hurdles in order to get a sort of tax on assets passed as it stands right now.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>So, aside from Prop 40, if you kind of put that to the side and just think about how California or the federal government do tax people in America. The income tax is primarily how things are done. But if we did want to raise taxes on high earners, super high earners, these billionaires, is there even a way to do it that isn’t through a wealth tax that looks at not liquid funds?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos:\u003c/strong> I don’t think so, because that’s how these folks have built their wealth. Once you get to that level of wealth, it’s largely because you got stock options from the company that you founded or invested in. And then because of the tax code we have, there’s no incentive to sell that. There’s an incentive not to sell it, right? And so I think that these, that is why we’re seeing something like this billionaire We’ve created a tax code that makes it very easy to avoid paying high taxes if you have this much money. And a lot of the ways that, you know, people sort of go about managing their wealth are with the intention of avoiding taxes that you would otherwise face.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>(music)\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>We’re going to take a quick break, but when we get back, more on Prop 42. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cem>Sponsor messages\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>All right, we’re back with Marisa Lagos talking about Proposition 42. Marisa, who is supporting this measure that makes it harder to tax wealth here in California, and why?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>So it’s really the same people that are supporting Prop 41 and that oppose Prop 40, the billionaire tax. Building a Better California, which is a PAC that was created by Sergey Brin and others, is funding the campaigns for this measure. They’ve raised almost $50 million to try to get Prop 42 over the finish line. So I sat down with Josh Rauh. He’s a Stanford University finance professor. He’s senior fellow at the Hoover Institution. And he thinks that leaving the door open for a wealth tax could cost the state.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Josh Rauh: \u003c/strong>We’re driving people away. We’re doing with the income taxes, and we’re doing it with this with the proposed wealth taxes So we would have to look for for for other measures economics is pretty clear about what some of the more efficient types of taxes are some of these have to do with consumption taxes meaning taxes on sales, which if you want to Make them progressive could be targeted towards luxury goods\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And there are some groups who are supporting this one who I wasn’t expecting, like California Professional Firefighters, the State Building and Construction Trades Council of California. Why are some of those folks supporting 42?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>I mean, what they would say is that they want to protect their retirement accounts, their pensions. You know, one of the trade offs you make being a public servant is often you might make a lower wage than you would in the private sector, but you have good retirement benefits. You have a decent sized pension fund.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Who is fighting this and why? \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Yeah, so SEIU, United Health Care Workers West is the biggest opposition. They’re the ones that wrote Prop 40, the billionaire tax, and they are obviously invested in ensuring not only that it passes, but that these competing measures do not undercut it. So they’re really using the Prop 40 campaign to also campaign against Prop 41 and Prop 42. And, you know, they say that this is not really about protecting average people’s retirement, that this essentially just a red herring to get normal California voters to vote for something that would nullify the wealth tax, the billionaire tax, and that, you know, that they’re essentially just using this threat of taxing your retirement account in order to convince you to do so. I spoke with Emanuel Sayez. He’s a professor of economics at the University of California, Berkeley. He actually helped craft Prop 40, the wealth tax proposal. And he thinks that these concerns about taxing all of our 401Ks are way overblown. He points out the legislature has had the ability to do that, to enact a wealth tax for decades and has never done so.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Emanuel Saez:\u003c/strong> It’s almost impossible to imagine that they would, by themselves, you know, increase one’s taxes. They are too scared of increasing taxes. Taxes in California are now increased almost suddenly through ballot initiatives.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>And that’s true. We rarely see the legislature and governor back tax increases. Most of the time, if they do, it’s to put it on the ballot in front of voters. I think the other thing to point out here is that even if this ballot measure passes, you can still go back to the voters and overturn it. So the idea that this is like putting your retirement in a lockbox and there will never be another attempt to do it, not totally true. You can always go back the voters and change things regardless of, you know, what they voted on before. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Now when it comes to campaign spending. What are we seeing on 42?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Well, the Yes on 42 side has raised and spent most of almost the 50 million dollars in their account. But we’re also seeing some crossover spending. As I said, building a better California, which is that PAC funded by the billionaires, is donating in all three campaigns. They’re putting money against Prop 40 through that PAC. They’re funding money for Props 41 and 42. And I would expect to see Building A Better California to continue. To contribute to the Yes on 42 campaign.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cem>Music starts\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>How do you think voters will be thinking about 40, 41, and 42? Do you think they’re always going to be connecting one to the other? Or could people be, you know, for or against the billionaire attacks and then find something they either like or don’t like in 41 or 42? How connected truly are these?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>The intention of the folks who wrote 41 and 42 is to not talk about the connection to the billionaire tax. They want to just promote what they see as good government measures, and they thought that this was the most politically expedient way to make an argument in a year where billionaires are not super popular, that essentially you don’t have to talk about Prop 40. You can just talk about these. I think on the other side, you’re going to see these labor unions really try to yoke all three measures in voters’ minds in order to ensure that if you support the billionaire tax, you don’t then take a second or third vote that undercuts it. But I think that that is sort of an open question. And given the uneven amount of money, how much more money you have to fight the billionaire tax from the billionaires, it’s going to be a challenge for the labor unions and others to make that case.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Marisa Lagos is a political correspondent at KQED and co-host of the podcast, Political Breakdown. Thanks, Marisa. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Thank you. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>In a nutshell, a vote yes on Prop 42 means you want no new taxes on investment accounts or personal assets. You also want no retroactive state taxes on paper assets. A no vote means that things stay as they are now.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>(music)\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>That’s it for our latest episode of PropFest. How we doing? How we feeling? Feeling smarter, feeling ready to vote? Well, there’s plenty more where that came from. From now until October 9th, the Bay and Bay Curious teams here at KQED are gonna be dropping breakdowns of all of the statewide propositions on your ballot this year to leave you feeling ready to vote this November. Stay locked in and make sure you’re subscribed to the Bay so you don’t miss out on the next ones.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>PrepFest is a collaboration between the Bay and Bay Curious podcasts. It’s produced by and me, Olivia Ellen Price.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>We get extra support from Katie Springer, Jen Chien, Maha Sanad, and Ethan Tovin-Lindsey.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>[00:12:38] And the whole KQED family. You can find audio and transcripts for this series at kqed.org slash prop fest.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>Our show is made in San Francisco at member-supported KQED. If you appreciate the work that we’re doing here on PropFest, please consider becoming a sustaining member of KQEd. We can’t do this work without you. Just go to donate.kqed.org slash podcasts. I’m Olivia Ellen Price. And I’m Erika Cruz Guevara. We’ll be back tomorrow with an explainer on Proposition 43, which would raise the threshold for special tax measures. We’ll see you then.\u003c/p>\n\u003c/div>\u003c/p>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
}
],
"link": "/news/12101418/prop-42-bans-new-state-taxes-on-personal-property",
"authors": [
"234",
"3239",
"102"
],
"programs": [
"news_28779",
"news_33523",
"news_34552"
],
"series": [
"news_17986"
],
"categories": [
"news_31795",
"news_13"
],
"tags": [
"news_28645",
"news_22598"
],
"featImg": "news_12101422",
"label": "source_news_12101418"
},
"news_12101275": {
"type": "posts",
"id": "news_12101275",
"meta": {
"index": "posts_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "12101275",
"score": null,
"sort": [
1791280800000
]
},
"guestAuthors": [],
"slug": "prop-41-requires-new-audits-of-special-tax-programs",
"title": "Prop 41: Requires New Audits of Special Tax Programs",
"publishDate": 1791280800,
"format": "standard",
"headTitle": "Prop 41: Requires New Audits of Special Tax Programs | KQED",
"labelTerm": {},
"content": "\n\u003ch2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Episode Transcript\u003c/h2>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>You’re going to see a lot about taxes on this year’s ballot.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>Yesterday we talked about Prop 40, which would be a one-time tax on billionaires. If you haven’t listened to that episode yet, I suggest you go give it a listen, because today we’re dropping episodes on Props 41 and 42. And both of those are related to Prop 40.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Now, Prop 41 would require more audits on the programs that are funded by special taxes. Is it good governance or red tape meant to make it harder to pass new taxes?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>This is how Prop 41 reads on your ballot, and just a warning, it’s pretty wonky.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Voice Over: \u003c/strong>Prohibits new state taxes that exclude revenues from state spending limit. Requires audits for new state special taxes.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>I’m Erika Cruz Guevara, host of The Bay.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And I’m Olivia Ellen Price, host of Bay Curious. You’re listening to PropFest, our special series that goes through the statewide propositions on your ballot. They can be so confusing and consequential. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>We’ll explain the ins and outs of each one in hopes that you feel confident in your vote, no matter which side you come down on.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Here to walk us through Prop 41 is KQED political correspondent and co-host of the podcast, Political Breakdown, Marisa Lagos. Welcome, Marissa. Hey. So the language of Prop 41 sort of sounds like gobbledygook to some voters. And we will straighten that out pretty soon. But maybe before we dive into all those specifics of this ballot measure, give us some context about who put this on the ballot and why.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Yeah, this was placed on the ballot, essentially by the billionaires who were opposing Prop 40. That’s the billionaire tax. And both Prop 41 and another measure, Prop 42, were written after the billionaire proposal was already out collecting signatures. So they were crafted really as an attempt to undercut that ballot measure. And so it’s kind of impossible to talk about them without talking about the billionaire tax and the billionaires who are trying to kill the tax. Got it. OK, helpful context. So now let’s get into what Prop 41 does. So Prop 41 has kind of three main provisions. The first one is it’s going to require ongoing audits of state programs that are funded by what’s called special taxes. So in California, when tax money comes in, most of it goes to the general fund. That is the main spending account that pays for K-12 schools and most of the things the state does. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>But, sometimes that revenue has been sort of written into law as a special tax, and those are earmarked for specific programs. You can think of something like the gas tax, which, you know, funds roads and infrastructure. That is not money that goes into the general fund. This measure says that before voters even weigh in on a proposed special tax they need to have an audit of what the money would be spent on. And then it requires ongoing audits in the future if a tax is actually passed. And so it’s being framed by proponents as a good government measure, right? This gives more transparency. Why are we spending billions of dollars in state money and not knowing where it goes essentially? Prop 41 has two other important provisions, and these are the ones that would conflict with the billionaire tax and potentially nullify them. And they both have something to do with the GAN limit, otherwise known as the state spending limit. This was a law put in place by voters in the 1970s, and it puts a cap on how much revenue the state can spend every year. It essentially says that if state revenues grow too fast, you gotta give some of that money back to taxpayers. Some special taxes are excluded from that limit, including the gas tax example. So one of the provisions in Prop 41 says new special taxes would all be subject to the state’s spending limit. So you can imagine if the billionaire tax passes and we have $100 billion in new spending, that would really increase the state revenue, right? So then the other provision prohibits the state from enforcing taxes that are not subject to the spending limit, so. Basically, either of these things would undercut Prop 40.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Let’s dig in a little bit more on that first provision about the audits, because there is a state auditor whose job is to audit what are they doing, are these new audits necessary?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Yeah, I think opponents would say they’re not. You do have the ability of the legislature to request an audit of anything that they vote to. And yeah, we have an auditor who very regularly looks at state agencies and programs and spending and comes out with reports based on what the legislature has decided are the priorities.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>We need to take a quick break, but when we get back, more on Prop 41. If PropFest is helping you out, let us know by supporting our work. Your donations help keep projects like PropFast going. Contribute at donate.kqed.org. And you can get some sweet podcast swag as a thank you gift.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cem>Sponsor message\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Welcome back. We’re talking with KQED’s Marisa Lagos about Proposition 41, the tax audit prop. Marisa, let’s get into who supports and opposes this prop. First up, what does support look like?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>This was crafted by the folks who are opposing Proposition 40. It’s been largely funded by the same billionaires who are opposing that, again, sort of led by Sergey Brin. But a lot of familiar names here. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Names like Larry Page, who, with Sergey Brin, co-founded Alphabet, Mark Zuckerberg of Meta, Larry Ellison of Oracle, Jensen Huang of NVIDIA, mostly a who’s who of Silicon Valley.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Yeah,\u003cstrong> \u003c/strong>but you also have folks like the California Chamber of Commerce, the California Taxpayers Association supporting this, and you know, these are groups that generally think that California spends too much money and have questions about whether it’s being properly spent. I mean, we’ve heard a lot of talk about this around homeless funding, right, in the governor’s race. Like, why are we spending billions of dollars and not addressing the underlying problem or making progress? So I think groups like the Chamber, the Cal Taxpayers Association, first of all, you know, just. Are pretty opposed to higher taxes and regulation, but also think that there would be some benefit in auditing all state spending, especially these special taxes, which, you know, arguably in some cases may not be getting sort of the scrutiny that they could. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Who is lining up against Prop 41 and why? \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Yeah, so the opponents are the same groups that are supporting Prop 40 that put the billionaire tax on the ballot. So SEIU, HW West, the State Democratic Party. The California Federation of Labor Unions, they see this really as an attempt to undercut, to nullify the billionaire tax proposal and that it’s not really as much about good government as it is about that.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>So if Prop 40 and 41 were both to pass, how does that play out?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>On which one gets more votes. If Prop 40 got more votes, then it would stand and the only provisions of Prop 41 I believe that would take effect would be, you know, the audits and the spending limit. It would affect future special taxes, not this one. If 41 got more vote than 40, it would make it sort of unenforceable because so many provisions in 41 conflict with 40 and under California law, if something is on the same ballot together and they’re in a certain way, whatever gets more votes is kind of the law of the land. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>But in the past, I know that’s gone to a judge, ultimately, to decide. Is that what would happen here, too?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>I think regardless of whether any of these pass individually, I believe that there will be court challenges.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>How do you think voters are going to be thinking about this suite of three props, proposition 40, 41 and 42? Will they be connecting them all and voting in one direction, or could it go like we’ve seen in the past, where sometimes you get this mixed message from voters on sort of opposing props? \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>I think that’s really gonna depend on how well the Yes on 40 campaign can draw a straight line between getting someone’s support and getting them to oppose these other measures. The billionaires and other folks who oppose the billionaire tax are not gonna wanna talk about Prop 40 when they talk about props 41 and 42. They wanna make these sort of just standalone good government measures. And so I think that’s sort of an outstanding question because you don’t have a traditional campaign against 41 and 40 too. Can the Yes on 40 folks really make clear in voters’ minds that these are all tied together, and even if you like some of the provisions of these other ballot measures, that by supporting them, you would essentially be casting another vote against the billionaire tax.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>When it comes to campaign spending, what are we seeing here?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>This one is very lopsided. We’ve seen the folks pushing Prop 41, yes on 41, raise more than 46 million so far. Most of that is coming from the same pack that is fighting the billionaire tax. It’s called Building a Better California. It was founded by Google co-founder Sergey Brin and other billionaires. And I think one thing that’s important to note is that We’re probably going to be seeing some crossover messaging. So a lot of the money being spent on the other ballot measures will also affect this one. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>But sounds like really no spending on the no side.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>No, and I think what you’re seeing is really that these are sort of a combined campaign for the other side. The unions that are pushing the billionaire tax are also pushing back against 41 and 42, but there isn’t that same level of like an organized campaign against each of them, in part because these are good government measures that sound very good on their face. I think it’s not something that you have the same sort of coalition. Able to sort of raise money and stand up against the way you might in some other sort of more traditional fights between the business community and labor.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Marisa Lagos is a political correspondent at KQED and co-host of the podcast, Political Breakdown. Thanks, Marisa. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>It was my pleasure. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>In a nutshell, a vote yes on Prop 41 would create new rules about auditing state programs that would receive revenue from special taxes. It would also make new special taxes part of the state’s spending limit. A vote no means things would stay the same as they are now.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>That’s it for PropFest today. This series is a collaboration between The Bay and Bay Curious podcasts. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>It’s produced by Erika Cruz Guevara, Alan Montecillo, Ericka Cruz Guevarra, Gabriella Glueck, Pauline Bartolone, Katrina Schwartz, Christopher Beale, Anna Casalme and me, Olivia Allen-Price. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>We get extra support from Katie Springer, Jen Chien, Maha Sanad, Ethan Toven-Lindsey.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>You can find audio and transcripts for this series at kqed.org slash prop fest.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>Support for the bay is provided in part by the Osher Production Fund.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Some members of the KQD podcast team are represented by the Screen Actors Guild American Federation of Television and Radio Artists, San Francisco, Northern California Local.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>I’m Erika Cruz Guevara. We’ll be back tomorrow with an explainer on Proposition 42, which aims to make it harder to create a wealth tax in California. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>We’ll get into all that tomorrow. See you then.\u003c/p>\n",
"blocks": [
{
"blockName": "core/heading",
"attrs": {
"text": "Episode Transcript",
"level": 2
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003ch2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Episode Transcript\u003c/h2>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003ch2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Episode Transcript\u003c/h2>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>You’re going to see a lot about taxes on this year’s ballot.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>You’re going to see a lot about taxes on this year’s ballot.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>Yesterday we talked about Prop 40, which would be a one-time tax on billionaires. If you haven’t listened to that episode yet, I suggest you go give it a listen, because today we’re dropping episodes on Props 41 and 42. And both of those are related to Prop 40.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>Yesterday we talked about Prop 40, which would be a one-time tax on billionaires. If you haven’t listened to that episode yet, I suggest you go give it a listen, because today we’re dropping episodes on Props 41 and 42. And both of those are related to Prop 40.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Now, Prop 41 would require more audits on the programs that are funded by special taxes. Is it good governance or red tape meant to make it harder to pass new taxes?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Now, Prop 41 would require more audits on the programs that are funded by special taxes. Is it good governance or red tape meant to make it harder to pass new taxes?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>This is how Prop 41 reads on your ballot, and just a warning, it’s pretty wonky.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>This is how Prop 41 reads on your ballot, and just a warning, it’s pretty wonky.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Voice Over: \u003c/strong>Prohibits new state taxes that exclude revenues from state spending limit. Requires audits for new state special taxes.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Voice Over: \u003c/strong>Prohibits new state taxes that exclude revenues from state spending limit. Requires audits for new state special taxes.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>I’m Erika Cruz Guevara, host of The Bay.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>I’m Erika Cruz Guevara, host of The Bay.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And I’m Olivia Ellen Price, host of Bay Curious. You’re listening to PropFest, our special series that goes through the statewide propositions on your ballot. They can be so confusing and consequential. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And I’m Olivia Ellen Price, host of Bay Curious. You’re listening to PropFest, our special series that goes through the statewide propositions on your ballot. They can be so confusing and consequential. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>We’ll explain the ins and outs of each one in hopes that you feel confident in your vote, no matter which side you come down on.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>We’ll explain the ins and outs of each one in hopes that you feel confident in your vote, no matter which side you come down on.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Here to walk us through Prop 41 is KQED political correspondent and co-host of the podcast, Political Breakdown, Marisa Lagos. Welcome, Marissa. Hey. So the language of Prop 41 sort of sounds like gobbledygook to some voters. And we will straighten that out pretty soon. But maybe before we dive into all those specifics of this ballot measure, give us some context about who put this on the ballot and why.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Here to walk us through Prop 41 is KQED political correspondent and co-host of the podcast, Political Breakdown, Marisa Lagos. Welcome, Marissa. Hey. So the language of Prop 41 sort of sounds like gobbledygook to some voters. And we will straighten that out pretty soon. But maybe before we dive into all those specifics of this ballot measure, give us some context about who put this on the ballot and why.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Yeah, this was placed on the ballot, essentially by the billionaires who were opposing Prop 40. That’s the billionaire tax. And both Prop 41 and another measure, Prop 42, were written after the billionaire proposal was already out collecting signatures. So they were crafted really as an attempt to undercut that ballot measure. And so it’s kind of impossible to talk about them without talking about the billionaire tax and the billionaires who are trying to kill the tax. Got it. OK, helpful context. So now let’s get into what Prop 41 does. So Prop 41 has kind of three main provisions. The first one is it’s going to require ongoing audits of state programs that are funded by what’s called special taxes. So in California, when tax money comes in, most of it goes to the general fund. That is the main spending account that pays for K-12 schools and most of the things the state does. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Yeah, this was placed on the ballot, essentially by the billionaires who were opposing Prop 40. That’s the billionaire tax. And both Prop 41 and another measure, Prop 42, were written after the billionaire proposal was already out collecting signatures. So they were crafted really as an attempt to undercut that ballot measure. And so it’s kind of impossible to talk about them without talking about the billionaire tax and the billionaires who are trying to kill the tax. Got it. OK, helpful context. So now let’s get into what Prop 41 does. So Prop 41 has kind of three main provisions. The first one is it’s going to require ongoing audits of state programs that are funded by what’s called special taxes. So in California, when tax money comes in, most of it goes to the general fund. That is the main spending account that pays for K-12 schools and most of the things the state does. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>But, sometimes that revenue has been sort of written into law as a special tax, and those are earmarked for specific programs. You can think of something like the gas tax, which, you know, funds roads and infrastructure. That is not money that goes into the general fund. This measure says that before voters even weigh in on a proposed special tax they need to have an audit of what the money would be spent on. And then it requires ongoing audits in the future if a tax is actually passed. And so it’s being framed by proponents as a good government measure, right? This gives more transparency. Why are we spending billions of dollars in state money and not knowing where it goes essentially? Prop 41 has two other important provisions, and these are the ones that would conflict with the billionaire tax and potentially nullify them. And they both have something to do with the GAN limit, otherwise known as the state spending limit. This was a law put in place by voters in the 1970s, and it puts a cap on how much revenue the state can spend every year. It essentially says that if state revenues grow too fast, you gotta give some of that money back to taxpayers. Some special taxes are excluded from that limit, including the gas tax example. So one of the provisions in Prop 41 says new special taxes would all be subject to the state’s spending limit. So you can imagine if the billionaire tax passes and we have $100 billion in new spending, that would really increase the state revenue, right? So then the other provision prohibits the state from enforcing taxes that are not subject to the spending limit, so. Basically, either of these things would undercut Prop 40.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>But, sometimes that revenue has been sort of written into law as a special tax, and those are earmarked for specific programs. You can think of something like the gas tax, which, you know, funds roads and infrastructure. That is not money that goes into the general fund. This measure says that before voters even weigh in on a proposed special tax they need to have an audit of what the money would be spent on. And then it requires ongoing audits in the future if a tax is actually passed. And so it’s being framed by proponents as a good government measure, right? This gives more transparency. Why are we spending billions of dollars in state money and not knowing where it goes essentially? Prop 41 has two other important provisions, and these are the ones that would conflict with the billionaire tax and potentially nullify them. And they both have something to do with the GAN limit, otherwise known as the state spending limit. This was a law put in place by voters in the 1970s, and it puts a cap on how much revenue the state can spend every year. It essentially says that if state revenues grow too fast, you gotta give some of that money back to taxpayers. Some special taxes are excluded from that limit, including the gas tax example. So one of the provisions in Prop 41 says new special taxes would all be subject to the state’s spending limit. So you can imagine if the billionaire tax passes and we have $100 billion in new spending, that would really increase the state revenue, right? So then the other provision prohibits the state from enforcing taxes that are not subject to the spending limit, so. Basically, either of these things would undercut Prop 40.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Let’s dig in a little bit more on that first provision about the audits, because there is a state auditor whose job is to audit what are they doing, are these new audits necessary?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Let’s dig in a little bit more on that first provision about the audits, because there is a state auditor whose job is to audit what are they doing, are these new audits necessary?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Yeah, I think opponents would say they’re not. You do have the ability of the legislature to request an audit of anything that they vote to. And yeah, we have an auditor who very regularly looks at state agencies and programs and spending and comes out with reports based on what the legislature has decided are the priorities.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Yeah, I think opponents would say they’re not. You do have the ability of the legislature to request an audit of anything that they vote to. And yeah, we have an auditor who very regularly looks at state agencies and programs and spending and comes out with reports based on what the legislature has decided are the priorities.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>We need to take a quick break, but when we get back, more on Prop 41. If PropFest is helping you out, let us know by supporting our work. Your donations help keep projects like PropFast going. Contribute at donate.kqed.org. And you can get some sweet podcast swag as a thank you gift.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>We need to take a quick break, but when we get back, more on Prop 41. If PropFest is helping you out, let us know by supporting our work. Your donations help keep projects like PropFast going. Contribute at donate.kqed.org. And you can get some sweet podcast swag as a thank you gift.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cem>Sponsor message\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cem>Sponsor message\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Welcome back. We’re talking with KQED’s Marisa Lagos about Proposition 41, the tax audit prop. Marisa, let’s get into who supports and opposes this prop. First up, what does support look like?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Welcome back. We’re talking with KQED’s Marisa Lagos about Proposition 41, the tax audit prop. Marisa, let’s get into who supports and opposes this prop. First up, what does support look like?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>This was crafted by the folks who are opposing Proposition 40. It’s been largely funded by the same billionaires who are opposing that, again, sort of led by Sergey Brin. But a lot of familiar names here. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>This was crafted by the folks who are opposing Proposition 40. It’s been largely funded by the same billionaires who are opposing that, again, sort of led by Sergey Brin. But a lot of familiar names here. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Names like Larry Page, who, with Sergey Brin, co-founded Alphabet, Mark Zuckerberg of Meta, Larry Ellison of Oracle, Jensen Huang of NVIDIA, mostly a who’s who of Silicon Valley.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Names like Larry Page, who, with Sergey Brin, co-founded Alphabet, Mark Zuckerberg of Meta, Larry Ellison of Oracle, Jensen Huang of NVIDIA, mostly a who’s who of Silicon Valley.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Yeah,\u003cstrong> \u003c/strong>but you also have folks like the California Chamber of Commerce, the California Taxpayers Association supporting this, and you know, these are groups that generally think that California spends too much money and have questions about whether it’s being properly spent. I mean, we’ve heard a lot of talk about this around homeless funding, right, in the governor’s race. Like, why are we spending billions of dollars and not addressing the underlying problem or making progress? So I think groups like the Chamber, the Cal Taxpayers Association, first of all, you know, just. Are pretty opposed to higher taxes and regulation, but also think that there would be some benefit in auditing all state spending, especially these special taxes, which, you know, arguably in some cases may not be getting sort of the scrutiny that they could. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Yeah,\u003cstrong> \u003c/strong>but you also have folks like the California Chamber of Commerce, the California Taxpayers Association supporting this, and you know, these are groups that generally think that California spends too much money and have questions about whether it’s being properly spent. I mean, we’ve heard a lot of talk about this around homeless funding, right, in the governor’s race. Like, why are we spending billions of dollars and not addressing the underlying problem or making progress? So I think groups like the Chamber, the Cal Taxpayers Association, first of all, you know, just. Are pretty opposed to higher taxes and regulation, but also think that there would be some benefit in auditing all state spending, especially these special taxes, which, you know, arguably in some cases may not be getting sort of the scrutiny that they could. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Who is lining up against Prop 41 and why? \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Who is lining up against Prop 41 and why? \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Yeah, so the opponents are the same groups that are supporting Prop 40 that put the billionaire tax on the ballot. So SEIU, HW West, the State Democratic Party. The California Federation of Labor Unions, they see this really as an attempt to undercut, to nullify the billionaire tax proposal and that it’s not really as much about good government as it is about that.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Yeah, so the opponents are the same groups that are supporting Prop 40 that put the billionaire tax on the ballot. So SEIU, HW West, the State Democratic Party. The California Federation of Labor Unions, they see this really as an attempt to undercut, to nullify the billionaire tax proposal and that it’s not really as much about good government as it is about that.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>So if Prop 40 and 41 were both to pass, how does that play out?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>So if Prop 40 and 41 were both to pass, how does that play out?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>On which one gets more votes. If Prop 40 got more votes, then it would stand and the only provisions of Prop 41 I believe that would take effect would be, you know, the audits and the spending limit. It would affect future special taxes, not this one. If 41 got more vote than 40, it would make it sort of unenforceable because so many provisions in 41 conflict with 40 and under California law, if something is on the same ballot together and they’re in a certain way, whatever gets more votes is kind of the law of the land. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>On which one gets more votes. If Prop 40 got more votes, then it would stand and the only provisions of Prop 41 I believe that would take effect would be, you know, the audits and the spending limit. It would affect future special taxes, not this one. If 41 got more vote than 40, it would make it sort of unenforceable because so many provisions in 41 conflict with 40 and under California law, if something is on the same ballot together and they’re in a certain way, whatever gets more votes is kind of the law of the land. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>But in the past, I know that’s gone to a judge, ultimately, to decide. Is that what would happen here, too?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>But in the past, I know that’s gone to a judge, ultimately, to decide. Is that what would happen here, too?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>I think regardless of whether any of these pass individually, I believe that there will be court challenges.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>I think regardless of whether any of these pass individually, I believe that there will be court challenges.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>How do you think voters are going to be thinking about this suite of three props, proposition 40, 41 and 42? Will they be connecting them all and voting in one direction, or could it go like we’ve seen in the past, where sometimes you get this mixed message from voters on sort of opposing props? \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>How do you think voters are going to be thinking about this suite of three props, proposition 40, 41 and 42? Will they be connecting them all and voting in one direction, or could it go like we’ve seen in the past, where sometimes you get this mixed message from voters on sort of opposing props? \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>I think that’s really gonna depend on how well the Yes on 40 campaign can draw a straight line between getting someone’s support and getting them to oppose these other measures. The billionaires and other folks who oppose the billionaire tax are not gonna wanna talk about Prop 40 when they talk about props 41 and 42. They wanna make these sort of just standalone good government measures. And so I think that’s sort of an outstanding question because you don’t have a traditional campaign against 41 and 40 too. Can the Yes on 40 folks really make clear in voters’ minds that these are all tied together, and even if you like some of the provisions of these other ballot measures, that by supporting them, you would essentially be casting another vote against the billionaire tax.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>I think that’s really gonna depend on how well the Yes on 40 campaign can draw a straight line between getting someone’s support and getting them to oppose these other measures. The billionaires and other folks who oppose the billionaire tax are not gonna wanna talk about Prop 40 when they talk about props 41 and 42. They wanna make these sort of just standalone good government measures. And so I think that’s sort of an outstanding question because you don’t have a traditional campaign against 41 and 40 too. Can the Yes on 40 folks really make clear in voters’ minds that these are all tied together, and even if you like some of the provisions of these other ballot measures, that by supporting them, you would essentially be casting another vote against the billionaire tax.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>When it comes to campaign spending, what are we seeing here?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>When it comes to campaign spending, what are we seeing here?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>This one is very lopsided. We’ve seen the folks pushing Prop 41, yes on 41, raise more than 46 million so far. Most of that is coming from the same pack that is fighting the billionaire tax. It’s called Building a Better California. It was founded by Google co-founder Sergey Brin and other billionaires. And I think one thing that’s important to note is that We’re probably going to be seeing some crossover messaging. So a lot of the money being spent on the other ballot measures will also affect this one. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>This one is very lopsided. We’ve seen the folks pushing Prop 41, yes on 41, raise more than 46 million so far. Most of that is coming from the same pack that is fighting the billionaire tax. It’s called Building a Better California. It was founded by Google co-founder Sergey Brin and other billionaires. And I think one thing that’s important to note is that We’re probably going to be seeing some crossover messaging. So a lot of the money being spent on the other ballot measures will also affect this one. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>But sounds like really no spending on the no side.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>But sounds like really no spending on the no side.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>No, and I think what you’re seeing is really that these are sort of a combined campaign for the other side. The unions that are pushing the billionaire tax are also pushing back against 41 and 42, but there isn’t that same level of like an organized campaign against each of them, in part because these are good government measures that sound very good on their face. I think it’s not something that you have the same sort of coalition. Able to sort of raise money and stand up against the way you might in some other sort of more traditional fights between the business community and labor.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>No, and I think what you’re seeing is really that these are sort of a combined campaign for the other side. The unions that are pushing the billionaire tax are also pushing back against 41 and 42, but there isn’t that same level of like an organized campaign against each of them, in part because these are good government measures that sound very good on their face. I think it’s not something that you have the same sort of coalition. Able to sort of raise money and stand up against the way you might in some other sort of more traditional fights between the business community and labor.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Marisa Lagos is a political correspondent at KQED and co-host of the podcast, Political Breakdown. Thanks, Marisa. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Marisa Lagos is a political correspondent at KQED and co-host of the podcast, Political Breakdown. Thanks, Marisa. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>It was my pleasure. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>It was my pleasure. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>In a nutshell, a vote yes on Prop 41 would create new rules about auditing state programs that would receive revenue from special taxes. It would also make new special taxes part of the state’s spending limit. A vote no means things would stay the same as they are now.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>In a nutshell, a vote yes on Prop 41 would create new rules about auditing state programs that would receive revenue from special taxes. It would also make new special taxes part of the state’s spending limit. A vote no means things would stay the same as they are now.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>That’s it for PropFest today. This series is a collaboration between The Bay and Bay Curious podcasts. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>That’s it for PropFest today. This series is a collaboration between The Bay and Bay Curious podcasts. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>It’s produced by Erika Cruz Guevara, Alan Montecillo, Ericka Cruz Guevarra, Gabriella Glueck, Pauline Bartolone, Katrina Schwartz, Christopher Beale, Anna Casalme and me, Olivia Allen-Price. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>It’s produced by Erika Cruz Guevara, Alan Montecillo, Ericka Cruz Guevarra, Gabriella Glueck, Pauline Bartolone, Katrina Schwartz, Christopher Beale, Anna Casalme and me, Olivia Allen-Price. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>We get extra support from Katie Springer, Jen Chien, Maha Sanad, Ethan Toven-Lindsey.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>We get extra support from Katie Springer, Jen Chien, Maha Sanad, Ethan Toven-Lindsey.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>You can find audio and transcripts for this series at kqed.org slash prop fest.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>You can find audio and transcripts for this series at kqed.org slash prop fest.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>Support for the bay is provided in part by the Osher Production Fund.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>Support for the bay is provided in part by the Osher Production Fund.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Some members of the KQD podcast team are represented by the Screen Actors Guild American Federation of Television and Radio Artists, San Francisco, Northern California Local.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Some members of the KQD podcast team are represented by the Screen Actors Guild American Federation of Television and Radio Artists, San Francisco, Northern California Local.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>I’m Erika Cruz Guevara. We’ll be back tomorrow with an explainer on Proposition 42, which aims to make it harder to create a wealth tax in California. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>I’m Erika Cruz Guevara. We’ll be back tomorrow with an explainer on Proposition 42, which aims to make it harder to create a wealth tax in California. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>We’ll get into all that tomorrow. See you then.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>We’ll get into all that tomorrow. See you then.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
}
],
"excerpt": "Proposition 41 would require audits of any state programs that would benefit from special taxes.",
"status": "publish",
"parent": 0,
"modified": 1790721004,
"stats": {
"hasAudio": false,
"hasVideo": false,
"hasChartOrMap": false,
"iframeSrcs": [],
"hasGoogleForm": false,
"hasGallery": false,
"hasHearkenModule": false,
"hasPolis": false,
"paragraphCount": 43,
"wordCount": 2190
},
"headData": {
"title": "Prop 41: Requires New Audits of Special Tax Programs | KQED",
"description": "Proposition 41 would require audits of any state programs that would benefit from special taxes.",
"ogTitle": "",
"ogDescription": "",
"ogImgId": "",
"twTitle": "",
"twDescription": "",
"twImgId": "",
"schema": {
"@context": "https://schema.org",
"@type": "NewsArticle",
"headline": "Prop 41: Requires New Audits of Special Tax Programs",
"datePublished": "2026-10-06T03:00:00-07:00",
"dateModified": "2026-09-29T15:30:04-07:00",
"image": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"isAccessibleForFree": "True",
"publisher": {
"@type": "NewsMediaOrganization",
"@id": "https://www.kqed.org/#organization",
"name": "KQED",
"logo": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"url": "https://www.kqed.org",
"sameAs": [
"https://www.facebook.com/KQED",
"https://twitter.com/KQED",
"https://www.instagram.com/kqed/",
"https://www.tiktok.com/@kqedofficial",
"https://www.linkedin.com/company/kqed",
"https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCeC0IOo7i1P_61zVUWbJ4nw"
]
}
}
},
"primaryCategory": {
"termId": 31795,
"slug": "california",
"name": "California"
},
"source": "Prop Fest 2026",
"sourceUrl": "http://kqed.org/propfest",
"audioUrl": "https://www.podtrac.com/pts/redirect.mp3/pdst.fm/e/traffic.megaphone.fm/KQINC2885454190.mp3",
"sticky": false,
"templateType": "standard",
"featuredImageType": "standard",
"excludeFromSiteSearch": "Include",
"articleAge": "0",
"path": "/news/12101275/prop-41-requires-new-audits-of-special-tax-programs",
"audioTrackLength": null,
"parsedContent": [
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>\n\u003ch2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Episode Transcript\u003c/h2>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>You’re going to see a lot about taxes on this year’s ballot.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>Yesterday we talked about Prop 40, which would be a one-time tax on billionaires. If you haven’t listened to that episode yet, I suggest you go give it a listen, because today we’re dropping episodes on Props 41 and 42. And both of those are related to Prop 40.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Now, Prop 41 would require more audits on the programs that are funded by special taxes. Is it good governance or red tape meant to make it harder to pass new taxes?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>This is how Prop 41 reads on your ballot, and just a warning, it’s pretty wonky.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Voice Over: \u003c/strong>Prohibits new state taxes that exclude revenues from state spending limit. Requires audits for new state special taxes.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>I’m Erika Cruz Guevara, host of The Bay.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And I’m Olivia Ellen Price, host of Bay Curious. You’re listening to PropFest, our special series that goes through the statewide propositions on your ballot. They can be so confusing and consequential. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>We’ll explain the ins and outs of each one in hopes that you feel confident in your vote, no matter which side you come down on.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Here to walk us through Prop 41 is KQED political correspondent and co-host of the podcast, Political Breakdown, Marisa Lagos. Welcome, Marissa. Hey. So the language of Prop 41 sort of sounds like gobbledygook to some voters. And we will straighten that out pretty soon. But maybe before we dive into all those specifics of this ballot measure, give us some context about who put this on the ballot and why.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Yeah, this was placed on the ballot, essentially by the billionaires who were opposing Prop 40. That’s the billionaire tax. And both Prop 41 and another measure, Prop 42, were written after the billionaire proposal was already out collecting signatures. So they were crafted really as an attempt to undercut that ballot measure. And so it’s kind of impossible to talk about them without talking about the billionaire tax and the billionaires who are trying to kill the tax. Got it. OK, helpful context. So now let’s get into what Prop 41 does. So Prop 41 has kind of three main provisions. The first one is it’s going to require ongoing audits of state programs that are funded by what’s called special taxes. So in California, when tax money comes in, most of it goes to the general fund. That is the main spending account that pays for K-12 schools and most of the things the state does. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>But, sometimes that revenue has been sort of written into law as a special tax, and those are earmarked for specific programs. You can think of something like the gas tax, which, you know, funds roads and infrastructure. That is not money that goes into the general fund. This measure says that before voters even weigh in on a proposed special tax they need to have an audit of what the money would be spent on. And then it requires ongoing audits in the future if a tax is actually passed. And so it’s being framed by proponents as a good government measure, right? This gives more transparency. Why are we spending billions of dollars in state money and not knowing where it goes essentially? Prop 41 has two other important provisions, and these are the ones that would conflict with the billionaire tax and potentially nullify them. And they both have something to do with the GAN limit, otherwise known as the state spending limit. This was a law put in place by voters in the 1970s, and it puts a cap on how much revenue the state can spend every year. It essentially says that if state revenues grow too fast, you gotta give some of that money back to taxpayers. Some special taxes are excluded from that limit, including the gas tax example. So one of the provisions in Prop 41 says new special taxes would all be subject to the state’s spending limit. So you can imagine if the billionaire tax passes and we have $100 billion in new spending, that would really increase the state revenue, right? So then the other provision prohibits the state from enforcing taxes that are not subject to the spending limit, so. Basically, either of these things would undercut Prop 40.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Let’s dig in a little bit more on that first provision about the audits, because there is a state auditor whose job is to audit what are they doing, are these new audits necessary?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Yeah, I think opponents would say they’re not. You do have the ability of the legislature to request an audit of anything that they vote to. And yeah, we have an auditor who very regularly looks at state agencies and programs and spending and comes out with reports based on what the legislature has decided are the priorities.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>We need to take a quick break, but when we get back, more on Prop 41. If PropFest is helping you out, let us know by supporting our work. Your donations help keep projects like PropFast going. Contribute at donate.kqed.org. And you can get some sweet podcast swag as a thank you gift.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cem>Sponsor message\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Welcome back. We’re talking with KQED’s Marisa Lagos about Proposition 41, the tax audit prop. Marisa, let’s get into who supports and opposes this prop. First up, what does support look like?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>This was crafted by the folks who are opposing Proposition 40. It’s been largely funded by the same billionaires who are opposing that, again, sort of led by Sergey Brin. But a lot of familiar names here. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Names like Larry Page, who, with Sergey Brin, co-founded Alphabet, Mark Zuckerberg of Meta, Larry Ellison of Oracle, Jensen Huang of NVIDIA, mostly a who’s who of Silicon Valley.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Yeah,\u003cstrong> \u003c/strong>but you also have folks like the California Chamber of Commerce, the California Taxpayers Association supporting this, and you know, these are groups that generally think that California spends too much money and have questions about whether it’s being properly spent. I mean, we’ve heard a lot of talk about this around homeless funding, right, in the governor’s race. Like, why are we spending billions of dollars and not addressing the underlying problem or making progress? So I think groups like the Chamber, the Cal Taxpayers Association, first of all, you know, just. Are pretty opposed to higher taxes and regulation, but also think that there would be some benefit in auditing all state spending, especially these special taxes, which, you know, arguably in some cases may not be getting sort of the scrutiny that they could. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Who is lining up against Prop 41 and why? \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Yeah, so the opponents are the same groups that are supporting Prop 40 that put the billionaire tax on the ballot. So SEIU, HW West, the State Democratic Party. The California Federation of Labor Unions, they see this really as an attempt to undercut, to nullify the billionaire tax proposal and that it’s not really as much about good government as it is about that.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>So if Prop 40 and 41 were both to pass, how does that play out?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>On which one gets more votes. If Prop 40 got more votes, then it would stand and the only provisions of Prop 41 I believe that would take effect would be, you know, the audits and the spending limit. It would affect future special taxes, not this one. If 41 got more vote than 40, it would make it sort of unenforceable because so many provisions in 41 conflict with 40 and under California law, if something is on the same ballot together and they’re in a certain way, whatever gets more votes is kind of the law of the land. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>But in the past, I know that’s gone to a judge, ultimately, to decide. Is that what would happen here, too?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>I think regardless of whether any of these pass individually, I believe that there will be court challenges.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>How do you think voters are going to be thinking about this suite of three props, proposition 40, 41 and 42? Will they be connecting them all and voting in one direction, or could it go like we’ve seen in the past, where sometimes you get this mixed message from voters on sort of opposing props? \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>I think that’s really gonna depend on how well the Yes on 40 campaign can draw a straight line between getting someone’s support and getting them to oppose these other measures. The billionaires and other folks who oppose the billionaire tax are not gonna wanna talk about Prop 40 when they talk about props 41 and 42. They wanna make these sort of just standalone good government measures. And so I think that’s sort of an outstanding question because you don’t have a traditional campaign against 41 and 40 too. Can the Yes on 40 folks really make clear in voters’ minds that these are all tied together, and even if you like some of the provisions of these other ballot measures, that by supporting them, you would essentially be casting another vote against the billionaire tax.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>When it comes to campaign spending, what are we seeing here?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>This one is very lopsided. We’ve seen the folks pushing Prop 41, yes on 41, raise more than 46 million so far. Most of that is coming from the same pack that is fighting the billionaire tax. It’s called Building a Better California. It was founded by Google co-founder Sergey Brin and other billionaires. And I think one thing that’s important to note is that We’re probably going to be seeing some crossover messaging. So a lot of the money being spent on the other ballot measures will also affect this one. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>But sounds like really no spending on the no side.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>No, and I think what you’re seeing is really that these are sort of a combined campaign for the other side. The unions that are pushing the billionaire tax are also pushing back against 41 and 42, but there isn’t that same level of like an organized campaign against each of them, in part because these are good government measures that sound very good on their face. I think it’s not something that you have the same sort of coalition. Able to sort of raise money and stand up against the way you might in some other sort of more traditional fights between the business community and labor.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Marisa Lagos is a political correspondent at KQED and co-host of the podcast, Political Breakdown. Thanks, Marisa. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>It was my pleasure. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>In a nutshell, a vote yes on Prop 41 would create new rules about auditing state programs that would receive revenue from special taxes. It would also make new special taxes part of the state’s spending limit. A vote no means things would stay the same as they are now.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>That’s it for PropFest today. This series is a collaboration between The Bay and Bay Curious podcasts. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>It’s produced by Erika Cruz Guevara, Alan Montecillo, Ericka Cruz Guevarra, Gabriella Glueck, Pauline Bartolone, Katrina Schwartz, Christopher Beale, Anna Casalme and me, Olivia Allen-Price. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>We get extra support from Katie Springer, Jen Chien, Maha Sanad, Ethan Toven-Lindsey.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>You can find audio and transcripts for this series at kqed.org slash prop fest.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>Support for the bay is provided in part by the Osher Production Fund.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Some members of the KQD podcast team are represented by the Screen Actors Guild American Federation of Television and Radio Artists, San Francisco, Northern California Local.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>I’m Erika Cruz Guevara. We’ll be back tomorrow with an explainer on Proposition 42, which aims to make it harder to create a wealth tax in California. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>We’ll get into all that tomorrow. See you then.\u003c/p>\n\u003c/div>\u003c/p>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
}
],
"link": "/news/12101275/prop-41-requires-new-audits-of-special-tax-programs",
"authors": [
"234",
"3239",
"102"
],
"programs": [
"news_28779",
"news_33523",
"news_34552"
],
"series": [
"news_17986"
],
"categories": [
"news_31795",
"news_13"
],
"tags": [
"news_28645",
"news_22598"
],
"featImg": "news_12101278",
"label": "source_news_12101275"
},
"news_12100660": {
"type": "posts",
"id": "news_12100660",
"meta": {
"index": "posts_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "12100660",
"score": null,
"sort": [
1791194400000
]
},
"guestAuthors": [],
"slug": "proposition-40-imposes-a-one-time-tax-on-billionaires-to-fund-healthcare-and-education",
"title": "Proposition 40: Imposes a One-Time Tax on Billionaires to Fund Healthcare and Education",
"publishDate": 1791194400,
"format": "standard",
"headTitle": "Proposition 40: Imposes a One-Time Tax on Billionaires to Fund Healthcare and Education | KQED",
"labelTerm": {},
"content": "\n\u003ch2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Transcript\u003c/h2>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>If you live in California right now, it’s pretty hard to avoid the ads about Proposition 40, otherwise known as the billionaire tax.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>No on 40 ad clip: \u003c/strong>You have questions about the wealth tax, Prop 40. So here are some facts. Newsom, Becerra, and Hilton are all voting no, calling it sketchy policy that will damage our economy.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Yes on 40 ad clip: \u003c/strong>We must work together to pass this tax and ensure that our health care services are protected. The billionaire class cannot have it all.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>Proposition 40 is a one-time 5% tax on the billionaires currently living in California. It’s a hotly debated measure with folks like Bernie Sanders and Governor Gavin Newsom taking sides.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>It’s an interesting one because traditional allies are not lining up the way you might expect on this one.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>I’m Ericka Cruz Guevarra, host of The Bay.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And I’m Olivia Allen-Price, host of Bay Curious. Welcome to PropFest. It’s a new week and we’ve got six propositions left to discuss. Our teams at The Bay and Bay Curious are bringing you breakdowns of the statewide propositions on the California ballot, so you can vote with confidence in the November election.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra:\u003c/strong> There are 14 propositions on the ballot this year, and we’ll be taking you through all of them. We’ll be looking at how they got on the ballot, the arguments for and against each one, really talk about how things could play out if they pass, and the money fueling it all.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price:\u003c/strong> Today we’re discussing Proposition 40, a one-time tax on the wealthiest Californians. It reads like this on your ballot.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Voice Over: \u003c/strong>Prop 40 imposes one-time tax on certain taxpayers.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price:\u003c/strong> Here to walk us through it is KQED political correspondent and co-host of the podcast, Political Breakdown, Marisa Lagos. Welcome, Marissa. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos:\u003c/strong> Hey, glad to be here. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>There’s a lot to get into on Proposition 40, but before we start on the measure itself, can you give us some context for why this is on our ballot this year?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Yeah, so this dates back to last year after President Trump took office, he and Republicans in Congress passed what’s known as H.R.1 or the Big Beautiful Bill. That included a reform of the tax code that enacted massive tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans. To pay for those tax cuts, they took billions and billions of dollars out of Medicaid and assistance programs. In California, those cuts will probably be around $30 billion a year that will not be going specifically to Medi-Cal, which is California’s Medicaid program. That’s the health insurance program for low-income Americans. This is basically aimed at replacing that money. Proponents of this tax estimate it would collect around $100 billion over a five-year period. That money would basically go to backfill the cuts from the H.R.1 or the Big Beautiful Bill.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>[00:03:03] And so where does Prop 40 come into all this?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>SEIU-UHW, which is a health care union that represents a lot of rank-and-file health care workers, they saw these cuts coming and decided that they wanted to try to backfill them. And so they came up with this idea to impose a one-time tax on the billionaires in California. It would apply to anyone who has a net worth of over a billion dollars and was living in the state as of January 1 of 2026. So this is a one time tax that would sort of be paid out over a couple of years and the union says it would help essentially avoid massive cuts to the healthcare system, at least for the next few years.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And how many billionaires do we have in California? And give us a sense of who these people are.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>There’s an estimated 200 or so people like Larry Page and Sergey Brin who founded Google, Mark Zuckerberg of Meta. Basically the people you hear about the most as being the wealthiest kind of Silicon Valley folks are the ones who are going to be subject to this tax if it passes.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And how are they assessing wealth in this scenario? Because I understand this is like, it’s a little bit interesting how they’re planning to get at the wealth of these people because it’s not necessarily the way that sort of everyday people hold their cash.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos \u003c/strong>[00:04:16] Right, so maybe to back up, let’s just talk a little bit about how we pay taxes as sort of average working people, right? If you and I make a salary out of every paycheck, there’s an income tax that is taken by the state. If we have money in the stock market and we sell that stock and we make some capital gains, we would pay based on those capital gains that we realized. And then of course, there are things like property taxes, sales taxes, other things. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>The critique of billionaires and really wealthy people is that they don’t make money through the same way that normal people do, right? I think there’s been reporting that Jeff Bezos’ Amazon salary, for example, is like $85,000. So he might actually qualify for some low-income programs based on that. But a lot of the ways that these folks have built their wealth is through stocks and other assets that are being played on Wall Street. And they don’t sort of realize the increase in those numbers unless they were to go and sell them. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>So how do these billionaires pay for their yachts and their mansions? Well, if you’re that rich, you don’t need an income to essentially go to a bank and say, “hey, look, I’m worth a billion dollars, two billion dollars 100 billion dollars. So you should just give me some loans,” and they get basically loans in really low rates that the rest of us wouldn’t qualify for that help pay for life styles. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>This tax would say when you file your taxes as a California resident, you have to check a box to declare whether you’re worth more than a billion dollars. And if you are worth more than a billion dollars, it essentially wants you to tell them how much that overall wealth is. So how much money do you have in your Google stocks if you’re a Sergey brand? How much money have you invested in other companies? You know, if you were Elon Musk, it would be Tesla and SpaceX. And then they want to impose a 5% tax on that overall wealth. So this is a really different kind of novel approach that is not how we have historically taxed people in the United States in general. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>For Dave Reagan — who is the head of the union and the guy who basically wrote this proposition — this is like a really simple argument.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Dave Regan: \u003c/strong>Just so everyone understands, the billionaires in California pay a tiny percentage of their financial holdings in income tax. They pay two and a half percent. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp> \u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>When you look at sort of what we pay as average Californians and our income tax rates and others, and you compare that to the overall wealth of these folks and how little they pay, that this is just like a simple math problem that this proposition would help fix.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Dave Regan: \u003c/strong>Seven years ago in 2019, the aggregate wealth of California billionaires was $700 billion. Today it’s $2.3 trillion. It has more than tripled in the last seven years. Your wages aren’t tripling. My wages aren’t tripling. I don’t know anybody whose salary is tripling.”\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And how are they Proposing that the money from this one-time tax be used?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>It’s actually pretty vague in the measure. It says that 90% of it would go to healthcare, and then the legislature would have a lot of say over how that money is actually allocated, aimed at helping all those people who would be losing their healthcare or access to it because of the federal cuts. 10% is set aside for other programs, namely food assistance, which was also cut by HR1, as well as schools.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>But I understand, like, one critique is that because it is more vague or it’s left to legislators to spend, Californians to some degree, like don’t know exactly what they’re getting with this tax.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Yeah, I think that’s right. The health care system is incredibly expensive and complicated. And I think, you know, because of the way HR1 was written, there’s also a lot of uncertainty in how it’ll actually be carried out. And so I do think that some of that flexibility was built in to account for what we don’t know about how the HR1 cuts would actually play out.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And now, I know you’ve spoken to some of the people who are behind this measure, who wrote it. Why are they proposing this as a one-time tax and not something ongoing?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Yeah, this is a question I really had because it seems like if you’re trying to push back on what are permanent federal cuts, you would want something permanent yourself. And that also, if you are going to go to the trouble of picking this very big fight with the most wealthy people, really in the world, that like, is it worth it for one time? But when I sat down with Dave Reagan, he said that there’s a couple of reasons. One was that he wanted this to be a one-time thing. He didn’t want to give billionaires an incentive to leave California to avoid this. He understands that we are part of a 50 state system and that these are people who can move their wealth.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Dave Regan: \u003c/strong>We wanted to fix a crisis, solve a problem, and then have enough time to figure out what’s the permanent solution. We wanted, to the extent possible, to take the issue off the table, that the billionaires threatening everybody that they’re gonna leave, there is no incentive for them to leave under our proposal.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>The other thing that he and proponents say is that they don’t think these will be permanent cuts, that they want to get Democrats back in power in Congress and win the White House in 2028, and that they wanna see those cuts restored at the federal level, that that is the better way to be funding them. And so they felt that this should just be a one-time tax in order to kind of bridge that gap that they hope is a gap and not a permanent reduction.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>We’ve got to take a quick break, but when we return, more on Proposition 40, including what those opposing it are saying. Stay with us. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cem>Sponsor messages\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And we’re back with Prop Fest, talking proposition 40. Marisa, other than the union that put this on the ballot, who else is supporting Prop 40 and why? \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>So in addition to SEIU-UHW, you do have some of the biggest progressive national voices supporting this. Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont. In the Bay Area, U.S. Representative Ro Khanna is behind it. The California Federation of Labor, which represents, you know, thousands of unions, did vote to endorse it. The California Democratic Party did vote to endorse Prop 40, but it is largely being driven by SEIU-UHW. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>All right, and then who is against it? And what are they arguing?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa:\u003c/strong> Everybody else in California. So at the top of the list are the billionaires. Sergey Brin has really taken the lead on this. He’s donated the most money and helped create some organizations that are really funneling money to oppose Prop 40 and push two other ballot measures that they put on the ballot in order to try to undercut Prop 40. But in addition to the billionaires themselves, you do have a really interesting list of folks up to Governor Gavin Newsom who says he opposes this tax. Most of the more high-profile Democrats in California, so in addition to Newsom, you have Xavier Becerra, the likely next governor. You have a lot of people in the legislature and others who are opposing it. And then you have some kind of surprising names. You have the California Teachers Association. You have Planned Parenthood of California. You have some other unions, firefighters and police officers and others that traditionally would probably be on the side of these taxes. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>And then, of course, groups you would expect. The Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, the California Republican Party, conservative groups who generally just oppose raising taxes in any way.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>That’s such an eclectic group. What are their arguments against this measure?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Yeah, so we’ve really seen a lot of frustration by the governor on down at the fact that this was pushed through. And I think what they say is that it is a poorly designed one-time measure that potentially has the effect of hurting the progressive movement long-term. So their arguments include the idea that it’s gonna be hard to enforce, that this is like only a one-time thing for this ongoing problem, that it could actually essentially hurt California’s ability to stay competitive and to really, you know, be an innovator in the tech space, especially as we see this AI boom happening, that this will sort of scare people off. Newsom himself is trying to thread this needle where he says that he does support a national wealth tax. But that it’s just not the right way to do it at the state level. That this should be a national attack so that you wouldn’t have the ability to sort of avoid it by moving somewhere else.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>One concern that I keep reading about this, Prop 40, is how it could impact California in the future. Can you explain?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>One of the bigger arguments against it, too, is this idea that it could do longer-term damage to the state budget. If, indeed, you buy the argument that this will drive billionaires out of California or other wealthy people, even if it’s not to avoid this one-time tax, but that it’s just creating an environment that is less, you know, that is hostile to developing businesses, the concern is that if you have a lot of wealthy people flee the state, that would result in a huge hit to the state’s operating budget every single year. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>I spoke to Joshua Rauh. He’s a Stanford University Finance Professor, a senior fellow at the Hoover Institute and he is very critical of Prop 40.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Joshua Rauh: \u003c/strong>The costs, in this case, with the billionaire tax are that we’re driving billionaires out of the state and we’re also discouraging new entrepreneurs from growing their businesses here. And so that’s really the way to see it. The benefits would potentially be revenue, but we calculate that actually the state’s gonna lose $25 billion from doing this tax.\u003cbr>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price:\u003c/strong> Mmm so essentially the concern is this wealth tax could drive rich people out of the state, and so California would lose out on the yearly taxes they do pay.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos:\u003c/strong> We do have a very progressive tax system here. The highest earners do pay the most into the state budget. And if that pool of folks shrinks, it could have an impact on overall spending every year, which of course goes not just to healthcare, but to. Police and fire and education and all these other areas. So I think part of what Newsom and a lot of the people on his side of things on the Democratic side who oppose this are worried about is that in the short term, this would help shore up the healthcare system, but in the long term, it would really undercut our overall ability to support all those programs that people depend on.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Another issue Rauh takes with Prop 40 is with how it may force billionaires to make more of their money liquid.\u003cbr>\u003cbr>\u003cstrong>Joshua Rauh: \u003c/strong> If someone has a business that has a value of $1 billion, they’re going to be subject to this tax. They’re going to have to pay $50 million because of this tax, and they may not have that money liquid. That means that they’re gonna have to actually sell off some of this company and you know that that actually removes capital from growing companies. It’s bad for the companies and bad for economy. It’s bad to the labor force.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Now I understand that this would be the first of its kind tax if this is passed in the United States, but similar stuff has been tried elsewhere.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>There was an attempt a few decades ago to levy wealth taxes in some European countries. Most of those, I believe, were repealed. They were much broader. They were not just aimed at billionaires. Billionaires didn’t actually exist in the 90s, let’s not forget. So I think one of what you’ll hear from critics is that you should look at a place like France, which abolished its tax in 2018. After they did see sort of an exodus of a lot of businesses and business people who brought in, you know, a lot money. The flip side to that is that, you know, this is a one-time tax. It is in a state that is the center of these industries.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price:\u003c/strong> Now we’re gonna get into props 41 and 42 in detail in some future episodes, but because they are related to prop 40, can you briefly explain how they conflict?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Yeah, both Prop 41 and 42 have various other provisions, but they include language that says if they get more votes than Proposition 40, they supersede it. And in both cases, they would sort of undercut key provisions in Prop 40, and essentially make it impossible for the state to enforce the billionaire tax. So if all three pass, but 40 gets fewer votes, it essentially is like it didn’t pass in a lot of ways.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And like we mentioned at the top of this episode, there have been a lot of ads about this measure, which means money. How is campaign spending shaking out on this?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>So there has been money spent so far, and you might already feel like you’re seeing a lot of ads, but actually how much has been spent pales in comparison to what’s going to be spent. There are some estimates that this could be the most expensive ballot measure campaign in state history, so those ads you’re seeing are not going away anytime soon. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>On the pro side, the healthcare unions, their allies, have spent, I think, over $30 million by the end of August. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>On the other side, just the committee created by the billionaires to fight Prop 40 and push those other competing ballot measures, it’s called Building A Better California, they’ve raised $118 million so far. Most of that has not been spent, a little less than the other side has been spent so far, around $21 million. But they have reserved $87 million in TV and radio time leading up to the fall election. And so you can expect that money is all going to be put out there. Obviously these billionaires have a lot of money and that’s just the money that they’ve put in so far.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And I understand that this proposition is polling pretty close right now. So it could seem like a good investment if you can move a couple of voters this way or that.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>A hundred percent. I mean, what we’ve seen is that more Californians in these polls tend to favor this than oppose it. However, those numbers are pretty squishy. The kind of common wisdom is that if you’re going into a ballot measure campaign with a well-funded opposition, you want to start around 60% support. This is more in the mid to low fifties in terms of the support and some of the public polling we’ve seen. For both sides, people just get fatigued when they hear too much about any ballot measure and they start getting angry. And that sometimes can lead people to vote no, but if all they’re hearing is a no message, does that flip them the other way? I think there’s a saturation point that the campaigns may have to be concerned about on either side.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Marisa Lagos is a political correspondent at KQED and co-host of the podcas, Political Breakdown. Thanks, Marisa.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>My pleasure.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>In a nutshell, a vote yes on Prop 40 means you want to levy a one-time tax of 5% on California’s 200 billionaires, with 90% of the revenue going to support health care in the state, and the other 10% going to fund public education and food assistance programs. A no vote means you do not want to levy a one time tax on billionaires. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>If you wanna hear more about Prop 40, the billionaire tax, check out Marisa’s podcast, Political Breakdown. She has in-depth interviews with Dave Reagan, who authored Prop 40 and Joshua Rauh, a Stanford economist who’s critical of it. You can find both in the Political Break Down podcast feed and we’ll link in our show notes. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>That’s it for our latest episode of PropFest. How we doing? How we feeling? Feeling smarter? Feeling ready to vote? Well, there’s plenty more where that came from. From now until October 9th, the Bay and Bay Curious teams here at KQED are going to be dropping breakdowns of all the statewide propositions on the ballot this year to leave you feeling ready to vote this November. Stay locked in and make sure you’re subscribed to the Bay and be curious so you don’t miss out on the next ones.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price:\u003c/strong> Prop Fest is a collaboration between The Bay and Bay Curious podcasts. It is produced by: Alan Montecillo, Ericka Cruz Guevarra, Gabriella Glueck, Pauline Bartolone, Katrina Schwartz, Christopher Beale, Anna Casalme, and me, Olivia Allen-Price\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>We get extra support from, Katie Sprenger, Jen Chien, Maha Sanad, Ethan Toven-Lindsey and the whole KQED family.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>You can find audio and transcripts for this series at kqed.org slash propfest.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>Our show is made in San Francisco at member-supported KQED. If you value podcasts like this one, please consider becoming a sustaining KQED member. Learn more at donate.kqed.org slash podcasts. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Some members of the KQED podcast team are represented by The Screen Actors Guild, American Federation of Television and Radio Artists, San Francisco-Northern California Local.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>Support for the Bay is provided in part by the Osher Production Fund.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>I’m Olivia Allen-Price. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>And I’m Erika Cruz-Gabara. We’ll be back tomorrow with an explainer on Proposition 41, which takes aim at new special taxes, including the billionaire tax we just talked about. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>We’ll see you then!\u003c/p>\n",
"blocks": [
{
"blockName": "core/heading",
"attrs": {
"text": "Transcript",
"level": 2
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003ch2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Transcript\u003c/h2>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003ch2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Transcript\u003c/h2>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>If you live in California right now, it’s pretty hard to avoid the ads about Proposition 40, otherwise known as the billionaire tax.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>If you live in California right now, it’s pretty hard to avoid the ads about Proposition 40, otherwise known as the billionaire tax.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>No on 40 ad clip: \u003c/strong>You have questions about the wealth tax, Prop 40. So here are some facts. Newsom, Becerra, and Hilton are all voting no, calling it sketchy policy that will damage our economy.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>No on 40 ad clip: \u003c/strong>You have questions about the wealth tax, Prop 40. So here are some facts. Newsom, Becerra, and Hilton are all voting no, calling it sketchy policy that will damage our economy.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Yes on 40 ad clip: \u003c/strong>We must work together to pass this tax and ensure that our health care services are protected. The billionaire class cannot have it all.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Yes on 40 ad clip: \u003c/strong>We must work together to pass this tax and ensure that our health care services are protected. The billionaire class cannot have it all.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>Proposition 40 is a one-time 5% tax on the billionaires currently living in California. It’s a hotly debated measure with folks like Bernie Sanders and Governor Gavin Newsom taking sides.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>Proposition 40 is a one-time 5% tax on the billionaires currently living in California. It’s a hotly debated measure with folks like Bernie Sanders and Governor Gavin Newsom taking sides.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>It’s an interesting one because traditional allies are not lining up the way you might expect on this one.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>It’s an interesting one because traditional allies are not lining up the way you might expect on this one.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>I’m Ericka Cruz Guevarra, host of The Bay.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>I’m Ericka Cruz Guevarra, host of The Bay.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And I’m Olivia Allen-Price, host of Bay Curious. Welcome to PropFest. It’s a new week and we’ve got six propositions left to discuss. Our teams at The Bay and Bay Curious are bringing you breakdowns of the statewide propositions on the California ballot, so you can vote with confidence in the November election.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And I’m Olivia Allen-Price, host of Bay Curious. Welcome to PropFest. It’s a new week and we’ve got six propositions left to discuss. Our teams at The Bay and Bay Curious are bringing you breakdowns of the statewide propositions on the California ballot, so you can vote with confidence in the November election.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra:\u003c/strong> There are 14 propositions on the ballot this year, and we’ll be taking you through all of them. We’ll be looking at how they got on the ballot, the arguments for and against each one, really talk about how things could play out if they pass, and the money fueling it all.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra:\u003c/strong> There are 14 propositions on the ballot this year, and we’ll be taking you through all of them. We’ll be looking at how they got on the ballot, the arguments for and against each one, really talk about how things could play out if they pass, and the money fueling it all.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price:\u003c/strong> Today we’re discussing Proposition 40, a one-time tax on the wealthiest Californians. It reads like this on your ballot.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price:\u003c/strong> Today we’re discussing Proposition 40, a one-time tax on the wealthiest Californians. It reads like this on your ballot.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Voice Over: \u003c/strong>Prop 40 imposes one-time tax on certain taxpayers.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Voice Over: \u003c/strong>Prop 40 imposes one-time tax on certain taxpayers.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price:\u003c/strong> Here to walk us through it is KQED political correspondent and co-host of the podcast, Political Breakdown, Marisa Lagos. Welcome, Marissa. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price:\u003c/strong> Here to walk us through it is KQED political correspondent and co-host of the podcast, Political Breakdown, Marisa Lagos. Welcome, Marissa. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos:\u003c/strong> Hey, glad to be here. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos:\u003c/strong> Hey, glad to be here. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>There’s a lot to get into on Proposition 40, but before we start on the measure itself, can you give us some context for why this is on our ballot this year?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>There’s a lot to get into on Proposition 40, but before we start on the measure itself, can you give us some context for why this is on our ballot this year?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Yeah, so this dates back to last year after President Trump took office, he and Republicans in Congress passed what’s known as H.R.1 or the Big Beautiful Bill. That included a reform of the tax code that enacted massive tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans. To pay for those tax cuts, they took billions and billions of dollars out of Medicaid and assistance programs. In California, those cuts will probably be around $30 billion a year that will not be going specifically to Medi-Cal, which is California’s Medicaid program. That’s the health insurance program for low-income Americans. This is basically aimed at replacing that money. Proponents of this tax estimate it would collect around $100 billion over a five-year period. That money would basically go to backfill the cuts from the H.R.1 or the Big Beautiful Bill.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Yeah, so this dates back to last year after President Trump took office, he and Republicans in Congress passed what’s known as H.R.1 or the Big Beautiful Bill. That included a reform of the tax code that enacted massive tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans. To pay for those tax cuts, they took billions and billions of dollars out of Medicaid and assistance programs. In California, those cuts will probably be around $30 billion a year that will not be going specifically to Medi-Cal, which is California’s Medicaid program. That’s the health insurance program for low-income Americans. This is basically aimed at replacing that money. Proponents of this tax estimate it would collect around $100 billion over a five-year period. That money would basically go to backfill the cuts from the H.R.1 or the Big Beautiful Bill.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>[00:03:03] And so where does Prop 40 come into all this?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>[00:03:03] And so where does Prop 40 come into all this?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>SEIU-UHW, which is a health care union that represents a lot of rank-and-file health care workers, they saw these cuts coming and decided that they wanted to try to backfill them. And so they came up with this idea to impose a one-time tax on the billionaires in California. It would apply to anyone who has a net worth of over a billion dollars and was living in the state as of January 1 of 2026. So this is a one time tax that would sort of be paid out over a couple of years and the union says it would help essentially avoid massive cuts to the healthcare system, at least for the next few years.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>SEIU-UHW, which is a health care union that represents a lot of rank-and-file health care workers, they saw these cuts coming and decided that they wanted to try to backfill them. And so they came up with this idea to impose a one-time tax on the billionaires in California. It would apply to anyone who has a net worth of over a billion dollars and was living in the state as of January 1 of 2026. So this is a one time tax that would sort of be paid out over a couple of years and the union says it would help essentially avoid massive cuts to the healthcare system, at least for the next few years.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And how many billionaires do we have in California? And give us a sense of who these people are.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And how many billionaires do we have in California? And give us a sense of who these people are.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>There’s an estimated 200 or so people like Larry Page and Sergey Brin who founded Google, Mark Zuckerberg of Meta. Basically the people you hear about the most as being the wealthiest kind of Silicon Valley folks are the ones who are going to be subject to this tax if it passes.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>There’s an estimated 200 or so people like Larry Page and Sergey Brin who founded Google, Mark Zuckerberg of Meta. Basically the people you hear about the most as being the wealthiest kind of Silicon Valley folks are the ones who are going to be subject to this tax if it passes.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And how are they assessing wealth in this scenario? Because I understand this is like, it’s a little bit interesting how they’re planning to get at the wealth of these people because it’s not necessarily the way that sort of everyday people hold their cash.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And how are they assessing wealth in this scenario? Because I understand this is like, it’s a little bit interesting how they’re planning to get at the wealth of these people because it’s not necessarily the way that sort of everyday people hold their cash.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos \u003c/strong>[00:04:16] Right, so maybe to back up, let’s just talk a little bit about how we pay taxes as sort of average working people, right? If you and I make a salary out of every paycheck, there’s an income tax that is taken by the state. If we have money in the stock market and we sell that stock and we make some capital gains, we would pay based on those capital gains that we realized. And then of course, there are things like property taxes, sales taxes, other things. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos \u003c/strong>[00:04:16] Right, so maybe to back up, let’s just talk a little bit about how we pay taxes as sort of average working people, right? If you and I make a salary out of every paycheck, there’s an income tax that is taken by the state. If we have money in the stock market and we sell that stock and we make some capital gains, we would pay based on those capital gains that we realized. And then of course, there are things like property taxes, sales taxes, other things. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>The critique of billionaires and really wealthy people is that they don’t make money through the same way that normal people do, right? I think there’s been reporting that Jeff Bezos’ Amazon salary, for example, is like $85,000. So he might actually qualify for some low-income programs based on that. But a lot of the ways that these folks have built their wealth is through stocks and other assets that are being played on Wall Street. And they don’t sort of realize the increase in those numbers unless they were to go and sell them. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>The critique of billionaires and really wealthy people is that they don’t make money through the same way that normal people do, right? I think there’s been reporting that Jeff Bezos’ Amazon salary, for example, is like $85,000. So he might actually qualify for some low-income programs based on that. But a lot of the ways that these folks have built their wealth is through stocks and other assets that are being played on Wall Street. And they don’t sort of realize the increase in those numbers unless they were to go and sell them. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>So how do these billionaires pay for their yachts and their mansions? Well, if you’re that rich, you don’t need an income to essentially go to a bank and say, “hey, look, I’m worth a billion dollars, two billion dollars 100 billion dollars. So you should just give me some loans,” and they get basically loans in really low rates that the rest of us wouldn’t qualify for that help pay for life styles. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>So how do these billionaires pay for their yachts and their mansions? Well, if you’re that rich, you don’t need an income to essentially go to a bank and say, “hey, look, I’m worth a billion dollars, two billion dollars 100 billion dollars. So you should just give me some loans,” and they get basically loans in really low rates that the rest of us wouldn’t qualify for that help pay for life styles. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>This tax would say when you file your taxes as a California resident, you have to check a box to declare whether you’re worth more than a billion dollars. And if you are worth more than a billion dollars, it essentially wants you to tell them how much that overall wealth is. So how much money do you have in your Google stocks if you’re a Sergey brand? How much money have you invested in other companies? You know, if you were Elon Musk, it would be Tesla and SpaceX. And then they want to impose a 5% tax on that overall wealth. So this is a really different kind of novel approach that is not how we have historically taxed people in the United States in general. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>This tax would say when you file your taxes as a California resident, you have to check a box to declare whether you’re worth more than a billion dollars. And if you are worth more than a billion dollars, it essentially wants you to tell them how much that overall wealth is. So how much money do you have in your Google stocks if you’re a Sergey brand? How much money have you invested in other companies? You know, if you were Elon Musk, it would be Tesla and SpaceX. And then they want to impose a 5% tax on that overall wealth. So this is a really different kind of novel approach that is not how we have historically taxed people in the United States in general. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>For Dave Reagan — who is the head of the union and the guy who basically wrote this proposition — this is like a really simple argument.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>For Dave Reagan — who is the head of the union and the guy who basically wrote this proposition — this is like a really simple argument.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Dave Regan: \u003c/strong>Just so everyone understands, the billionaires in California pay a tiny percentage of their financial holdings in income tax. They pay two and a half percent. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Dave Regan: \u003c/strong>Just so everyone understands, the billionaires in California pay a tiny percentage of their financial holdings in income tax. They pay two and a half percent. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp> \u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>When you look at sort of what we pay as average Californians and our income tax rates and others, and you compare that to the overall wealth of these folks and how little they pay, that this is just like a simple math problem that this proposition would help fix.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp> \u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>When you look at sort of what we pay as average Californians and our income tax rates and others, and you compare that to the overall wealth of these folks and how little they pay, that this is just like a simple math problem that this proposition would help fix.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Dave Regan: \u003c/strong>Seven years ago in 2019, the aggregate wealth of California billionaires was $700 billion. Today it’s $2.3 trillion. It has more than tripled in the last seven years. Your wages aren’t tripling. My wages aren’t tripling. I don’t know anybody whose salary is tripling.”\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Dave Regan: \u003c/strong>Seven years ago in 2019, the aggregate wealth of California billionaires was $700 billion. Today it’s $2.3 trillion. It has more than tripled in the last seven years. Your wages aren’t tripling. My wages aren’t tripling. I don’t know anybody whose salary is tripling.”\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And how are they Proposing that the money from this one-time tax be used?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And how are they Proposing that the money from this one-time tax be used?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>It’s actually pretty vague in the measure. It says that 90% of it would go to healthcare, and then the legislature would have a lot of say over how that money is actually allocated, aimed at helping all those people who would be losing their healthcare or access to it because of the federal cuts. 10% is set aside for other programs, namely food assistance, which was also cut by HR1, as well as schools.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>It’s actually pretty vague in the measure. It says that 90% of it would go to healthcare, and then the legislature would have a lot of say over how that money is actually allocated, aimed at helping all those people who would be losing their healthcare or access to it because of the federal cuts. 10% is set aside for other programs, namely food assistance, which was also cut by HR1, as well as schools.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>But I understand, like, one critique is that because it is more vague or it’s left to legislators to spend, Californians to some degree, like don’t know exactly what they’re getting with this tax.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>But I understand, like, one critique is that because it is more vague or it’s left to legislators to spend, Californians to some degree, like don’t know exactly what they’re getting with this tax.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Yeah, I think that’s right. The health care system is incredibly expensive and complicated. And I think, you know, because of the way HR1 was written, there’s also a lot of uncertainty in how it’ll actually be carried out. And so I do think that some of that flexibility was built in to account for what we don’t know about how the HR1 cuts would actually play out.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Yeah, I think that’s right. The health care system is incredibly expensive and complicated. And I think, you know, because of the way HR1 was written, there’s also a lot of uncertainty in how it’ll actually be carried out. And so I do think that some of that flexibility was built in to account for what we don’t know about how the HR1 cuts would actually play out.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And now, I know you’ve spoken to some of the people who are behind this measure, who wrote it. Why are they proposing this as a one-time tax and not something ongoing?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And now, I know you’ve spoken to some of the people who are behind this measure, who wrote it. Why are they proposing this as a one-time tax and not something ongoing?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Yeah, this is a question I really had because it seems like if you’re trying to push back on what are permanent federal cuts, you would want something permanent yourself. And that also, if you are going to go to the trouble of picking this very big fight with the most wealthy people, really in the world, that like, is it worth it for one time? But when I sat down with Dave Reagan, he said that there’s a couple of reasons. One was that he wanted this to be a one-time thing. He didn’t want to give billionaires an incentive to leave California to avoid this. He understands that we are part of a 50 state system and that these are people who can move their wealth.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Yeah, this is a question I really had because it seems like if you’re trying to push back on what are permanent federal cuts, you would want something permanent yourself. And that also, if you are going to go to the trouble of picking this very big fight with the most wealthy people, really in the world, that like, is it worth it for one time? But when I sat down with Dave Reagan, he said that there’s a couple of reasons. One was that he wanted this to be a one-time thing. He didn’t want to give billionaires an incentive to leave California to avoid this. He understands that we are part of a 50 state system and that these are people who can move their wealth.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Dave Regan: \u003c/strong>We wanted to fix a crisis, solve a problem, and then have enough time to figure out what’s the permanent solution. We wanted, to the extent possible, to take the issue off the table, that the billionaires threatening everybody that they’re gonna leave, there is no incentive for them to leave under our proposal.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Dave Regan: \u003c/strong>We wanted to fix a crisis, solve a problem, and then have enough time to figure out what’s the permanent solution. We wanted, to the extent possible, to take the issue off the table, that the billionaires threatening everybody that they’re gonna leave, there is no incentive for them to leave under our proposal.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>The other thing that he and proponents say is that they don’t think these will be permanent cuts, that they want to get Democrats back in power in Congress and win the White House in 2028, and that they wanna see those cuts restored at the federal level, that that is the better way to be funding them. And so they felt that this should just be a one-time tax in order to kind of bridge that gap that they hope is a gap and not a permanent reduction.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>The other thing that he and proponents say is that they don’t think these will be permanent cuts, that they want to get Democrats back in power in Congress and win the White House in 2028, and that they wanna see those cuts restored at the federal level, that that is the better way to be funding them. And so they felt that this should just be a one-time tax in order to kind of bridge that gap that they hope is a gap and not a permanent reduction.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>We’ve got to take a quick break, but when we return, more on Proposition 40, including what those opposing it are saying. Stay with us. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>We’ve got to take a quick break, but when we return, more on Proposition 40, including what those opposing it are saying. Stay with us. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cem>Sponsor messages\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cem>Sponsor messages\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And we’re back with Prop Fest, talking proposition 40. Marisa, other than the union that put this on the ballot, who else is supporting Prop 40 and why? \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And we’re back with Prop Fest, talking proposition 40. Marisa, other than the union that put this on the ballot, who else is supporting Prop 40 and why? \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>So in addition to SEIU-UHW, you do have some of the biggest progressive national voices supporting this. Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont. In the Bay Area, U.S. Representative Ro Khanna is behind it. The California Federation of Labor, which represents, you know, thousands of unions, did vote to endorse it. The California Democratic Party did vote to endorse Prop 40, but it is largely being driven by SEIU-UHW. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>So in addition to SEIU-UHW, you do have some of the biggest progressive national voices supporting this. Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont. In the Bay Area, U.S. Representative Ro Khanna is behind it. The California Federation of Labor, which represents, you know, thousands of unions, did vote to endorse it. The California Democratic Party did vote to endorse Prop 40, but it is largely being driven by SEIU-UHW. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>All right, and then who is against it? And what are they arguing?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>All right, and then who is against it? And what are they arguing?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa:\u003c/strong> Everybody else in California. So at the top of the list are the billionaires. Sergey Brin has really taken the lead on this. He’s donated the most money and helped create some organizations that are really funneling money to oppose Prop 40 and push two other ballot measures that they put on the ballot in order to try to undercut Prop 40. But in addition to the billionaires themselves, you do have a really interesting list of folks up to Governor Gavin Newsom who says he opposes this tax. Most of the more high-profile Democrats in California, so in addition to Newsom, you have Xavier Becerra, the likely next governor. You have a lot of people in the legislature and others who are opposing it. And then you have some kind of surprising names. You have the California Teachers Association. You have Planned Parenthood of California. You have some other unions, firefighters and police officers and others that traditionally would probably be on the side of these taxes. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa:\u003c/strong> Everybody else in California. So at the top of the list are the billionaires. Sergey Brin has really taken the lead on this. He’s donated the most money and helped create some organizations that are really funneling money to oppose Prop 40 and push two other ballot measures that they put on the ballot in order to try to undercut Prop 40. But in addition to the billionaires themselves, you do have a really interesting list of folks up to Governor Gavin Newsom who says he opposes this tax. Most of the more high-profile Democrats in California, so in addition to Newsom, you have Xavier Becerra, the likely next governor. You have a lot of people in the legislature and others who are opposing it. And then you have some kind of surprising names. You have the California Teachers Association. You have Planned Parenthood of California. You have some other unions, firefighters and police officers and others that traditionally would probably be on the side of these taxes. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>And then, of course, groups you would expect. The Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, the California Republican Party, conservative groups who generally just oppose raising taxes in any way.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>And then, of course, groups you would expect. The Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, the California Republican Party, conservative groups who generally just oppose raising taxes in any way.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>That’s such an eclectic group. What are their arguments against this measure?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>That’s such an eclectic group. What are their arguments against this measure?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Yeah, so we’ve really seen a lot of frustration by the governor on down at the fact that this was pushed through. And I think what they say is that it is a poorly designed one-time measure that potentially has the effect of hurting the progressive movement long-term. So their arguments include the idea that it’s gonna be hard to enforce, that this is like only a one-time thing for this ongoing problem, that it could actually essentially hurt California’s ability to stay competitive and to really, you know, be an innovator in the tech space, especially as we see this AI boom happening, that this will sort of scare people off. Newsom himself is trying to thread this needle where he says that he does support a national wealth tax. But that it’s just not the right way to do it at the state level. That this should be a national attack so that you wouldn’t have the ability to sort of avoid it by moving somewhere else.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Yeah, so we’ve really seen a lot of frustration by the governor on down at the fact that this was pushed through. And I think what they say is that it is a poorly designed one-time measure that potentially has the effect of hurting the progressive movement long-term. So their arguments include the idea that it’s gonna be hard to enforce, that this is like only a one-time thing for this ongoing problem, that it could actually essentially hurt California’s ability to stay competitive and to really, you know, be an innovator in the tech space, especially as we see this AI boom happening, that this will sort of scare people off. Newsom himself is trying to thread this needle where he says that he does support a national wealth tax. But that it’s just not the right way to do it at the state level. That this should be a national attack so that you wouldn’t have the ability to sort of avoid it by moving somewhere else.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>One concern that I keep reading about this, Prop 40, is how it could impact California in the future. Can you explain?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>One concern that I keep reading about this, Prop 40, is how it could impact California in the future. Can you explain?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>One of the bigger arguments against it, too, is this idea that it could do longer-term damage to the state budget. If, indeed, you buy the argument that this will drive billionaires out of California or other wealthy people, even if it’s not to avoid this one-time tax, but that it’s just creating an environment that is less, you know, that is hostile to developing businesses, the concern is that if you have a lot of wealthy people flee the state, that would result in a huge hit to the state’s operating budget every single year. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>One of the bigger arguments against it, too, is this idea that it could do longer-term damage to the state budget. If, indeed, you buy the argument that this will drive billionaires out of California or other wealthy people, even if it’s not to avoid this one-time tax, but that it’s just creating an environment that is less, you know, that is hostile to developing businesses, the concern is that if you have a lot of wealthy people flee the state, that would result in a huge hit to the state’s operating budget every single year. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>I spoke to Joshua Rauh. He’s a Stanford University Finance Professor, a senior fellow at the Hoover Institute and he is very critical of Prop 40.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>I spoke to Joshua Rauh. He’s a Stanford University Finance Professor, a senior fellow at the Hoover Institute and he is very critical of Prop 40.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Joshua Rauh: \u003c/strong>The costs, in this case, with the billionaire tax are that we’re driving billionaires out of the state and we’re also discouraging new entrepreneurs from growing their businesses here. And so that’s really the way to see it. The benefits would potentially be revenue, but we calculate that actually the state’s gonna lose $25 billion from doing this tax.\u003cbr>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price:\u003c/strong> Mmm so essentially the concern is this wealth tax could drive rich people out of the state, and so California would lose out on the yearly taxes they do pay.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Joshua Rauh: \u003c/strong>The costs, in this case, with the billionaire tax are that we’re driving billionaires out of the state and we’re also discouraging new entrepreneurs from growing their businesses here. And so that’s really the way to see it. The benefits would potentially be revenue, but we calculate that actually the state’s gonna lose $25 billion from doing this tax.\u003cbr>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price:\u003c/strong> Mmm so essentially the concern is this wealth tax could drive rich people out of the state, and so California would lose out on the yearly taxes they do pay.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos:\u003c/strong> We do have a very progressive tax system here. The highest earners do pay the most into the state budget. And if that pool of folks shrinks, it could have an impact on overall spending every year, which of course goes not just to healthcare, but to. Police and fire and education and all these other areas. So I think part of what Newsom and a lot of the people on his side of things on the Democratic side who oppose this are worried about is that in the short term, this would help shore up the healthcare system, but in the long term, it would really undercut our overall ability to support all those programs that people depend on.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos:\u003c/strong> We do have a very progressive tax system here. The highest earners do pay the most into the state budget. And if that pool of folks shrinks, it could have an impact on overall spending every year, which of course goes not just to healthcare, but to. Police and fire and education and all these other areas. So I think part of what Newsom and a lot of the people on his side of things on the Democratic side who oppose this are worried about is that in the short term, this would help shore up the healthcare system, but in the long term, it would really undercut our overall ability to support all those programs that people depend on.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>Another issue Rauh takes with Prop 40 is with how it may force billionaires to make more of their money liquid.\u003cbr>\u003cbr>\u003cstrong>Joshua Rauh: \u003c/strong> If someone has a business that has a value of $1 billion, they’re going to be subject to this tax. They’re going to have to pay $50 million because of this tax, and they may not have that money liquid. That means that they’re gonna have to actually sell off some of this company and you know that that actually removes capital from growing companies. It’s bad for the companies and bad for economy. It’s bad to the labor force.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>Another issue Rauh takes with Prop 40 is with how it may force billionaires to make more of their money liquid.\u003cbr>\u003cbr>\u003cstrong>Joshua Rauh: \u003c/strong> If someone has a business that has a value of $1 billion, they’re going to be subject to this tax. They’re going to have to pay $50 million because of this tax, and they may not have that money liquid. That means that they’re gonna have to actually sell off some of this company and you know that that actually removes capital from growing companies. It’s bad for the companies and bad for economy. It’s bad to the labor force.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Now I understand that this would be the first of its kind tax if this is passed in the United States, but similar stuff has been tried elsewhere.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Now I understand that this would be the first of its kind tax if this is passed in the United States, but similar stuff has been tried elsewhere.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>There was an attempt a few decades ago to levy wealth taxes in some European countries. Most of those, I believe, were repealed. They were much broader. They were not just aimed at billionaires. Billionaires didn’t actually exist in the 90s, let’s not forget. So I think one of what you’ll hear from critics is that you should look at a place like France, which abolished its tax in 2018. After they did see sort of an exodus of a lot of businesses and business people who brought in, you know, a lot money. The flip side to that is that, you know, this is a one-time tax. It is in a state that is the center of these industries.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>There was an attempt a few decades ago to levy wealth taxes in some European countries. Most of those, I believe, were repealed. They were much broader. They were not just aimed at billionaires. Billionaires didn’t actually exist in the 90s, let’s not forget. So I think one of what you’ll hear from critics is that you should look at a place like France, which abolished its tax in 2018. After they did see sort of an exodus of a lot of businesses and business people who brought in, you know, a lot money. The flip side to that is that, you know, this is a one-time tax. It is in a state that is the center of these industries.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price:\u003c/strong> Now we’re gonna get into props 41 and 42 in detail in some future episodes, but because they are related to prop 40, can you briefly explain how they conflict?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price:\u003c/strong> Now we’re gonna get into props 41 and 42 in detail in some future episodes, but because they are related to prop 40, can you briefly explain how they conflict?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Yeah, both Prop 41 and 42 have various other provisions, but they include language that says if they get more votes than Proposition 40, they supersede it. And in both cases, they would sort of undercut key provisions in Prop 40, and essentially make it impossible for the state to enforce the billionaire tax. So if all three pass, but 40 gets fewer votes, it essentially is like it didn’t pass in a lot of ways.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Yeah, both Prop 41 and 42 have various other provisions, but they include language that says if they get more votes than Proposition 40, they supersede it. And in both cases, they would sort of undercut key provisions in Prop 40, and essentially make it impossible for the state to enforce the billionaire tax. So if all three pass, but 40 gets fewer votes, it essentially is like it didn’t pass in a lot of ways.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And like we mentioned at the top of this episode, there have been a lot of ads about this measure, which means money. How is campaign spending shaking out on this?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And like we mentioned at the top of this episode, there have been a lot of ads about this measure, which means money. How is campaign spending shaking out on this?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>So there has been money spent so far, and you might already feel like you’re seeing a lot of ads, but actually how much has been spent pales in comparison to what’s going to be spent. There are some estimates that this could be the most expensive ballot measure campaign in state history, so those ads you’re seeing are not going away anytime soon. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>So there has been money spent so far, and you might already feel like you’re seeing a lot of ads, but actually how much has been spent pales in comparison to what’s going to be spent. There are some estimates that this could be the most expensive ballot measure campaign in state history, so those ads you’re seeing are not going away anytime soon. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>On the pro side, the healthcare unions, their allies, have spent, I think, over $30 million by the end of August. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>On the pro side, the healthcare unions, their allies, have spent, I think, over $30 million by the end of August. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>On the other side, just the committee created by the billionaires to fight Prop 40 and push those other competing ballot measures, it’s called Building A Better California, they’ve raised $118 million so far. Most of that has not been spent, a little less than the other side has been spent so far, around $21 million. But they have reserved $87 million in TV and radio time leading up to the fall election. And so you can expect that money is all going to be put out there. Obviously these billionaires have a lot of money and that’s just the money that they’ve put in so far.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>On the other side, just the committee created by the billionaires to fight Prop 40 and push those other competing ballot measures, it’s called Building A Better California, they’ve raised $118 million so far. Most of that has not been spent, a little less than the other side has been spent so far, around $21 million. But they have reserved $87 million in TV and radio time leading up to the fall election. And so you can expect that money is all going to be put out there. Obviously these billionaires have a lot of money and that’s just the money that they’ve put in so far.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And I understand that this proposition is polling pretty close right now. So it could seem like a good investment if you can move a couple of voters this way or that.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And I understand that this proposition is polling pretty close right now. So it could seem like a good investment if you can move a couple of voters this way or that.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>A hundred percent. I mean, what we’ve seen is that more Californians in these polls tend to favor this than oppose it. However, those numbers are pretty squishy. The kind of common wisdom is that if you’re going into a ballot measure campaign with a well-funded opposition, you want to start around 60% support. This is more in the mid to low fifties in terms of the support and some of the public polling we’ve seen. For both sides, people just get fatigued when they hear too much about any ballot measure and they start getting angry. And that sometimes can lead people to vote no, but if all they’re hearing is a no message, does that flip them the other way? I think there’s a saturation point that the campaigns may have to be concerned about on either side.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>A hundred percent. I mean, what we’ve seen is that more Californians in these polls tend to favor this than oppose it. However, those numbers are pretty squishy. The kind of common wisdom is that if you’re going into a ballot measure campaign with a well-funded opposition, you want to start around 60% support. This is more in the mid to low fifties in terms of the support and some of the public polling we’ve seen. For both sides, people just get fatigued when they hear too much about any ballot measure and they start getting angry. And that sometimes can lead people to vote no, but if all they’re hearing is a no message, does that flip them the other way? I think there’s a saturation point that the campaigns may have to be concerned about on either side.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Marisa Lagos is a political correspondent at KQED and co-host of the podcas, Political Breakdown. Thanks, Marisa.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Marisa Lagos is a political correspondent at KQED and co-host of the podcas, Political Breakdown. Thanks, Marisa.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>My pleasure.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>My pleasure.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>In a nutshell, a vote yes on Prop 40 means you want to levy a one-time tax of 5% on California’s 200 billionaires, with 90% of the revenue going to support health care in the state, and the other 10% going to fund public education and food assistance programs. A no vote means you do not want to levy a one time tax on billionaires. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>In a nutshell, a vote yes on Prop 40 means you want to levy a one-time tax of 5% on California’s 200 billionaires, with 90% of the revenue going to support health care in the state, and the other 10% going to fund public education and food assistance programs. A no vote means you do not want to levy a one time tax on billionaires. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>If you wanna hear more about Prop 40, the billionaire tax, check out Marisa’s podcast, Political Breakdown. She has in-depth interviews with Dave Reagan, who authored Prop 40 and Joshua Rauh, a Stanford economist who’s critical of it. You can find both in the Political Break Down podcast feed and we’ll link in our show notes. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>If you wanna hear more about Prop 40, the billionaire tax, check out Marisa’s podcast, Political Breakdown. She has in-depth interviews with Dave Reagan, who authored Prop 40 and Joshua Rauh, a Stanford economist who’s critical of it. You can find both in the Political Break Down podcast feed and we’ll link in our show notes. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>That’s it for our latest episode of PropFest. How we doing? How we feeling? Feeling smarter? Feeling ready to vote? Well, there’s plenty more where that came from. From now until October 9th, the Bay and Bay Curious teams here at KQED are going to be dropping breakdowns of all the statewide propositions on the ballot this year to leave you feeling ready to vote this November. Stay locked in and make sure you’re subscribed to the Bay and be curious so you don’t miss out on the next ones.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>That’s it for our latest episode of PropFest. How we doing? How we feeling? Feeling smarter? Feeling ready to vote? Well, there’s plenty more where that came from. From now until October 9th, the Bay and Bay Curious teams here at KQED are going to be dropping breakdowns of all the statewide propositions on the ballot this year to leave you feeling ready to vote this November. Stay locked in and make sure you’re subscribed to the Bay and be curious so you don’t miss out on the next ones.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price:\u003c/strong> Prop Fest is a collaboration between The Bay and Bay Curious podcasts. It is produced by: Alan Montecillo, Ericka Cruz Guevarra, Gabriella Glueck, Pauline Bartolone, Katrina Schwartz, Christopher Beale, Anna Casalme, and me, Olivia Allen-Price\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price:\u003c/strong> Prop Fest is a collaboration between The Bay and Bay Curious podcasts. It is produced by: Alan Montecillo, Ericka Cruz Guevarra, Gabriella Glueck, Pauline Bartolone, Katrina Schwartz, Christopher Beale, Anna Casalme, and me, Olivia Allen-Price\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>We get extra support from, Katie Sprenger, Jen Chien, Maha Sanad, Ethan Toven-Lindsey and the whole KQED family.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>We get extra support from, Katie Sprenger, Jen Chien, Maha Sanad, Ethan Toven-Lindsey and the whole KQED family.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>You can find audio and transcripts for this series at kqed.org slash propfest.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>You can find audio and transcripts for this series at kqed.org slash propfest.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>Our show is made in San Francisco at member-supported KQED. If you value podcasts like this one, please consider becoming a sustaining KQED member. Learn more at donate.kqed.org slash podcasts. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>Our show is made in San Francisco at member-supported KQED. If you value podcasts like this one, please consider becoming a sustaining KQED member. Learn more at donate.kqed.org slash podcasts. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Some members of the KQED podcast team are represented by The Screen Actors Guild, American Federation of Television and Radio Artists, San Francisco-Northern California Local.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Some members of the KQED podcast team are represented by The Screen Actors Guild, American Federation of Television and Radio Artists, San Francisco-Northern California Local.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>Support for the Bay is provided in part by the Osher Production Fund.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>Support for the Bay is provided in part by the Osher Production Fund.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>I’m Olivia Allen-Price. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>I’m Olivia Allen-Price. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>And I’m Erika Cruz-Gabara. We’ll be back tomorrow with an explainer on Proposition 41, which takes aim at new special taxes, including the billionaire tax we just talked about. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>And I’m Erika Cruz-Gabara. We’ll be back tomorrow with an explainer on Proposition 41, which takes aim at new special taxes, including the billionaire tax we just talked about. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>We’ll see you then!\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>We’ll see you then!\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
}
],
"excerpt": "Prop 40 would impose a one-time tax on the state's billionaires to backfill federal cuts to healthcare.",
"status": "publish",
"parent": 0,
"modified": 1790721161,
"stats": {
"hasAudio": false,
"hasVideo": false,
"hasChartOrMap": false,
"iframeSrcs": [],
"hasGoogleForm": false,
"hasGallery": false,
"hasHearkenModule": false,
"hasPolis": false,
"paragraphCount": 73,
"wordCount": 4192
},
"headData": {
"title": "Proposition 40: Imposes a One-Time Tax on Billionaires to Fund Healthcare and Education | KQED",
"description": "Prop 40 would impose a one-time tax on the state's billionaires to backfill federal cuts to healthcare.",
"ogTitle": "",
"ogDescription": "",
"ogImgId": "",
"twTitle": "",
"twDescription": "",
"twImgId": "",
"schema": {
"@context": "https://schema.org",
"@type": "NewsArticle",
"headline": "Proposition 40: Imposes a One-Time Tax on Billionaires to Fund Healthcare and Education",
"datePublished": "2026-10-05T03:00:00-07:00",
"dateModified": "2026-09-29T15:32:41-07:00",
"image": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"isAccessibleForFree": "True",
"publisher": {
"@type": "NewsMediaOrganization",
"@id": "https://www.kqed.org/#organization",
"name": "KQED",
"logo": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"url": "https://www.kqed.org",
"sameAs": [
"https://www.facebook.com/KQED",
"https://twitter.com/KQED",
"https://www.instagram.com/kqed/",
"https://www.tiktok.com/@kqedofficial",
"https://www.linkedin.com/company/kqed",
"https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCeC0IOo7i1P_61zVUWbJ4nw"
]
}
}
},
"primaryCategory": {
"termId": 31795,
"slug": "california",
"name": "California"
},
"source": "Prop Fest 2026",
"sourceUrl": "http://kqed.org/propfest",
"audioUrl": "https://www.podtrac.com/pts/redirect.mp3/pdst.fm/e/traffic.megaphone.fm/KQINC7823072285.mp3",
"sticky": false,
"templateType": "audio",
"featuredImageType": "standard",
"excludeFromSiteSearch": "Include",
"articleAge": "0",
"path": "/news/12100660/proposition-40-imposes-a-one-time-tax-on-billionaires-to-fund-healthcare-and-education",
"audioTrackLength": null,
"parsedContent": [
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>\n\u003ch2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Transcript\u003c/h2>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>If you live in California right now, it’s pretty hard to avoid the ads about Proposition 40, otherwise known as the billionaire tax.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>No on 40 ad clip: \u003c/strong>You have questions about the wealth tax, Prop 40. So here are some facts. Newsom, Becerra, and Hilton are all voting no, calling it sketchy policy that will damage our economy.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Yes on 40 ad clip: \u003c/strong>We must work together to pass this tax and ensure that our health care services are protected. The billionaire class cannot have it all.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>Proposition 40 is a one-time 5% tax on the billionaires currently living in California. It’s a hotly debated measure with folks like Bernie Sanders and Governor Gavin Newsom taking sides.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>It’s an interesting one because traditional allies are not lining up the way you might expect on this one.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>I’m Ericka Cruz Guevarra, host of The Bay.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And I’m Olivia Allen-Price, host of Bay Curious. Welcome to PropFest. It’s a new week and we’ve got six propositions left to discuss. Our teams at The Bay and Bay Curious are bringing you breakdowns of the statewide propositions on the California ballot, so you can vote with confidence in the November election.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra:\u003c/strong> There are 14 propositions on the ballot this year, and we’ll be taking you through all of them. We’ll be looking at how they got on the ballot, the arguments for and against each one, really talk about how things could play out if they pass, and the money fueling it all.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price:\u003c/strong> Today we’re discussing Proposition 40, a one-time tax on the wealthiest Californians. It reads like this on your ballot.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Voice Over: \u003c/strong>Prop 40 imposes one-time tax on certain taxpayers.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price:\u003c/strong> Here to walk us through it is KQED political correspondent and co-host of the podcast, Political Breakdown, Marisa Lagos. Welcome, Marissa. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos:\u003c/strong> Hey, glad to be here. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>There’s a lot to get into on Proposition 40, but before we start on the measure itself, can you give us some context for why this is on our ballot this year?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Yeah, so this dates back to last year after President Trump took office, he and Republicans in Congress passed what’s known as H.R.1 or the Big Beautiful Bill. That included a reform of the tax code that enacted massive tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans. To pay for those tax cuts, they took billions and billions of dollars out of Medicaid and assistance programs. In California, those cuts will probably be around $30 billion a year that will not be going specifically to Medi-Cal, which is California’s Medicaid program. That’s the health insurance program for low-income Americans. This is basically aimed at replacing that money. Proponents of this tax estimate it would collect around $100 billion over a five-year period. That money would basically go to backfill the cuts from the H.R.1 or the Big Beautiful Bill.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>[00:03:03] And so where does Prop 40 come into all this?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>SEIU-UHW, which is a health care union that represents a lot of rank-and-file health care workers, they saw these cuts coming and decided that they wanted to try to backfill them. And so they came up with this idea to impose a one-time tax on the billionaires in California. It would apply to anyone who has a net worth of over a billion dollars and was living in the state as of January 1 of 2026. So this is a one time tax that would sort of be paid out over a couple of years and the union says it would help essentially avoid massive cuts to the healthcare system, at least for the next few years.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And how many billionaires do we have in California? And give us a sense of who these people are.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>There’s an estimated 200 or so people like Larry Page and Sergey Brin who founded Google, Mark Zuckerberg of Meta. Basically the people you hear about the most as being the wealthiest kind of Silicon Valley folks are the ones who are going to be subject to this tax if it passes.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And how are they assessing wealth in this scenario? Because I understand this is like, it’s a little bit interesting how they’re planning to get at the wealth of these people because it’s not necessarily the way that sort of everyday people hold their cash.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos \u003c/strong>[00:04:16] Right, so maybe to back up, let’s just talk a little bit about how we pay taxes as sort of average working people, right? If you and I make a salary out of every paycheck, there’s an income tax that is taken by the state. If we have money in the stock market and we sell that stock and we make some capital gains, we would pay based on those capital gains that we realized. And then of course, there are things like property taxes, sales taxes, other things. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>The critique of billionaires and really wealthy people is that they don’t make money through the same way that normal people do, right? I think there’s been reporting that Jeff Bezos’ Amazon salary, for example, is like $85,000. So he might actually qualify for some low-income programs based on that. But a lot of the ways that these folks have built their wealth is through stocks and other assets that are being played on Wall Street. And they don’t sort of realize the increase in those numbers unless they were to go and sell them. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>So how do these billionaires pay for their yachts and their mansions? Well, if you’re that rich, you don’t need an income to essentially go to a bank and say, “hey, look, I’m worth a billion dollars, two billion dollars 100 billion dollars. So you should just give me some loans,” and they get basically loans in really low rates that the rest of us wouldn’t qualify for that help pay for life styles. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>This tax would say when you file your taxes as a California resident, you have to check a box to declare whether you’re worth more than a billion dollars. And if you are worth more than a billion dollars, it essentially wants you to tell them how much that overall wealth is. So how much money do you have in your Google stocks if you’re a Sergey brand? How much money have you invested in other companies? You know, if you were Elon Musk, it would be Tesla and SpaceX. And then they want to impose a 5% tax on that overall wealth. So this is a really different kind of novel approach that is not how we have historically taxed people in the United States in general. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>For Dave Reagan — who is the head of the union and the guy who basically wrote this proposition — this is like a really simple argument.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Dave Regan: \u003c/strong>Just so everyone understands, the billionaires in California pay a tiny percentage of their financial holdings in income tax. They pay two and a half percent. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp> \u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>When you look at sort of what we pay as average Californians and our income tax rates and others, and you compare that to the overall wealth of these folks and how little they pay, that this is just like a simple math problem that this proposition would help fix.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Dave Regan: \u003c/strong>Seven years ago in 2019, the aggregate wealth of California billionaires was $700 billion. Today it’s $2.3 trillion. It has more than tripled in the last seven years. Your wages aren’t tripling. My wages aren’t tripling. I don’t know anybody whose salary is tripling.”\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And how are they Proposing that the money from this one-time tax be used?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>It’s actually pretty vague in the measure. It says that 90% of it would go to healthcare, and then the legislature would have a lot of say over how that money is actually allocated, aimed at helping all those people who would be losing their healthcare or access to it because of the federal cuts. 10% is set aside for other programs, namely food assistance, which was also cut by HR1, as well as schools.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>But I understand, like, one critique is that because it is more vague or it’s left to legislators to spend, Californians to some degree, like don’t know exactly what they’re getting with this tax.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Yeah, I think that’s right. The health care system is incredibly expensive and complicated. And I think, you know, because of the way HR1 was written, there’s also a lot of uncertainty in how it’ll actually be carried out. And so I do think that some of that flexibility was built in to account for what we don’t know about how the HR1 cuts would actually play out.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And now, I know you’ve spoken to some of the people who are behind this measure, who wrote it. Why are they proposing this as a one-time tax and not something ongoing?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Yeah, this is a question I really had because it seems like if you’re trying to push back on what are permanent federal cuts, you would want something permanent yourself. And that also, if you are going to go to the trouble of picking this very big fight with the most wealthy people, really in the world, that like, is it worth it for one time? But when I sat down with Dave Reagan, he said that there’s a couple of reasons. One was that he wanted this to be a one-time thing. He didn’t want to give billionaires an incentive to leave California to avoid this. He understands that we are part of a 50 state system and that these are people who can move their wealth.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Dave Regan: \u003c/strong>We wanted to fix a crisis, solve a problem, and then have enough time to figure out what’s the permanent solution. We wanted, to the extent possible, to take the issue off the table, that the billionaires threatening everybody that they’re gonna leave, there is no incentive for them to leave under our proposal.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>The other thing that he and proponents say is that they don’t think these will be permanent cuts, that they want to get Democrats back in power in Congress and win the White House in 2028, and that they wanna see those cuts restored at the federal level, that that is the better way to be funding them. And so they felt that this should just be a one-time tax in order to kind of bridge that gap that they hope is a gap and not a permanent reduction.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>We’ve got to take a quick break, but when we return, more on Proposition 40, including what those opposing it are saying. Stay with us. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cem>Sponsor messages\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And we’re back with Prop Fest, talking proposition 40. Marisa, other than the union that put this on the ballot, who else is supporting Prop 40 and why? \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>So in addition to SEIU-UHW, you do have some of the biggest progressive national voices supporting this. Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont. In the Bay Area, U.S. Representative Ro Khanna is behind it. The California Federation of Labor, which represents, you know, thousands of unions, did vote to endorse it. The California Democratic Party did vote to endorse Prop 40, but it is largely being driven by SEIU-UHW. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>All right, and then who is against it? And what are they arguing?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa:\u003c/strong> Everybody else in California. So at the top of the list are the billionaires. Sergey Brin has really taken the lead on this. He’s donated the most money and helped create some organizations that are really funneling money to oppose Prop 40 and push two other ballot measures that they put on the ballot in order to try to undercut Prop 40. But in addition to the billionaires themselves, you do have a really interesting list of folks up to Governor Gavin Newsom who says he opposes this tax. Most of the more high-profile Democrats in California, so in addition to Newsom, you have Xavier Becerra, the likely next governor. You have a lot of people in the legislature and others who are opposing it. And then you have some kind of surprising names. You have the California Teachers Association. You have Planned Parenthood of California. You have some other unions, firefighters and police officers and others that traditionally would probably be on the side of these taxes. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>And then, of course, groups you would expect. The Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, the California Republican Party, conservative groups who generally just oppose raising taxes in any way.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>That’s such an eclectic group. What are their arguments against this measure?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Yeah, so we’ve really seen a lot of frustration by the governor on down at the fact that this was pushed through. And I think what they say is that it is a poorly designed one-time measure that potentially has the effect of hurting the progressive movement long-term. So their arguments include the idea that it’s gonna be hard to enforce, that this is like only a one-time thing for this ongoing problem, that it could actually essentially hurt California’s ability to stay competitive and to really, you know, be an innovator in the tech space, especially as we see this AI boom happening, that this will sort of scare people off. Newsom himself is trying to thread this needle where he says that he does support a national wealth tax. But that it’s just not the right way to do it at the state level. That this should be a national attack so that you wouldn’t have the ability to sort of avoid it by moving somewhere else.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>One concern that I keep reading about this, Prop 40, is how it could impact California in the future. Can you explain?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>One of the bigger arguments against it, too, is this idea that it could do longer-term damage to the state budget. If, indeed, you buy the argument that this will drive billionaires out of California or other wealthy people, even if it’s not to avoid this one-time tax, but that it’s just creating an environment that is less, you know, that is hostile to developing businesses, the concern is that if you have a lot of wealthy people flee the state, that would result in a huge hit to the state’s operating budget every single year. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>I spoke to Joshua Rauh. He’s a Stanford University Finance Professor, a senior fellow at the Hoover Institute and he is very critical of Prop 40.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Joshua Rauh: \u003c/strong>The costs, in this case, with the billionaire tax are that we’re driving billionaires out of the state and we’re also discouraging new entrepreneurs from growing their businesses here. And so that’s really the way to see it. The benefits would potentially be revenue, but we calculate that actually the state’s gonna lose $25 billion from doing this tax.\u003cbr>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price:\u003c/strong> Mmm so essentially the concern is this wealth tax could drive rich people out of the state, and so California would lose out on the yearly taxes they do pay.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos:\u003c/strong> We do have a very progressive tax system here. The highest earners do pay the most into the state budget. And if that pool of folks shrinks, it could have an impact on overall spending every year, which of course goes not just to healthcare, but to. Police and fire and education and all these other areas. So I think part of what Newsom and a lot of the people on his side of things on the Democratic side who oppose this are worried about is that in the short term, this would help shore up the healthcare system, but in the long term, it would really undercut our overall ability to support all those programs that people depend on.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Another issue Rauh takes with Prop 40 is with how it may force billionaires to make more of their money liquid.\u003cbr>\u003cbr>\u003cstrong>Joshua Rauh: \u003c/strong> If someone has a business that has a value of $1 billion, they’re going to be subject to this tax. They’re going to have to pay $50 million because of this tax, and they may not have that money liquid. That means that they’re gonna have to actually sell off some of this company and you know that that actually removes capital from growing companies. It’s bad for the companies and bad for economy. It’s bad to the labor force.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Now I understand that this would be the first of its kind tax if this is passed in the United States, but similar stuff has been tried elsewhere.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>There was an attempt a few decades ago to levy wealth taxes in some European countries. Most of those, I believe, were repealed. They were much broader. They were not just aimed at billionaires. Billionaires didn’t actually exist in the 90s, let’s not forget. So I think one of what you’ll hear from critics is that you should look at a place like France, which abolished its tax in 2018. After they did see sort of an exodus of a lot of businesses and business people who brought in, you know, a lot money. The flip side to that is that, you know, this is a one-time tax. It is in a state that is the center of these industries.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price:\u003c/strong> Now we’re gonna get into props 41 and 42 in detail in some future episodes, but because they are related to prop 40, can you briefly explain how they conflict?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Yeah, both Prop 41 and 42 have various other provisions, but they include language that says if they get more votes than Proposition 40, they supersede it. And in both cases, they would sort of undercut key provisions in Prop 40, and essentially make it impossible for the state to enforce the billionaire tax. So if all three pass, but 40 gets fewer votes, it essentially is like it didn’t pass in a lot of ways.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And like we mentioned at the top of this episode, there have been a lot of ads about this measure, which means money. How is campaign spending shaking out on this?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>So there has been money spent so far, and you might already feel like you’re seeing a lot of ads, but actually how much has been spent pales in comparison to what’s going to be spent. There are some estimates that this could be the most expensive ballot measure campaign in state history, so those ads you’re seeing are not going away anytime soon. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>On the pro side, the healthcare unions, their allies, have spent, I think, over $30 million by the end of August. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>On the other side, just the committee created by the billionaires to fight Prop 40 and push those other competing ballot measures, it’s called Building A Better California, they’ve raised $118 million so far. Most of that has not been spent, a little less than the other side has been spent so far, around $21 million. But they have reserved $87 million in TV and radio time leading up to the fall election. And so you can expect that money is all going to be put out there. Obviously these billionaires have a lot of money and that’s just the money that they’ve put in so far.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And I understand that this proposition is polling pretty close right now. So it could seem like a good investment if you can move a couple of voters this way or that.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>A hundred percent. I mean, what we’ve seen is that more Californians in these polls tend to favor this than oppose it. However, those numbers are pretty squishy. The kind of common wisdom is that if you’re going into a ballot measure campaign with a well-funded opposition, you want to start around 60% support. This is more in the mid to low fifties in terms of the support and some of the public polling we’ve seen. For both sides, people just get fatigued when they hear too much about any ballot measure and they start getting angry. And that sometimes can lead people to vote no, but if all they’re hearing is a no message, does that flip them the other way? I think there’s a saturation point that the campaigns may have to be concerned about on either side.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Marisa Lagos is a political correspondent at KQED and co-host of the podcas, Political Breakdown. Thanks, Marisa.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>My pleasure.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>In a nutshell, a vote yes on Prop 40 means you want to levy a one-time tax of 5% on California’s 200 billionaires, with 90% of the revenue going to support health care in the state, and the other 10% going to fund public education and food assistance programs. A no vote means you do not want to levy a one time tax on billionaires. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>If you wanna hear more about Prop 40, the billionaire tax, check out Marisa’s podcast, Political Breakdown. She has in-depth interviews with Dave Reagan, who authored Prop 40 and Joshua Rauh, a Stanford economist who’s critical of it. You can find both in the Political Break Down podcast feed and we’ll link in our show notes. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>That’s it for our latest episode of PropFest. How we doing? How we feeling? Feeling smarter? Feeling ready to vote? Well, there’s plenty more where that came from. From now until October 9th, the Bay and Bay Curious teams here at KQED are going to be dropping breakdowns of all the statewide propositions on the ballot this year to leave you feeling ready to vote this November. Stay locked in and make sure you’re subscribed to the Bay and be curious so you don’t miss out on the next ones.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price:\u003c/strong> Prop Fest is a collaboration between The Bay and Bay Curious podcasts. It is produced by: Alan Montecillo, Ericka Cruz Guevarra, Gabriella Glueck, Pauline Bartolone, Katrina Schwartz, Christopher Beale, Anna Casalme, and me, Olivia Allen-Price\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>We get extra support from, Katie Sprenger, Jen Chien, Maha Sanad, Ethan Toven-Lindsey and the whole KQED family.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>You can find audio and transcripts for this series at kqed.org slash propfest.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>Our show is made in San Francisco at member-supported KQED. If you value podcasts like this one, please consider becoming a sustaining KQED member. Learn more at donate.kqed.org slash podcasts. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Some members of the KQED podcast team are represented by The Screen Actors Guild, American Federation of Television and Radio Artists, San Francisco-Northern California Local.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>Support for the Bay is provided in part by the Osher Production Fund.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>I’m Olivia Allen-Price. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>And I’m Erika Cruz-Gabara. We’ll be back tomorrow with an explainer on Proposition 41, which takes aim at new special taxes, including the billionaire tax we just talked about. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>We’ll see you then!\u003c/p>\n\u003c/div>\u003c/p>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
}
],
"link": "/news/12100660/proposition-40-imposes-a-one-time-tax-on-billionaires-to-fund-healthcare-and-education",
"authors": [
"234",
"102",
"3239"
],
"programs": [
"news_28779",
"news_33523",
"news_34552"
],
"series": [
"news_17986"
],
"categories": [
"news_31795",
"news_13"
],
"tags": [
"news_37055",
"news_28645",
"news_22598"
],
"featImg": "news_12100662",
"label": "source_news_12100660"
},
"news_12101928": {
"type": "posts",
"id": "news_12101928",
"meta": {
"index": "posts_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "12101928",
"score": null,
"sort": [
1790935500000
]
},
"guestAuthors": [],
"slug": "prop-39-require-identification-when-californians-cast-a-ballot",
"title": "Prop 39: Require Identification When Californians Cast A Ballot",
"publishDate": 1790935500,
"format": "standard",
"headTitle": "Prop 39: Require Identification When Californians Cast A Ballot | KQED",
"labelTerm": {},
"content": "\n\u003ch2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Episode Transcript:\u003c/h2>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price:\u003c/strong> Right now, when you cast a ballot in California, you don’t need to show identification. Prop 39 seeks to change that.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>This is one of the most hotly contested issues on this year’s ballot, in part because President Donald Trump has also been talking about new voter ID laws.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Donald Trump:\u003c/strong> It’s very simple, all voters must show voter ID.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price:\u003c/strong> Is this a common sense way to make voting more secure or an attempt to suppress the vote? That’s for you to decide.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra:\u003c/strong> This is how Proposition 39 reads on your ballot. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Voiceover:\u003c/strong> Proposition 39 prohibits citizens from voting unless they present government issued identification. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra:\u003c/strong> I’m Ericka Cruz Guevarra, host of The Bay.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price:\u003c/strong> And I’m Olivia Allen-Price, host of Bay Curious.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra:\u003c/strong> We are back with another edition of PropFest, where our teams break down each statewide proposition on the California ballot. Way to hang in there this week. We talked about a lot of ballot measures.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price:\u003c/strong> But there’s one last one to talk about this week before we head into the weekend. And it’s one of the most contentious. Here to help us understand Prop 39 is reporter Izzy Bloom from KQED’s politics desk. Welcome, Izzy. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Izzy Bloom:\u003c/strong> Hi.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Proposition 39 is an amendment to the state constitution about how we vote in the state. Before we dive into specifics, who put us on the ballot and why now? \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Izzy Bloom:\u003c/strong> Nationally, we’ve seen a lot of conversations in recent years about election integrity, especially from President Donald Trump and his allies, who are pushing voter ID requirements nationally and attempting to restrict mail-in voting. So this was put on the ballot by Republican lawmakers in California who want to increase voter confidence in elections by adding new ID requirements. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price:\u003c/strong> Break down for us what exactly Prop 39 would do. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Izzy Bloom:\u003c/strong> So the measure would amend the state constitution to require Californians present a government-issued ID when voting in person. So that would be something like a driver’s license or a social security number. Or if they’re voting by mail, they would need to write the last four digits of an ID number on their ballot envelope. Right now, California only requires ID or social security numbers when registering to vote. It would also require the Secretary of State and county election officials to verify voters’ citizenship and report every year what percentage of their voter rolls they’ve verified. And in odd years, the state auditor would have to audit counties on how well they’re complying with the law and recommend changes. Lastly, the initiative says that any voter can request a new free state-issued ID at no cost, but when you designate at registration which ID you’re using, you have to stick to that number every time you vote or else your ballot could be invalidated.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price:\u003c/strong> Why do proponents say this measure is necessary? \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Izzy Bloom: \u003c/strong>Backers of the measure are really trying to distance themselves from accusations that this is an extension of Trump’s agenda, given how blue the state votes. Their main argument is this is a common sense reform that both Republicans and Democrats are in favor of. They say nearly half the signatures they gathered to qualify for the ballot were from Democrats and Independents. Also one of the bill’s authors, Assemblymember Carl DeMaio, says whether there is or isn’t fraud going on. It’s undeniable that voter confidence in elections is incredibly low, and this is just an easy way to give people greater trust in the election system.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Assemblymember Carl DeMaio:\u003c/strong> Because we’ve seen a dramatic drop in public trust and confidence in our elections. We’ve also seen very destructive and dishonest conspiracy theories on both sides. And so what we need to do is make sure that we always conduct our elections with the best safeguards and the highest integrity. And voters have said they want voter ID. It’s common sense.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Izzy Bloom: \u003c/strong>Another argument that Senator Tony Strickland, who is also one of the bill’s authors, made is that 36 other states and many other countries already have voter ID requirements.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Senator Tony Strickland:\u003c/strong> ID is part of your everyday life. I had to use my idea a few times just today. You need an ID to get on a plane. You need ID to get prescription medication. You use the ID to open up a bank account. So there’s no reason why we shouldn’t require ID to actually go out and vote.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Izzy Bloom:\u003c/strong> And Strickland says voter participation has actually increased in states like Georgia after introducing voter ID. But opponents say motivation is really hard to measure, and it’s just as likely due to voter mobilization efforts. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Do we have a problem with voter fraud in California? \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Izzy Bloom: \u003c/strong>Most studies say the rates of voter fraud are minuscule. But there’s certainly a narrative out there that it’s too easy to take advantage of the system. This year, I think a lot of concerns about fraud came from California’s slow vote count. And one of the talking points you’ll hear a lot from Republicans is how there was a dog registered to vote in Orange County. Democrats respond to that saying, actually this shows the system is working because the dog’s owner, who’s a registered Republican, was caught and prosecuted.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>We’ll pause the conversation here for a moment. More on Prop 39 when we return. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And we’re back talking about Proposition 39 with KQED’s Izzy Bloom. Izzy, what are the current rules around citizenship and voting in California?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Izzy Bloom:\u003c/strong> Right now, when you register to vote in California, you have to prove that you’re legally allowed to vote by showing ID or a social security number, and it’s already illegal for non-citizens to vote in California. Jenny Farrell is the executive director for the League of Women Voters in California and she says, you know, California already has voter ID laws.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Jenny Farrell: \u003c/strong>Voters sign the roster and impersonating another voter is a crime. And then for mail ballots, every ballot goes through a signature verification against the voter’s registration record before it is counted with a process to cure mismatches. No matter how you vote, citizenship is already attested to under penalty of perjure when someone registers.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Izzy Bloom:\u003c/strong> For mail-in ballots, they say it’s not very different to sign an envelope and verify that signature versus writing down a number and verifying that. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Tell me more about that citizenship verification process. What happens now with voter rolls and how would this be different?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Izzy Bloom: \u003c/strong>It’s already part of state law that voter roles are maintained and updated. So for example, if someone goes to prison or dies and can no longer vote, government agencies send those names to the Secretary of State and the roles are updated. When it comes to citizenship status, that’s checked when a person registers to vote currently, and it’s considered perjury for a non-citizen to lie and sign up to vote anyway. So this measure is really aiming to make everything stricter. It’s not really clear what best efforts to verify citizenship means. That’s probably something the state legislature would have to determine if this passes. But in general, the measure is adding more steps to ensure you are who you say you are when you go to vote.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Okay, we’ve heard from supporters on this, who is opposing this prop and what are their arguments?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Izzy Bloom:\u003c/strong> As you can imagine, this has become a pretty partisan fight. The California Democratic Party and gubernatorial candidate Javier Becerra are against it. And then there’s also groups including the ACLU of Northern California, the League of Women Voters, California Common Cause also against the measure. And they argue the system isn’t broken. There’s very little, if any, election fraud right now. And all this will do is make it harder to vote. Here’s Farrell again.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Jenny Farrell: \u003c/strong>Prop 39 would actually affect every California voter, but we know that additional ID requirements don’t fall equally on everyone. There are large gaps in terms of who possesses current valid ID with, you know, the current name and address. Voters in Black, Latino, Asian American, and Pacific Islander communities are less likely to have that current valid ID. These ID laws also present particular challenges for young voters, low-income voters, voters with disabilities, and folks who have changed their names, including women who have changed their name due to marriage and transgender folks.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Izzy Bloom: \u003c/strong>Also, Farrell says it creates new identity theft problems because it requires voters write the last four digits of a government-issued ID on the outside of their mail-in envelope, and that already has your name and address on it.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Jenny Farrell: \u003c/strong>The measure itself does not require a secrecy flap or some other covering over that number. And then election officials retain those envelopes for as long as 22 months.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Izzy Bloom:\u003c/strong> The initiative seems clear on its face, but there are a lot of details that still need to be hashed out if it passes. For instance, it’s unclear what kinds of government-issued ID would qualify, like tribal ID, student ID, public housing ID, gun registration ID, and whichever forms of ID are allowed could privilege certain racial, age, and socioeconomic groups. The opposition also points out that this could cost the state a bunch of money. The Legislative Analyst’s office estimated tens of millions to the low hundreds of millions of dollars to issue all those free state IDs and additional workload for state and county election officials and the state auditor. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>What does campaign spending look like for this measure? \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Izzy Bloom: \u003c/strong>As of early September, the yes on Prop 39 side has far outspent the no side to tune of $15 million. The spending here isn’t nearly as big as we’re seeing in some of the other contentious measures, like the billionaire tax, but polling does show it’s underwater. The most recent Berkeley IGS poll from September shows 52% of likely voters plan to vote no versus 39% planning to vote yes.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>That was Izzy Bloom, a reporter with KQED’s Politics Desk. Thanks so much, Izzy. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Izzy Bloom: \u003c/strong>Thanks for having me.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>In a nutshell, a vote yes on Prop 39 would require people to show a government-issued ID when voting in person or provide the last four digits of a government issued ID designated during voter registration for mail-in voting. It would also require election officials to maintain accurate voter registration lists and to try to verify citizenship of voters using government data. And it would also require the state auditor to audit government compliance with these requirements. A vote no on Prop 39 would keep things as they are now.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra\u003c/strong>: That’s it for our episode on Proposition 39. We’ll be back next week with explainers on the remaining six propositions on your ballot.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price:\u003c/strong> Bay Curious is produced by Erika Cruz Guevarra, Alan Monticello, Gabriella Glick, Pauline Bartolone, Katrina Schwartz, Christopher Beale, Anna Casalme and me, Olivia Allen-Price.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>We get extra support from Maha Sanad, Katie Sprenger, Jen Chien, Ethan Toven-Lindsey and everyone on team KQED.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price:\u003c/strong> Some members of the KQED podcast team are represented by the Screen Actors Guild, American Federation of Television and Radio Artists, San Francisco, Northern California Local.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>Support for The Bay is provided in part by the Osher Production Fund. I’m Olivia Allen-Price and I’m Ericka Cruz Guavarra. Have a lovely weekend.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n",
"blocks": [
{
"blockName": "core/heading",
"attrs": {
"text": "Episode Transcript:",
"level": 2
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003ch2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Episode Transcript:\u003c/h2>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003ch2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Episode Transcript:\u003c/h2>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price:\u003c/strong> Right now, when you cast a ballot in California, you don’t need to show identification. Prop 39 seeks to change that.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price:\u003c/strong> Right now, when you cast a ballot in California, you don’t need to show identification. Prop 39 seeks to change that.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>This is one of the most hotly contested issues on this year’s ballot, in part because President Donald Trump has also been talking about new voter ID laws.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>This is one of the most hotly contested issues on this year’s ballot, in part because President Donald Trump has also been talking about new voter ID laws.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Donald Trump:\u003c/strong> It’s very simple, all voters must show voter ID.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Donald Trump:\u003c/strong> It’s very simple, all voters must show voter ID.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price:\u003c/strong> Is this a common sense way to make voting more secure or an attempt to suppress the vote? That’s for you to decide.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price:\u003c/strong> Is this a common sense way to make voting more secure or an attempt to suppress the vote? That’s for you to decide.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra:\u003c/strong> This is how Proposition 39 reads on your ballot. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra:\u003c/strong> This is how Proposition 39 reads on your ballot. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Voiceover:\u003c/strong> Proposition 39 prohibits citizens from voting unless they present government issued identification. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Voiceover:\u003c/strong> Proposition 39 prohibits citizens from voting unless they present government issued identification. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra:\u003c/strong> I’m Ericka Cruz Guevarra, host of The Bay.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra:\u003c/strong> I’m Ericka Cruz Guevarra, host of The Bay.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price:\u003c/strong> And I’m Olivia Allen-Price, host of Bay Curious.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price:\u003c/strong> And I’m Olivia Allen-Price, host of Bay Curious.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra:\u003c/strong> We are back with another edition of PropFest, where our teams break down each statewide proposition on the California ballot. Way to hang in there this week. We talked about a lot of ballot measures.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra:\u003c/strong> We are back with another edition of PropFest, where our teams break down each statewide proposition on the California ballot. Way to hang in there this week. We talked about a lot of ballot measures.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price:\u003c/strong> But there’s one last one to talk about this week before we head into the weekend. And it’s one of the most contentious. Here to help us understand Prop 39 is reporter Izzy Bloom from KQED’s politics desk. Welcome, Izzy. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price:\u003c/strong> But there’s one last one to talk about this week before we head into the weekend. And it’s one of the most contentious. Here to help us understand Prop 39 is reporter Izzy Bloom from KQED’s politics desk. Welcome, Izzy. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Izzy Bloom:\u003c/strong> Hi.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Izzy Bloom:\u003c/strong> Hi.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Proposition 39 is an amendment to the state constitution about how we vote in the state. Before we dive into specifics, who put us on the ballot and why now? \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Proposition 39 is an amendment to the state constitution about how we vote in the state. Before we dive into specifics, who put us on the ballot and why now? \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Izzy Bloom:\u003c/strong> Nationally, we’ve seen a lot of conversations in recent years about election integrity, especially from President Donald Trump and his allies, who are pushing voter ID requirements nationally and attempting to restrict mail-in voting. So this was put on the ballot by Republican lawmakers in California who want to increase voter confidence in elections by adding new ID requirements. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Izzy Bloom:\u003c/strong> Nationally, we’ve seen a lot of conversations in recent years about election integrity, especially from President Donald Trump and his allies, who are pushing voter ID requirements nationally and attempting to restrict mail-in voting. So this was put on the ballot by Republican lawmakers in California who want to increase voter confidence in elections by adding new ID requirements. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price:\u003c/strong> Break down for us what exactly Prop 39 would do. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price:\u003c/strong> Break down for us what exactly Prop 39 would do. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Izzy Bloom:\u003c/strong> So the measure would amend the state constitution to require Californians present a government-issued ID when voting in person. So that would be something like a driver’s license or a social security number. Or if they’re voting by mail, they would need to write the last four digits of an ID number on their ballot envelope. Right now, California only requires ID or social security numbers when registering to vote. It would also require the Secretary of State and county election officials to verify voters’ citizenship and report every year what percentage of their voter rolls they’ve verified. And in odd years, the state auditor would have to audit counties on how well they’re complying with the law and recommend changes. Lastly, the initiative says that any voter can request a new free state-issued ID at no cost, but when you designate at registration which ID you’re using, you have to stick to that number every time you vote or else your ballot could be invalidated.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Izzy Bloom:\u003c/strong> So the measure would amend the state constitution to require Californians present a government-issued ID when voting in person. So that would be something like a driver’s license or a social security number. Or if they’re voting by mail, they would need to write the last four digits of an ID number on their ballot envelope. Right now, California only requires ID or social security numbers when registering to vote. It would also require the Secretary of State and county election officials to verify voters’ citizenship and report every year what percentage of their voter rolls they’ve verified. And in odd years, the state auditor would have to audit counties on how well they’re complying with the law and recommend changes. Lastly, the initiative says that any voter can request a new free state-issued ID at no cost, but when you designate at registration which ID you’re using, you have to stick to that number every time you vote or else your ballot could be invalidated.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price:\u003c/strong> Why do proponents say this measure is necessary? \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price:\u003c/strong> Why do proponents say this measure is necessary? \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Izzy Bloom: \u003c/strong>Backers of the measure are really trying to distance themselves from accusations that this is an extension of Trump’s agenda, given how blue the state votes. Their main argument is this is a common sense reform that both Republicans and Democrats are in favor of. They say nearly half the signatures they gathered to qualify for the ballot were from Democrats and Independents. Also one of the bill’s authors, Assemblymember Carl DeMaio, says whether there is or isn’t fraud going on. It’s undeniable that voter confidence in elections is incredibly low, and this is just an easy way to give people greater trust in the election system.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Izzy Bloom: \u003c/strong>Backers of the measure are really trying to distance themselves from accusations that this is an extension of Trump’s agenda, given how blue the state votes. Their main argument is this is a common sense reform that both Republicans and Democrats are in favor of. They say nearly half the signatures they gathered to qualify for the ballot were from Democrats and Independents. Also one of the bill’s authors, Assemblymember Carl DeMaio, says whether there is or isn’t fraud going on. It’s undeniable that voter confidence in elections is incredibly low, and this is just an easy way to give people greater trust in the election system.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Assemblymember Carl DeMaio:\u003c/strong> Because we’ve seen a dramatic drop in public trust and confidence in our elections. We’ve also seen very destructive and dishonest conspiracy theories on both sides. And so what we need to do is make sure that we always conduct our elections with the best safeguards and the highest integrity. And voters have said they want voter ID. It’s common sense.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Assemblymember Carl DeMaio:\u003c/strong> Because we’ve seen a dramatic drop in public trust and confidence in our elections. We’ve also seen very destructive and dishonest conspiracy theories on both sides. And so what we need to do is make sure that we always conduct our elections with the best safeguards and the highest integrity. And voters have said they want voter ID. It’s common sense.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Izzy Bloom: \u003c/strong>Another argument that Senator Tony Strickland, who is also one of the bill’s authors, made is that 36 other states and many other countries already have voter ID requirements.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Izzy Bloom: \u003c/strong>Another argument that Senator Tony Strickland, who is also one of the bill’s authors, made is that 36 other states and many other countries already have voter ID requirements.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Senator Tony Strickland:\u003c/strong> ID is part of your everyday life. I had to use my idea a few times just today. You need an ID to get on a plane. You need ID to get prescription medication. You use the ID to open up a bank account. So there’s no reason why we shouldn’t require ID to actually go out and vote.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Senator Tony Strickland:\u003c/strong> ID is part of your everyday life. I had to use my idea a few times just today. You need an ID to get on a plane. You need ID to get prescription medication. You use the ID to open up a bank account. So there’s no reason why we shouldn’t require ID to actually go out and vote.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Izzy Bloom:\u003c/strong> And Strickland says voter participation has actually increased in states like Georgia after introducing voter ID. But opponents say motivation is really hard to measure, and it’s just as likely due to voter mobilization efforts. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Izzy Bloom:\u003c/strong> And Strickland says voter participation has actually increased in states like Georgia after introducing voter ID. But opponents say motivation is really hard to measure, and it’s just as likely due to voter mobilization efforts. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Do we have a problem with voter fraud in California? \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Do we have a problem with voter fraud in California? \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Izzy Bloom: \u003c/strong>Most studies say the rates of voter fraud are minuscule. But there’s certainly a narrative out there that it’s too easy to take advantage of the system. This year, I think a lot of concerns about fraud came from California’s slow vote count. And one of the talking points you’ll hear a lot from Republicans is how there was a dog registered to vote in Orange County. Democrats respond to that saying, actually this shows the system is working because the dog’s owner, who’s a registered Republican, was caught and prosecuted.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Izzy Bloom: \u003c/strong>Most studies say the rates of voter fraud are minuscule. But there’s certainly a narrative out there that it’s too easy to take advantage of the system. This year, I think a lot of concerns about fraud came from California’s slow vote count. And one of the talking points you’ll hear a lot from Republicans is how there was a dog registered to vote in Orange County. Democrats respond to that saying, actually this shows the system is working because the dog’s owner, who’s a registered Republican, was caught and prosecuted.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>We’ll pause the conversation here for a moment. More on Prop 39 when we return. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>We’ll pause the conversation here for a moment. More on Prop 39 when we return. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And we’re back talking about Proposition 39 with KQED’s Izzy Bloom. Izzy, what are the current rules around citizenship and voting in California?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And we’re back talking about Proposition 39 with KQED’s Izzy Bloom. Izzy, what are the current rules around citizenship and voting in California?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Izzy Bloom:\u003c/strong> Right now, when you register to vote in California, you have to prove that you’re legally allowed to vote by showing ID or a social security number, and it’s already illegal for non-citizens to vote in California. Jenny Farrell is the executive director for the League of Women Voters in California and she says, you know, California already has voter ID laws.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Izzy Bloom:\u003c/strong> Right now, when you register to vote in California, you have to prove that you’re legally allowed to vote by showing ID or a social security number, and it’s already illegal for non-citizens to vote in California. Jenny Farrell is the executive director for the League of Women Voters in California and she says, you know, California already has voter ID laws.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Jenny Farrell: \u003c/strong>Voters sign the roster and impersonating another voter is a crime. And then for mail ballots, every ballot goes through a signature verification against the voter’s registration record before it is counted with a process to cure mismatches. No matter how you vote, citizenship is already attested to under penalty of perjure when someone registers.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Jenny Farrell: \u003c/strong>Voters sign the roster and impersonating another voter is a crime. And then for mail ballots, every ballot goes through a signature verification against the voter’s registration record before it is counted with a process to cure mismatches. No matter how you vote, citizenship is already attested to under penalty of perjure when someone registers.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Izzy Bloom:\u003c/strong> For mail-in ballots, they say it’s not very different to sign an envelope and verify that signature versus writing down a number and verifying that. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Izzy Bloom:\u003c/strong> For mail-in ballots, they say it’s not very different to sign an envelope and verify that signature versus writing down a number and verifying that. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Tell me more about that citizenship verification process. What happens now with voter rolls and how would this be different?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Tell me more about that citizenship verification process. What happens now with voter rolls and how would this be different?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Izzy Bloom: \u003c/strong>It’s already part of state law that voter roles are maintained and updated. So for example, if someone goes to prison or dies and can no longer vote, government agencies send those names to the Secretary of State and the roles are updated. When it comes to citizenship status, that’s checked when a person registers to vote currently, and it’s considered perjury for a non-citizen to lie and sign up to vote anyway. So this measure is really aiming to make everything stricter. It’s not really clear what best efforts to verify citizenship means. That’s probably something the state legislature would have to determine if this passes. But in general, the measure is adding more steps to ensure you are who you say you are when you go to vote.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Izzy Bloom: \u003c/strong>It’s already part of state law that voter roles are maintained and updated. So for example, if someone goes to prison or dies and can no longer vote, government agencies send those names to the Secretary of State and the roles are updated. When it comes to citizenship status, that’s checked when a person registers to vote currently, and it’s considered perjury for a non-citizen to lie and sign up to vote anyway. So this measure is really aiming to make everything stricter. It’s not really clear what best efforts to verify citizenship means. That’s probably something the state legislature would have to determine if this passes. But in general, the measure is adding more steps to ensure you are who you say you are when you go to vote.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Okay, we’ve heard from supporters on this, who is opposing this prop and what are their arguments?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Okay, we’ve heard from supporters on this, who is opposing this prop and what are their arguments?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Izzy Bloom:\u003c/strong> As you can imagine, this has become a pretty partisan fight. The California Democratic Party and gubernatorial candidate Javier Becerra are against it. And then there’s also groups including the ACLU of Northern California, the League of Women Voters, California Common Cause also against the measure. And they argue the system isn’t broken. There’s very little, if any, election fraud right now. And all this will do is make it harder to vote. Here’s Farrell again.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Izzy Bloom:\u003c/strong> As you can imagine, this has become a pretty partisan fight. The California Democratic Party and gubernatorial candidate Javier Becerra are against it. And then there’s also groups including the ACLU of Northern California, the League of Women Voters, California Common Cause also against the measure. And they argue the system isn’t broken. There’s very little, if any, election fraud right now. And all this will do is make it harder to vote. Here’s Farrell again.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Jenny Farrell: \u003c/strong>Prop 39 would actually affect every California voter, but we know that additional ID requirements don’t fall equally on everyone. There are large gaps in terms of who possesses current valid ID with, you know, the current name and address. Voters in Black, Latino, Asian American, and Pacific Islander communities are less likely to have that current valid ID. These ID laws also present particular challenges for young voters, low-income voters, voters with disabilities, and folks who have changed their names, including women who have changed their name due to marriage and transgender folks.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Jenny Farrell: \u003c/strong>Prop 39 would actually affect every California voter, but we know that additional ID requirements don’t fall equally on everyone. There are large gaps in terms of who possesses current valid ID with, you know, the current name and address. Voters in Black, Latino, Asian American, and Pacific Islander communities are less likely to have that current valid ID. These ID laws also present particular challenges for young voters, low-income voters, voters with disabilities, and folks who have changed their names, including women who have changed their name due to marriage and transgender folks.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Izzy Bloom: \u003c/strong>Also, Farrell says it creates new identity theft problems because it requires voters write the last four digits of a government-issued ID on the outside of their mail-in envelope, and that already has your name and address on it.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Izzy Bloom: \u003c/strong>Also, Farrell says it creates new identity theft problems because it requires voters write the last four digits of a government-issued ID on the outside of their mail-in envelope, and that already has your name and address on it.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Jenny Farrell: \u003c/strong>The measure itself does not require a secrecy flap or some other covering over that number. And then election officials retain those envelopes for as long as 22 months.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Jenny Farrell: \u003c/strong>The measure itself does not require a secrecy flap or some other covering over that number. And then election officials retain those envelopes for as long as 22 months.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Izzy Bloom:\u003c/strong> The initiative seems clear on its face, but there are a lot of details that still need to be hashed out if it passes. For instance, it’s unclear what kinds of government-issued ID would qualify, like tribal ID, student ID, public housing ID, gun registration ID, and whichever forms of ID are allowed could privilege certain racial, age, and socioeconomic groups. The opposition also points out that this could cost the state a bunch of money. The Legislative Analyst’s office estimated tens of millions to the low hundreds of millions of dollars to issue all those free state IDs and additional workload for state and county election officials and the state auditor. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Izzy Bloom:\u003c/strong> The initiative seems clear on its face, but there are a lot of details that still need to be hashed out if it passes. For instance, it’s unclear what kinds of government-issued ID would qualify, like tribal ID, student ID, public housing ID, gun registration ID, and whichever forms of ID are allowed could privilege certain racial, age, and socioeconomic groups. The opposition also points out that this could cost the state a bunch of money. The Legislative Analyst’s office estimated tens of millions to the low hundreds of millions of dollars to issue all those free state IDs and additional workload for state and county election officials and the state auditor. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>What does campaign spending look like for this measure? \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>What does campaign spending look like for this measure? \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Izzy Bloom: \u003c/strong>As of early September, the yes on Prop 39 side has far outspent the no side to tune of $15 million. The spending here isn’t nearly as big as we’re seeing in some of the other contentious measures, like the billionaire tax, but polling does show it’s underwater. The most recent Berkeley IGS poll from September shows 52% of likely voters plan to vote no versus 39% planning to vote yes.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Izzy Bloom: \u003c/strong>As of early September, the yes on Prop 39 side has far outspent the no side to tune of $15 million. The spending here isn’t nearly as big as we’re seeing in some of the other contentious measures, like the billionaire tax, but polling does show it’s underwater. The most recent Berkeley IGS poll from September shows 52% of likely voters plan to vote no versus 39% planning to vote yes.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>That was Izzy Bloom, a reporter with KQED’s Politics Desk. Thanks so much, Izzy. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>That was Izzy Bloom, a reporter with KQED’s Politics Desk. Thanks so much, Izzy. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Izzy Bloom: \u003c/strong>Thanks for having me.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Izzy Bloom: \u003c/strong>Thanks for having me.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>In a nutshell, a vote yes on Prop 39 would require people to show a government-issued ID when voting in person or provide the last four digits of a government issued ID designated during voter registration for mail-in voting. It would also require election officials to maintain accurate voter registration lists and to try to verify citizenship of voters using government data. And it would also require the state auditor to audit government compliance with these requirements. A vote no on Prop 39 would keep things as they are now.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>In a nutshell, a vote yes on Prop 39 would require people to show a government-issued ID when voting in person or provide the last four digits of a government issued ID designated during voter registration for mail-in voting. It would also require election officials to maintain accurate voter registration lists and to try to verify citizenship of voters using government data. And it would also require the state auditor to audit government compliance with these requirements. A vote no on Prop 39 would keep things as they are now.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra\u003c/strong>: That’s it for our episode on Proposition 39. We’ll be back next week with explainers on the remaining six propositions on your ballot.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra\u003c/strong>: That’s it for our episode on Proposition 39. We’ll be back next week with explainers on the remaining six propositions on your ballot.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price:\u003c/strong> Bay Curious is produced by Erika Cruz Guevarra, Alan Monticello, Gabriella Glick, Pauline Bartolone, Katrina Schwartz, Christopher Beale, Anna Casalme and me, Olivia Allen-Price.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price:\u003c/strong> Bay Curious is produced by Erika Cruz Guevarra, Alan Monticello, Gabriella Glick, Pauline Bartolone, Katrina Schwartz, Christopher Beale, Anna Casalme and me, Olivia Allen-Price.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>We get extra support from Maha Sanad, Katie Sprenger, Jen Chien, Ethan Toven-Lindsey and everyone on team KQED.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>We get extra support from Maha Sanad, Katie Sprenger, Jen Chien, Ethan Toven-Lindsey and everyone on team KQED.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price:\u003c/strong> Some members of the KQED podcast team are represented by the Screen Actors Guild, American Federation of Television and Radio Artists, San Francisco, Northern California Local.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price:\u003c/strong> Some members of the KQED podcast team are represented by the Screen Actors Guild, American Federation of Television and Radio Artists, San Francisco, Northern California Local.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>Support for The Bay is provided in part by the Osher Production Fund. I’m Olivia Allen-Price and I’m Ericka Cruz Guavarra. Have a lovely weekend.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>Support for The Bay is provided in part by the Osher Production Fund. I’m Olivia Allen-Price and I’m Ericka Cruz Guavarra. Have a lovely weekend.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
}
],
"excerpt": "Would require voters to show identification when voting, not just when they register to vote.",
"status": "publish",
"parent": 0,
"modified": 1790721691,
"stats": {
"hasAudio": false,
"hasVideo": false,
"hasChartOrMap": false,
"iframeSrcs": [],
"hasGoogleForm": false,
"hasGallery": false,
"hasHearkenModule": false,
"hasPolis": false,
"paragraphCount": 47,
"wordCount": 2128
},
"headData": {
"title": "Prop 39: Require Identification When Californians Cast A Ballot | KQED",
"description": "Would require voters to show identification when voting, not just when they register to vote.",
"ogTitle": "",
"ogDescription": "",
"ogImgId": "",
"twTitle": "",
"twDescription": "",
"twImgId": "",
"schema": {
"@context": "https://schema.org",
"@type": "NewsArticle",
"headline": "Prop 39: Require Identification When Californians Cast A Ballot",
"datePublished": "2026-10-02T03:05:00-07:00",
"dateModified": "2026-09-29T15:41:31-07:00",
"image": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"isAccessibleForFree": "True",
"publisher": {
"@type": "NewsMediaOrganization",
"@id": "https://www.kqed.org/#organization",
"name": "KQED",
"logo": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"url": "https://www.kqed.org",
"sameAs": [
"https://www.facebook.com/KQED",
"https://twitter.com/KQED",
"https://www.instagram.com/kqed/",
"https://www.tiktok.com/@kqedofficial",
"https://www.linkedin.com/company/kqed",
"https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCeC0IOo7i1P_61zVUWbJ4nw"
]
}
}
},
"primaryCategory": {
"termId": 31795,
"slug": "california",
"name": "California"
},
"source": "Prop Fest 2026",
"sourceUrl": "http://kqed.org/propfest",
"audioUrl": "https://www.podtrac.com/pts/redirect.mp3/pdst.fm/e/traffic.megaphone.fm/KQINC4541803870.mp3",
"sticky": false,
"templateType": "standard",
"featuredImageType": "standard",
"excludeFromSiteSearch": "Include",
"articleAge": "0",
"path": "/news/12101928/prop-39-require-identification-when-californians-cast-a-ballot",
"audioTrackLength": null,
"parsedContent": [
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>\n\u003ch2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Episode Transcript:\u003c/h2>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price:\u003c/strong> Right now, when you cast a ballot in California, you don’t need to show identification. Prop 39 seeks to change that.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>This is one of the most hotly contested issues on this year’s ballot, in part because President Donald Trump has also been talking about new voter ID laws.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Donald Trump:\u003c/strong> It’s very simple, all voters must show voter ID.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price:\u003c/strong> Is this a common sense way to make voting more secure or an attempt to suppress the vote? That’s for you to decide.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra:\u003c/strong> This is how Proposition 39 reads on your ballot. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Voiceover:\u003c/strong> Proposition 39 prohibits citizens from voting unless they present government issued identification. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra:\u003c/strong> I’m Ericka Cruz Guevarra, host of The Bay.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price:\u003c/strong> And I’m Olivia Allen-Price, host of Bay Curious.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra:\u003c/strong> We are back with another edition of PropFest, where our teams break down each statewide proposition on the California ballot. Way to hang in there this week. We talked about a lot of ballot measures.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price:\u003c/strong> But there’s one last one to talk about this week before we head into the weekend. And it’s one of the most contentious. Here to help us understand Prop 39 is reporter Izzy Bloom from KQED’s politics desk. Welcome, Izzy. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Izzy Bloom:\u003c/strong> Hi.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Proposition 39 is an amendment to the state constitution about how we vote in the state. Before we dive into specifics, who put us on the ballot and why now? \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Izzy Bloom:\u003c/strong> Nationally, we’ve seen a lot of conversations in recent years about election integrity, especially from President Donald Trump and his allies, who are pushing voter ID requirements nationally and attempting to restrict mail-in voting. So this was put on the ballot by Republican lawmakers in California who want to increase voter confidence in elections by adding new ID requirements. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price:\u003c/strong> Break down for us what exactly Prop 39 would do. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Izzy Bloom:\u003c/strong> So the measure would amend the state constitution to require Californians present a government-issued ID when voting in person. So that would be something like a driver’s license or a social security number. Or if they’re voting by mail, they would need to write the last four digits of an ID number on their ballot envelope. Right now, California only requires ID or social security numbers when registering to vote. It would also require the Secretary of State and county election officials to verify voters’ citizenship and report every year what percentage of their voter rolls they’ve verified. And in odd years, the state auditor would have to audit counties on how well they’re complying with the law and recommend changes. Lastly, the initiative says that any voter can request a new free state-issued ID at no cost, but when you designate at registration which ID you’re using, you have to stick to that number every time you vote or else your ballot could be invalidated.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price:\u003c/strong> Why do proponents say this measure is necessary? \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Izzy Bloom: \u003c/strong>Backers of the measure are really trying to distance themselves from accusations that this is an extension of Trump’s agenda, given how blue the state votes. Their main argument is this is a common sense reform that both Republicans and Democrats are in favor of. They say nearly half the signatures they gathered to qualify for the ballot were from Democrats and Independents. Also one of the bill’s authors, Assemblymember Carl DeMaio, says whether there is or isn’t fraud going on. It’s undeniable that voter confidence in elections is incredibly low, and this is just an easy way to give people greater trust in the election system.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Assemblymember Carl DeMaio:\u003c/strong> Because we’ve seen a dramatic drop in public trust and confidence in our elections. We’ve also seen very destructive and dishonest conspiracy theories on both sides. And so what we need to do is make sure that we always conduct our elections with the best safeguards and the highest integrity. And voters have said they want voter ID. It’s common sense.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Izzy Bloom: \u003c/strong>Another argument that Senator Tony Strickland, who is also one of the bill’s authors, made is that 36 other states and many other countries already have voter ID requirements.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Senator Tony Strickland:\u003c/strong> ID is part of your everyday life. I had to use my idea a few times just today. You need an ID to get on a plane. You need ID to get prescription medication. You use the ID to open up a bank account. So there’s no reason why we shouldn’t require ID to actually go out and vote.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Izzy Bloom:\u003c/strong> And Strickland says voter participation has actually increased in states like Georgia after introducing voter ID. But opponents say motivation is really hard to measure, and it’s just as likely due to voter mobilization efforts. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Do we have a problem with voter fraud in California? \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Izzy Bloom: \u003c/strong>Most studies say the rates of voter fraud are minuscule. But there’s certainly a narrative out there that it’s too easy to take advantage of the system. This year, I think a lot of concerns about fraud came from California’s slow vote count. And one of the talking points you’ll hear a lot from Republicans is how there was a dog registered to vote in Orange County. Democrats respond to that saying, actually this shows the system is working because the dog’s owner, who’s a registered Republican, was caught and prosecuted.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>We’ll pause the conversation here for a moment. More on Prop 39 when we return. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And we’re back talking about Proposition 39 with KQED’s Izzy Bloom. Izzy, what are the current rules around citizenship and voting in California?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Izzy Bloom:\u003c/strong> Right now, when you register to vote in California, you have to prove that you’re legally allowed to vote by showing ID or a social security number, and it’s already illegal for non-citizens to vote in California. Jenny Farrell is the executive director for the League of Women Voters in California and she says, you know, California already has voter ID laws.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Jenny Farrell: \u003c/strong>Voters sign the roster and impersonating another voter is a crime. And then for mail ballots, every ballot goes through a signature verification against the voter’s registration record before it is counted with a process to cure mismatches. No matter how you vote, citizenship is already attested to under penalty of perjure when someone registers.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Izzy Bloom:\u003c/strong> For mail-in ballots, they say it’s not very different to sign an envelope and verify that signature versus writing down a number and verifying that. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Tell me more about that citizenship verification process. What happens now with voter rolls and how would this be different?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Izzy Bloom: \u003c/strong>It’s already part of state law that voter roles are maintained and updated. So for example, if someone goes to prison or dies and can no longer vote, government agencies send those names to the Secretary of State and the roles are updated. When it comes to citizenship status, that’s checked when a person registers to vote currently, and it’s considered perjury for a non-citizen to lie and sign up to vote anyway. So this measure is really aiming to make everything stricter. It’s not really clear what best efforts to verify citizenship means. That’s probably something the state legislature would have to determine if this passes. But in general, the measure is adding more steps to ensure you are who you say you are when you go to vote.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Okay, we’ve heard from supporters on this, who is opposing this prop and what are their arguments?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Izzy Bloom:\u003c/strong> As you can imagine, this has become a pretty partisan fight. The California Democratic Party and gubernatorial candidate Javier Becerra are against it. And then there’s also groups including the ACLU of Northern California, the League of Women Voters, California Common Cause also against the measure. And they argue the system isn’t broken. There’s very little, if any, election fraud right now. And all this will do is make it harder to vote. Here’s Farrell again.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Jenny Farrell: \u003c/strong>Prop 39 would actually affect every California voter, but we know that additional ID requirements don’t fall equally on everyone. There are large gaps in terms of who possesses current valid ID with, you know, the current name and address. Voters in Black, Latino, Asian American, and Pacific Islander communities are less likely to have that current valid ID. These ID laws also present particular challenges for young voters, low-income voters, voters with disabilities, and folks who have changed their names, including women who have changed their name due to marriage and transgender folks.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Izzy Bloom: \u003c/strong>Also, Farrell says it creates new identity theft problems because it requires voters write the last four digits of a government-issued ID on the outside of their mail-in envelope, and that already has your name and address on it.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Jenny Farrell: \u003c/strong>The measure itself does not require a secrecy flap or some other covering over that number. And then election officials retain those envelopes for as long as 22 months.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Izzy Bloom:\u003c/strong> The initiative seems clear on its face, but there are a lot of details that still need to be hashed out if it passes. For instance, it’s unclear what kinds of government-issued ID would qualify, like tribal ID, student ID, public housing ID, gun registration ID, and whichever forms of ID are allowed could privilege certain racial, age, and socioeconomic groups. The opposition also points out that this could cost the state a bunch of money. The Legislative Analyst’s office estimated tens of millions to the low hundreds of millions of dollars to issue all those free state IDs and additional workload for state and county election officials and the state auditor. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>What does campaign spending look like for this measure? \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Izzy Bloom: \u003c/strong>As of early September, the yes on Prop 39 side has far outspent the no side to tune of $15 million. The spending here isn’t nearly as big as we’re seeing in some of the other contentious measures, like the billionaire tax, but polling does show it’s underwater. The most recent Berkeley IGS poll from September shows 52% of likely voters plan to vote no versus 39% planning to vote yes.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>That was Izzy Bloom, a reporter with KQED’s Politics Desk. Thanks so much, Izzy. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Izzy Bloom: \u003c/strong>Thanks for having me.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>In a nutshell, a vote yes on Prop 39 would require people to show a government-issued ID when voting in person or provide the last four digits of a government issued ID designated during voter registration for mail-in voting. It would also require election officials to maintain accurate voter registration lists and to try to verify citizenship of voters using government data. And it would also require the state auditor to audit government compliance with these requirements. A vote no on Prop 39 would keep things as they are now.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra\u003c/strong>: That’s it for our episode on Proposition 39. We’ll be back next week with explainers on the remaining six propositions on your ballot.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price:\u003c/strong> Bay Curious is produced by Erika Cruz Guevarra, Alan Monticello, Gabriella Glick, Pauline Bartolone, Katrina Schwartz, Christopher Beale, Anna Casalme and me, Olivia Allen-Price.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>We get extra support from Maha Sanad, Katie Sprenger, Jen Chien, Ethan Toven-Lindsey and everyone on team KQED.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price:\u003c/strong> Some members of the KQED podcast team are represented by the Screen Actors Guild, American Federation of Television and Radio Artists, San Francisco, Northern California Local.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>Support for The Bay is provided in part by the Osher Production Fund. I’m Olivia Allen-Price and I’m Ericka Cruz Guavarra. Have a lovely weekend.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n\u003c/div>\u003c/p>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
}
],
"link": "/news/12101928/prop-39-require-identification-when-californians-cast-a-ballot",
"authors": [
"234",
"102",
"11805"
],
"programs": [
"news_28779",
"news_33523",
"news_34552"
],
"series": [
"news_17986"
],
"categories": [
"news_31795",
"news_13"
],
"tags": [
"news_28645",
"news_22598"
],
"featImg": "news_12101931",
"label": "source_news_12101928"
},
"news_12102150": {
"type": "posts",
"id": "news_12102150",
"meta": {
"index": "posts_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "12102150",
"score": null,
"sort": [
1790935200000
]
},
"guestAuthors": [],
"slug": "prop-38-borrows-8-4-billion-to-fund-immunology-research",
"title": "Prop 38: Borrows $8.4 Billion to Fund Immunology Research",
"publishDate": 1790935200,
"format": "standard",
"headTitle": "Prop 38: Borrows $8.4 Billion to Fund Immunology Research | KQED",
"labelTerm": {},
"content": "\n\u003ch2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Transcript\u003c/h2>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:00:00] \u003c/em>Immunotherapy has been around for a really long time. Things like vaccines are considered part of immunology, but it also includes more recent innovations like newer treatments for blood and skin cancers. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:00:15] \u003c/em>In simple terms, immunotherapy is individualized treatment designed to harness a patient’s immune system to fight disease. For some, immunotherapy has been life-changing. And voters are being asked this November whether to fund immunology and immunotherapy research with one very specific beneficiary in mind. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:00:38] \u003c/em>I’m Ericka Cruz Guevarra, host of The Bay. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:00:41] \u003c/em>And I’m Olivia Allen-Price, host of Bay Curious. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:00:44] \u003c/em>And welcome to Prop Fest. A collaboration between the Bay and Bay Curious, where we break down all 14 statewide propositions on your ballot this year November. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:00:54] \u003c/em>And we’re back at it again with Proposition 38. Here’s how it reads on your ballot. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Reporter: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:01:01] \u003c/em>Prop 38 authorizes bonds for immunology medical research. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:01:08] \u003c/em>Here to walk us through all of this is KQED Health Correspondent April Dembosky. April, first of all, what is Prop 38 all about? \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>April Dembosky: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:01:16] \u003c/em>Prop 38 is a bond measure that would fund immunology and immunotherapy research. It would allow the state to borrow $8.4 billion and distribute it to nonprofit research centers that are studying immunotherapy treatments for cancer, heart disease, and Alzheimer’s. The measure is expected to cost the state about $500 million a year for 20 years in bond repayments. And about $4 billion of that would be interest payments on top of the original 8.4 billion for a total cost of about $12 billion. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:01:58] \u003c/em>There is sort of an interesting story about how this came on the ballot in the first place, right? Can you actually talk about why voters are even being asked to fund immunotherapy in this year’s election?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>April Dembosky: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:02:11] \u003c/em>Prop 38 was the brainchild of a philanthropist named Gary Michelson. He raised the money to collect the signatures and put Prop 38 on the ballot. Something that’s really interesting about the initiative is how it’s worded. The language is very careful. It lists very strict criteria for the type of academic institution that should receive half of the money. This criteria is so specific. That only one university in the state meets the criteria, and that is UCLA. Half the funds would go toward launching a new immunology institute at UCLA, and the other half would be awarded through competitive grants to other institutes also in California. And so, as it turns out, Michelson has already donated $120 million of his own money to establish a new institute for immunotherapy at UCLA. It’s called the California Institute for Immunology and Immunotherapy. That same institution would also be the touch point for all the research. So the other half of the funding that would get distributed in competitive grants would all be sort of centered at UCLA. So it’s safe to say that this is on the ballot because a very wealthy philanthropist put it there as a way to finance a research institution focused on his interest, which is immunology and immunotherapy.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:03:50] \u003c/em>Okay, April, so Prop 38 was put on the ballot by this wealthy philanthropist, Gary Michelson, and it’s written in this way that would, it sounds like directly benefit a research institute at UCLA that he’s helping to fund. So clearly he has some skin in the game here. Is Prop 38 getting much support from elsewhere? Like how else is the pro-Prop 38 side kind of shaping up?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>April Dembosky: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:04:18] \u003c/em>There’s a long list of foundations and advocacy groups that have signed on in support of Prop 38, places like Blood Cancer United, the Melanoma Research Alliance, the Alzheimer’s Association, the ALS Association, the National Multiple Sclerosis Society, the Michael J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson’s Research. So these are groups that hope and believe that new immunotherapies could be developed to treat these specific diseases. Proponents also say this initiative is necessary because federal funding for this kind of research has become unreliable under the current administration. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Jillian McCool: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:04:58] \u003c/em>The big thing right now is that current CAR T therapy is really expensive. It’s not as efficient as we want it to be. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>April Dembosky: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:05:05] \u003c/em>So I spoke to one researcher who was working on a project funded by the NIH, the National Institutes of Health. Her name is Jillian McCool, and she was working at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory studying vaccines and a kind of therapy for cancer. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Jillian McCool: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:05:20] \u003c/em>We basically can take your immune cells and we can take them out of your body and we an alter them so they’re better fit and better suited to fight cancer cells specifically. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>April Dembosky: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:05:29] \u003c/em>And then some of their grants ran out after they reached the end of the term, but then some of the funding was paused because of the most recent government shutdown. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Jillian McCool: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:05:38] \u003c/em>All of the sudden we have this weird rhetoric around vaccines and all of the sudden there’s this new administration coming in that’s kind of pushing that rhetoric. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>April Dembosky: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:05:47] \u003c/em>McCool says about 100 scientists were laid off, including her. She was out of work for a year and a half. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Jillian McCool: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:05:54] \u003c/em>And then the public is no longer trusting scientists and what they have to say in the data we’ve collected, it kind of makes you question your whole career in general. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>April Dembosky: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:06:05] \u003c/em>So it’s personal for McCool, but she says Prop 38 is a way to correct what’s happening at the federal level and protect the jobs of lots of other scientists. She also says, you know, California is a center of excellence in this kind of research, and so it makes sense to root it here. She also points out that the measure is designed to be cost neutral, with 10% of revenues generated from successful discoveries being funneled back to the state. Californians would also be entitled to a 20% discount on any new therapies that are generated from the bond money.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:06:41] \u003c/em>And a big part of immunotherapy research is directed towards cancer research and you actually met a cancer patient who’s pretty gung-ho about Prop 38, right? Tell me about her. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Laurie Adami: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:06:52] \u003c/em>My name is Laurie Adami and I live in Los Angeles, California. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>April Dembosky: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:06:57] \u003c/em>Laurie was diagnosed with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. It’s a kind of blood cancer, and this was 20 years ago. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Laurie Adami: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:07:04] \u003c/em>And when I got sick and I ended up losing my career as a result of my very long battle with cancer. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>April Dembosky: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:07:13] \u003c/em>Several years ago, she enrolled in a clinical trial for an immunotherapy called CAR-T. So, Laurie had one infusion of this immunotherapy about eight years ago and her cancer has not come back since. Now, she’s only one person. You know, it’s important to point out there’s still a large proportion of patients who participated in these trials who did not respond in the same way. But as you can imagine, Laurie is pretty gung-ho for Prop 38. Because of the prospect that it could fund more research and develop more treatments like this to fight other kinds of cancers and other diseases and help more people. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Laurie Adami: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:07:54] \u003c/em>You know, not every family is gonna be affected by cancer, but every family is gonna affected by these other diseases. And so I am a huge proponent and supporter because immunotherapy saved my life. So why wouldn’t I believe? And why wouldn’t I want more patients to be able to access the type of treatment that finally saved my live? \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:08:23] \u003c/em>We’ll have more on Proposition 38 right after this. By the way, if you appreciate the work we’re doing here on PropFest, consider becoming a sustaining member of KQED. We can’t do this work without you. Just go to donate.kqed.org slash podcasts. We’ll be right back. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:08:47] \u003c/em>And we’re back breaking down Proposition 38 with KQED’s April Dembosky. April, you talked about the various different groups supporting Prop 38, including a patient who really believes in the power of immunotherapy research to potentially save lives. So who’s coming out against Prop 38 and what is their argument? \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>April Dembosky: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:09:10] \u003c/em>Yeah, so there’s a very small group of opponents. They’re pretty much all volunteers. It’s very grassroots. And they have organized to point out what they see as the weaknesses and even what they might call the dangers of Prop 38\u003cem>.\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Robert Kaplan: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:09:26] \u003c/em>I just think that there are inherent conflicts of interest. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>April Dembosky: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:09:29] \u003c/em>The main one is Robert Kaplan. He’s a biomedical researcher and administrator at Stanford University School of Medicine. And he also worked at the NIH, the National Institutes of Health. So he has a lot of experience coordinating the kind of research that we’re talking about and at a really grand scale. So he says he supports biomedical research. He’s in favor of science, including immunotherapy. But he says this proposition is not the way to fund it. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Robert Kaplan: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:09:58] \u003c/em>If you look at NIH support for biomedical research in general or immunology research, there are several institutions in California that are the national leaders, but because of the sort of arbitrary criteria in Proposition 38, they’re not eligible to compete. And we think that’s not right.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>April Dembosky: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:10:17] \u003c/em>So science grants are usually awarded based on an open, competitive process. People have to have a proven track record. He says it’s a good idea to spread that kind of research across different institutions, so you have different people with different ideas and different methodology. But half of the money for Prop 38 goes directly to one brand new institute that is barely off the ground yet, and it has zero track record. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Robert Kaplan: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:10:47] \u003c/em>I think [if] taxpayers are going to have to repay these bonds. We think that should be a fair competition that allows all of these excellent institutions in California to have an opportunity to be in that competition. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>April Dembosky: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:10:59] \u003c/em>The opponents would really point out it’s only for immunotherapy and immunology research. So if you think that there are other kinds of health priorities, like mental illness or kidney disease or other kinds treatments, those are not included here. The other people speaking out against Prop 38, they’re a very interesting group. They are financial analysts who used to work at the LAO. That’s the Legislative Analyst’s Office. And this is a nonpartisan state agency. It’s tasked with evaluating proposed legislation and ballot measures like this one. And they are trained to never take a stand on political issues. And in this case, three retired analysts from the LAOs are breaking that wall, because of their concerns on Prop 38.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Dan Carson: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:11:56] \u003c/em>Hi. I’m Dan Carson. I’m here today as a cancer survivor myself, who is obviously not against good medical research.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>April Dembosky: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:12:05] \u003c/em>So one of them is Dan Carson. He ran the health section of the LAO back in 2004 when another bond measure was on the ballot to fund stem cell research. So proponents said the $3 billion for that initiative would be paid back by all the new stem cell discoveries that researchers made with the money.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Dan Carson: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:12:26] \u003c/em>In fact, as our analysis at the time made really clear, the state eventually received only a tiny fraction of the billions of dollars we were promised. So here we go again with Prop 38. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>April Dembosky: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:12:41] \u003c/em>The opponents of Prop 38 take issue with one of the main claims that the supporters of Prop 38 have, which is they say that the proposition will be cost neutral, that the money that California borrows and spends on the research will be made back by revenues from all of the scientific discoveries that they made. The LAO analysts say the math just doesn’t add up. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Dan Carson: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:13:08] \u003c/em>Oh, once again, we’re being promised in this initiative and by its advocates that will quote, pay for itself with no net cost to the state or taxpayers, closed quote. I’m here to tell you that after reviewing the fine print of this ballot measure, that won’t happen. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:13:32] \u003c/em>April, what’s spending on Prop 38 looking like on either side, the yes and the no side? \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>April Dembosky: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:13:38] \u003c/em>So the Yes on Prop 38 campaign has raised about $27 million so far, and that comes mainly from Gary Michaelson and another billionaire who have donated to the same institute that would be the main beneficiary of the Prop 38 funds. The no side has not raised any money so far.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:13:59] \u003c/em>It seems like we as voters are sort of being asked to decide how scientific research should happen almost and the best way to go about that. How do you think voters should sort of navigate the question being asked before them? \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>April Dembosky: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:14:15] \u003c/em>It’s such a tricky one to put voters in a position of having to become experts on a field of science that maybe they haven’t even heard about. Totally, that’s how I feel. Right. You know, I think on its face, Prop 38 is very appealing and we’ve seen various ballot measures over the years that are healthcare oriented and we find that they often play well. For people who feel really strongly about this area of research, they may feel happy to have the opportunity to vote on something like this and set aside a pot of money that is just for this kind of research. On the other hand, the way that this proposition is worded and the way the money would be distributed looks very, very different from the kind of process that’s used at the federal level. So you’re not just creating a new fund for stability, you’re actually creating a new way of how that science gets funded and how the money gets distributed. Propositions like this, you could say are direct democracy, but in another way, they also circumvent that other democratic process.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:15:35] \u003c/em>Well, April Dombosky, thank you so much for breaking this down. Appreciate it.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>April Dembosky: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:15:40] \u003c/em>Thanks, Ericka.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:15:42] \u003c/em>In a nutshell, a yes vote on this measure means the state could borrow $8.4 billion to support medical research in immunology and immunotherapy. A no vote means the state cannot borrow 8.4 billion for immunology, and immunotherapy research. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:16:02] \u003c/em>And that’s it for our latest episode of PropFest, a collaboration between The Bay and Bay Curious. If this series is helping you get educated on all the statewide props, we sure hope that you’re going to share them with your friends and family. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:16:16] \u003c/em>The link is kqed.org slash propfest and we’ll be dropping new breakdowns until October 9th. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:16:24] \u003c/em>PropFest is made possible thanks to Katrina Schwartz, Pauline Bartolone, Anna Casalme, Ericka Cruz Guevara, Gabriela Glueck. Christopher Beale, Alan Montecillo. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:16:35] \u003c/em>And me, Olivia Allen Price. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:16:37] \u003c/em>We get extra support from Maha Sanad, Katie Springer, Jen Chien. Ethan Tovan Lindsey and everyone on Team KQED. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:16:46] \u003c/em>Our show is made in San Francisco at member-supported KQED.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:16:51] \u003c/em>Support for The Bay is provided in part by the Osher Production Fund. Some members of the KQED podcast team are represented by the Screen Actors Guild, American Federation of Television and Radio Artists, San Francisco, Northern California Local. I’m Ericka Cruz Guevarra. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:17:08] \u003c/em>And I’m Olivia Allen-Price. Have a good one. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cem>Some members of the KQED podcast team are represented by The Screen Actors Guild, American Federation of Television and Radio Artists, San Francisco-Northern California Local.\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n",
"blocks": [
{
"blockName": "core/heading",
"attrs": {
"text": "Transcript",
"level": 2
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003ch2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Transcript\u003c/h2>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003ch2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Transcript\u003c/h2>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:00:00] \u003c/em>Immunotherapy has been around for a really long time. Things like vaccines are considered part of immunology, but it also includes more recent innovations like newer treatments for blood and skin cancers. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:00:00] \u003c/em>Immunotherapy has been around for a really long time. Things like vaccines are considered part of immunology, but it also includes more recent innovations like newer treatments for blood and skin cancers. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:00:15] \u003c/em>In simple terms, immunotherapy is individualized treatment designed to harness a patient’s immune system to fight disease. For some, immunotherapy has been life-changing. And voters are being asked this November whether to fund immunology and immunotherapy research with one very specific beneficiary in mind. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:00:15] \u003c/em>In simple terms, immunotherapy is individualized treatment designed to harness a patient’s immune system to fight disease. For some, immunotherapy has been life-changing. And voters are being asked this November whether to fund immunology and immunotherapy research with one very specific beneficiary in mind. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:00:38] \u003c/em>I’m Ericka Cruz Guevarra, host of The Bay. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:00:38] \u003c/em>I’m Ericka Cruz Guevarra, host of The Bay. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:00:41] \u003c/em>And I’m Olivia Allen-Price, host of Bay Curious. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:00:41] \u003c/em>And I’m Olivia Allen-Price, host of Bay Curious. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:00:44] \u003c/em>And welcome to Prop Fest. A collaboration between the Bay and Bay Curious, where we break down all 14 statewide propositions on your ballot this year November. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:00:44] \u003c/em>And welcome to Prop Fest. A collaboration between the Bay and Bay Curious, where we break down all 14 statewide propositions on your ballot this year November. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:00:54] \u003c/em>And we’re back at it again with Proposition 38. Here’s how it reads on your ballot. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:00:54] \u003c/em>And we’re back at it again with Proposition 38. Here’s how it reads on your ballot. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Reporter: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:01:01] \u003c/em>Prop 38 authorizes bonds for immunology medical research. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Reporter: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:01:01] \u003c/em>Prop 38 authorizes bonds for immunology medical research. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:01:08] \u003c/em>Here to walk us through all of this is KQED Health Correspondent April Dembosky. April, first of all, what is Prop 38 all about? \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:01:08] \u003c/em>Here to walk us through all of this is KQED Health Correspondent April Dembosky. April, first of all, what is Prop 38 all about? \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>April Dembosky: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:01:16] \u003c/em>Prop 38 is a bond measure that would fund immunology and immunotherapy research. It would allow the state to borrow $8.4 billion and distribute it to nonprofit research centers that are studying immunotherapy treatments for cancer, heart disease, and Alzheimer’s. The measure is expected to cost the state about $500 million a year for 20 years in bond repayments. And about $4 billion of that would be interest payments on top of the original 8.4 billion for a total cost of about $12 billion. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>April Dembosky: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:01:16] \u003c/em>Prop 38 is a bond measure that would fund immunology and immunotherapy research. It would allow the state to borrow $8.4 billion and distribute it to nonprofit research centers that are studying immunotherapy treatments for cancer, heart disease, and Alzheimer’s. The measure is expected to cost the state about $500 million a year for 20 years in bond repayments. And about $4 billion of that would be interest payments on top of the original 8.4 billion for a total cost of about $12 billion. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:01:58] \u003c/em>There is sort of an interesting story about how this came on the ballot in the first place, right? Can you actually talk about why voters are even being asked to fund immunotherapy in this year’s election?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:01:58] \u003c/em>There is sort of an interesting story about how this came on the ballot in the first place, right? Can you actually talk about why voters are even being asked to fund immunotherapy in this year’s election?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>April Dembosky: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:02:11] \u003c/em>Prop 38 was the brainchild of a philanthropist named Gary Michelson. He raised the money to collect the signatures and put Prop 38 on the ballot. Something that’s really interesting about the initiative is how it’s worded. The language is very careful. It lists very strict criteria for the type of academic institution that should receive half of the money. This criteria is so specific. That only one university in the state meets the criteria, and that is UCLA. Half the funds would go toward launching a new immunology institute at UCLA, and the other half would be awarded through competitive grants to other institutes also in California. And so, as it turns out, Michelson has already donated $120 million of his own money to establish a new institute for immunotherapy at UCLA. It’s called the California Institute for Immunology and Immunotherapy. That same institution would also be the touch point for all the research. So the other half of the funding that would get distributed in competitive grants would all be sort of centered at UCLA. So it’s safe to say that this is on the ballot because a very wealthy philanthropist put it there as a way to finance a research institution focused on his interest, which is immunology and immunotherapy.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>April Dembosky: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:02:11] \u003c/em>Prop 38 was the brainchild of a philanthropist named Gary Michelson. He raised the money to collect the signatures and put Prop 38 on the ballot. Something that’s really interesting about the initiative is how it’s worded. The language is very careful. It lists very strict criteria for the type of academic institution that should receive half of the money. This criteria is so specific. That only one university in the state meets the criteria, and that is UCLA. Half the funds would go toward launching a new immunology institute at UCLA, and the other half would be awarded through competitive grants to other institutes also in California. And so, as it turns out, Michelson has already donated $120 million of his own money to establish a new institute for immunotherapy at UCLA. It’s called the California Institute for Immunology and Immunotherapy. That same institution would also be the touch point for all the research. So the other half of the funding that would get distributed in competitive grants would all be sort of centered at UCLA. So it’s safe to say that this is on the ballot because a very wealthy philanthropist put it there as a way to finance a research institution focused on his interest, which is immunology and immunotherapy.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:03:50] \u003c/em>Okay, April, so Prop 38 was put on the ballot by this wealthy philanthropist, Gary Michelson, and it’s written in this way that would, it sounds like directly benefit a research institute at UCLA that he’s helping to fund. So clearly he has some skin in the game here. Is Prop 38 getting much support from elsewhere? Like how else is the pro-Prop 38 side kind of shaping up?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:03:50] \u003c/em>Okay, April, so Prop 38 was put on the ballot by this wealthy philanthropist, Gary Michelson, and it’s written in this way that would, it sounds like directly benefit a research institute at UCLA that he’s helping to fund. So clearly he has some skin in the game here. Is Prop 38 getting much support from elsewhere? Like how else is the pro-Prop 38 side kind of shaping up?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>April Dembosky: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:04:18] \u003c/em>There’s a long list of foundations and advocacy groups that have signed on in support of Prop 38, places like Blood Cancer United, the Melanoma Research Alliance, the Alzheimer’s Association, the ALS Association, the National Multiple Sclerosis Society, the Michael J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson’s Research. So these are groups that hope and believe that new immunotherapies could be developed to treat these specific diseases. Proponents also say this initiative is necessary because federal funding for this kind of research has become unreliable under the current administration. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>April Dembosky: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:04:18] \u003c/em>There’s a long list of foundations and advocacy groups that have signed on in support of Prop 38, places like Blood Cancer United, the Melanoma Research Alliance, the Alzheimer’s Association, the ALS Association, the National Multiple Sclerosis Society, the Michael J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson’s Research. So these are groups that hope and believe that new immunotherapies could be developed to treat these specific diseases. Proponents also say this initiative is necessary because federal funding for this kind of research has become unreliable under the current administration. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Jillian McCool: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:04:58] \u003c/em>The big thing right now is that current CAR T therapy is really expensive. It’s not as efficient as we want it to be. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Jillian McCool: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:04:58] \u003c/em>The big thing right now is that current CAR T therapy is really expensive. It’s not as efficient as we want it to be. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>April Dembosky: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:05:05] \u003c/em>So I spoke to one researcher who was working on a project funded by the NIH, the National Institutes of Health. Her name is Jillian McCool, and she was working at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory studying vaccines and a kind of therapy for cancer. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>April Dembosky: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:05:05] \u003c/em>So I spoke to one researcher who was working on a project funded by the NIH, the National Institutes of Health. Her name is Jillian McCool, and she was working at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory studying vaccines and a kind of therapy for cancer. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Jillian McCool: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:05:20] \u003c/em>We basically can take your immune cells and we can take them out of your body and we an alter them so they’re better fit and better suited to fight cancer cells specifically. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Jillian McCool: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:05:20] \u003c/em>We basically can take your immune cells and we can take them out of your body and we an alter them so they’re better fit and better suited to fight cancer cells specifically. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>April Dembosky: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:05:29] \u003c/em>And then some of their grants ran out after they reached the end of the term, but then some of the funding was paused because of the most recent government shutdown. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>April Dembosky: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:05:29] \u003c/em>And then some of their grants ran out after they reached the end of the term, but then some of the funding was paused because of the most recent government shutdown. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Jillian McCool: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:05:38] \u003c/em>All of the sudden we have this weird rhetoric around vaccines and all of the sudden there’s this new administration coming in that’s kind of pushing that rhetoric. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Jillian McCool: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:05:38] \u003c/em>All of the sudden we have this weird rhetoric around vaccines and all of the sudden there’s this new administration coming in that’s kind of pushing that rhetoric. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>April Dembosky: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:05:47] \u003c/em>McCool says about 100 scientists were laid off, including her. She was out of work for a year and a half. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>April Dembosky: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:05:47] \u003c/em>McCool says about 100 scientists were laid off, including her. She was out of work for a year and a half. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Jillian McCool: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:05:54] \u003c/em>And then the public is no longer trusting scientists and what they have to say in the data we’ve collected, it kind of makes you question your whole career in general. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Jillian McCool: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:05:54] \u003c/em>And then the public is no longer trusting scientists and what they have to say in the data we’ve collected, it kind of makes you question your whole career in general. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>April Dembosky: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:06:05] \u003c/em>So it’s personal for McCool, but she says Prop 38 is a way to correct what’s happening at the federal level and protect the jobs of lots of other scientists. She also says, you know, California is a center of excellence in this kind of research, and so it makes sense to root it here. She also points out that the measure is designed to be cost neutral, with 10% of revenues generated from successful discoveries being funneled back to the state. Californians would also be entitled to a 20% discount on any new therapies that are generated from the bond money.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>April Dembosky: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:06:05] \u003c/em>So it’s personal for McCool, but she says Prop 38 is a way to correct what’s happening at the federal level and protect the jobs of lots of other scientists. She also says, you know, California is a center of excellence in this kind of research, and so it makes sense to root it here. She also points out that the measure is designed to be cost neutral, with 10% of revenues generated from successful discoveries being funneled back to the state. Californians would also be entitled to a 20% discount on any new therapies that are generated from the bond money.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:06:41] \u003c/em>And a big part of immunotherapy research is directed towards cancer research and you actually met a cancer patient who’s pretty gung-ho about Prop 38, right? Tell me about her. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:06:41] \u003c/em>And a big part of immunotherapy research is directed towards cancer research and you actually met a cancer patient who’s pretty gung-ho about Prop 38, right? Tell me about her. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Laurie Adami: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:06:52] \u003c/em>My name is Laurie Adami and I live in Los Angeles, California. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Laurie Adami: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:06:52] \u003c/em>My name is Laurie Adami and I live in Los Angeles, California. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>April Dembosky: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:06:57] \u003c/em>Laurie was diagnosed with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. It’s a kind of blood cancer, and this was 20 years ago. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>April Dembosky: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:06:57] \u003c/em>Laurie was diagnosed with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. It’s a kind of blood cancer, and this was 20 years ago. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Laurie Adami: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:07:04] \u003c/em>And when I got sick and I ended up losing my career as a result of my very long battle with cancer. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Laurie Adami: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:07:04] \u003c/em>And when I got sick and I ended up losing my career as a result of my very long battle with cancer. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>April Dembosky: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:07:13] \u003c/em>Several years ago, she enrolled in a clinical trial for an immunotherapy called CAR-T. So, Laurie had one infusion of this immunotherapy about eight years ago and her cancer has not come back since. Now, she’s only one person. You know, it’s important to point out there’s still a large proportion of patients who participated in these trials who did not respond in the same way. But as you can imagine, Laurie is pretty gung-ho for Prop 38. Because of the prospect that it could fund more research and develop more treatments like this to fight other kinds of cancers and other diseases and help more people. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>April Dembosky: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:07:13] \u003c/em>Several years ago, she enrolled in a clinical trial for an immunotherapy called CAR-T. So, Laurie had one infusion of this immunotherapy about eight years ago and her cancer has not come back since. Now, she’s only one person. You know, it’s important to point out there’s still a large proportion of patients who participated in these trials who did not respond in the same way. But as you can imagine, Laurie is pretty gung-ho for Prop 38. Because of the prospect that it could fund more research and develop more treatments like this to fight other kinds of cancers and other diseases and help more people. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Laurie Adami: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:07:54] \u003c/em>You know, not every family is gonna be affected by cancer, but every family is gonna affected by these other diseases. And so I am a huge proponent and supporter because immunotherapy saved my life. So why wouldn’t I believe? And why wouldn’t I want more patients to be able to access the type of treatment that finally saved my live? \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Laurie Adami: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:07:54] \u003c/em>You know, not every family is gonna be affected by cancer, but every family is gonna affected by these other diseases. And so I am a huge proponent and supporter because immunotherapy saved my life. So why wouldn’t I believe? And why wouldn’t I want more patients to be able to access the type of treatment that finally saved my live? \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:08:23] \u003c/em>We’ll have more on Proposition 38 right after this. By the way, if you appreciate the work we’re doing here on PropFest, consider becoming a sustaining member of KQED. We can’t do this work without you. Just go to donate.kqed.org slash podcasts. We’ll be right back. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:08:23] \u003c/em>We’ll have more on Proposition 38 right after this. By the way, if you appreciate the work we’re doing here on PropFest, consider becoming a sustaining member of KQED. We can’t do this work without you. Just go to donate.kqed.org slash podcasts. We’ll be right back. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:08:47] \u003c/em>And we’re back breaking down Proposition 38 with KQED’s April Dembosky. April, you talked about the various different groups supporting Prop 38, including a patient who really believes in the power of immunotherapy research to potentially save lives. So who’s coming out against Prop 38 and what is their argument? \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:08:47] \u003c/em>And we’re back breaking down Proposition 38 with KQED’s April Dembosky. April, you talked about the various different groups supporting Prop 38, including a patient who really believes in the power of immunotherapy research to potentially save lives. So who’s coming out against Prop 38 and what is their argument? \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>April Dembosky: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:09:10] \u003c/em>Yeah, so there’s a very small group of opponents. They’re pretty much all volunteers. It’s very grassroots. And they have organized to point out what they see as the weaknesses and even what they might call the dangers of Prop 38\u003cem>.\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>April Dembosky: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:09:10] \u003c/em>Yeah, so there’s a very small group of opponents. They’re pretty much all volunteers. It’s very grassroots. And they have organized to point out what they see as the weaknesses and even what they might call the dangers of Prop 38\u003cem>.\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Robert Kaplan: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:09:26] \u003c/em>I just think that there are inherent conflicts of interest. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Robert Kaplan: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:09:26] \u003c/em>I just think that there are inherent conflicts of interest. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>April Dembosky: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:09:29] \u003c/em>The main one is Robert Kaplan. He’s a biomedical researcher and administrator at Stanford University School of Medicine. And he also worked at the NIH, the National Institutes of Health. So he has a lot of experience coordinating the kind of research that we’re talking about and at a really grand scale. So he says he supports biomedical research. He’s in favor of science, including immunotherapy. But he says this proposition is not the way to fund it. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>April Dembosky: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:09:29] \u003c/em>The main one is Robert Kaplan. He’s a biomedical researcher and administrator at Stanford University School of Medicine. And he also worked at the NIH, the National Institutes of Health. So he has a lot of experience coordinating the kind of research that we’re talking about and at a really grand scale. So he says he supports biomedical research. He’s in favor of science, including immunotherapy. But he says this proposition is not the way to fund it. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Robert Kaplan: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:09:58] \u003c/em>If you look at NIH support for biomedical research in general or immunology research, there are several institutions in California that are the national leaders, but because of the sort of arbitrary criteria in Proposition 38, they’re not eligible to compete. And we think that’s not right.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Robert Kaplan: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:09:58] \u003c/em>If you look at NIH support for biomedical research in general or immunology research, there are several institutions in California that are the national leaders, but because of the sort of arbitrary criteria in Proposition 38, they’re not eligible to compete. And we think that’s not right.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>April Dembosky: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:10:17] \u003c/em>So science grants are usually awarded based on an open, competitive process. People have to have a proven track record. He says it’s a good idea to spread that kind of research across different institutions, so you have different people with different ideas and different methodology. But half of the money for Prop 38 goes directly to one brand new institute that is barely off the ground yet, and it has zero track record. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>April Dembosky: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:10:17] \u003c/em>So science grants are usually awarded based on an open, competitive process. People have to have a proven track record. He says it’s a good idea to spread that kind of research across different institutions, so you have different people with different ideas and different methodology. But half of the money for Prop 38 goes directly to one brand new institute that is barely off the ground yet, and it has zero track record. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Robert Kaplan: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:10:47] \u003c/em>I think [if] taxpayers are going to have to repay these bonds. We think that should be a fair competition that allows all of these excellent institutions in California to have an opportunity to be in that competition. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Robert Kaplan: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:10:47] \u003c/em>I think [if] taxpayers are going to have to repay these bonds. We think that should be a fair competition that allows all of these excellent institutions in California to have an opportunity to be in that competition. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>April Dembosky: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:10:59] \u003c/em>The opponents would really point out it’s only for immunotherapy and immunology research. So if you think that there are other kinds of health priorities, like mental illness or kidney disease or other kinds treatments, those are not included here. The other people speaking out against Prop 38, they’re a very interesting group. They are financial analysts who used to work at the LAO. That’s the Legislative Analyst’s Office. And this is a nonpartisan state agency. It’s tasked with evaluating proposed legislation and ballot measures like this one. And they are trained to never take a stand on political issues. And in this case, three retired analysts from the LAOs are breaking that wall, because of their concerns on Prop 38.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>April Dembosky: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:10:59] \u003c/em>The opponents would really point out it’s only for immunotherapy and immunology research. So if you think that there are other kinds of health priorities, like mental illness or kidney disease or other kinds treatments, those are not included here. The other people speaking out against Prop 38, they’re a very interesting group. They are financial analysts who used to work at the LAO. That’s the Legislative Analyst’s Office. And this is a nonpartisan state agency. It’s tasked with evaluating proposed legislation and ballot measures like this one. And they are trained to never take a stand on political issues. And in this case, three retired analysts from the LAOs are breaking that wall, because of their concerns on Prop 38.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Dan Carson: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:11:56] \u003c/em>Hi. I’m Dan Carson. I’m here today as a cancer survivor myself, who is obviously not against good medical research.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Dan Carson: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:11:56] \u003c/em>Hi. I’m Dan Carson. I’m here today as a cancer survivor myself, who is obviously not against good medical research.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>April Dembosky: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:12:05] \u003c/em>So one of them is Dan Carson. He ran the health section of the LAO back in 2004 when another bond measure was on the ballot to fund stem cell research. So proponents said the $3 billion for that initiative would be paid back by all the new stem cell discoveries that researchers made with the money.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>April Dembosky: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:12:05] \u003c/em>So one of them is Dan Carson. He ran the health section of the LAO back in 2004 when another bond measure was on the ballot to fund stem cell research. So proponents said the $3 billion for that initiative would be paid back by all the new stem cell discoveries that researchers made with the money.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Dan Carson: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:12:26] \u003c/em>In fact, as our analysis at the time made really clear, the state eventually received only a tiny fraction of the billions of dollars we were promised. So here we go again with Prop 38. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Dan Carson: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:12:26] \u003c/em>In fact, as our analysis at the time made really clear, the state eventually received only a tiny fraction of the billions of dollars we were promised. So here we go again with Prop 38. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>April Dembosky: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:12:41] \u003c/em>The opponents of Prop 38 take issue with one of the main claims that the supporters of Prop 38 have, which is they say that the proposition will be cost neutral, that the money that California borrows and spends on the research will be made back by revenues from all of the scientific discoveries that they made. The LAO analysts say the math just doesn’t add up. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>April Dembosky: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:12:41] \u003c/em>The opponents of Prop 38 take issue with one of the main claims that the supporters of Prop 38 have, which is they say that the proposition will be cost neutral, that the money that California borrows and spends on the research will be made back by revenues from all of the scientific discoveries that they made. The LAO analysts say the math just doesn’t add up. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Dan Carson: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:13:08] \u003c/em>Oh, once again, we’re being promised in this initiative and by its advocates that will quote, pay for itself with no net cost to the state or taxpayers, closed quote. I’m here to tell you that after reviewing the fine print of this ballot measure, that won’t happen. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Dan Carson: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:13:08] \u003c/em>Oh, once again, we’re being promised in this initiative and by its advocates that will quote, pay for itself with no net cost to the state or taxpayers, closed quote. I’m here to tell you that after reviewing the fine print of this ballot measure, that won’t happen. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:13:32] \u003c/em>April, what’s spending on Prop 38 looking like on either side, the yes and the no side? \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:13:32] \u003c/em>April, what’s spending on Prop 38 looking like on either side, the yes and the no side? \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>April Dembosky: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:13:38] \u003c/em>So the Yes on Prop 38 campaign has raised about $27 million so far, and that comes mainly from Gary Michaelson and another billionaire who have donated to the same institute that would be the main beneficiary of the Prop 38 funds. The no side has not raised any money so far.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>April Dembosky: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:13:38] \u003c/em>So the Yes on Prop 38 campaign has raised about $27 million so far, and that comes mainly from Gary Michaelson and another billionaire who have donated to the same institute that would be the main beneficiary of the Prop 38 funds. The no side has not raised any money so far.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:13:59] \u003c/em>It seems like we as voters are sort of being asked to decide how scientific research should happen almost and the best way to go about that. How do you think voters should sort of navigate the question being asked before them? \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:13:59] \u003c/em>It seems like we as voters are sort of being asked to decide how scientific research should happen almost and the best way to go about that. How do you think voters should sort of navigate the question being asked before them? \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>April Dembosky: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:14:15] \u003c/em>It’s such a tricky one to put voters in a position of having to become experts on a field of science that maybe they haven’t even heard about. Totally, that’s how I feel. Right. You know, I think on its face, Prop 38 is very appealing and we’ve seen various ballot measures over the years that are healthcare oriented and we find that they often play well. For people who feel really strongly about this area of research, they may feel happy to have the opportunity to vote on something like this and set aside a pot of money that is just for this kind of research. On the other hand, the way that this proposition is worded and the way the money would be distributed looks very, very different from the kind of process that’s used at the federal level. So you’re not just creating a new fund for stability, you’re actually creating a new way of how that science gets funded and how the money gets distributed. Propositions like this, you could say are direct democracy, but in another way, they also circumvent that other democratic process.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>April Dembosky: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:14:15] \u003c/em>It’s such a tricky one to put voters in a position of having to become experts on a field of science that maybe they haven’t even heard about. Totally, that’s how I feel. Right. You know, I think on its face, Prop 38 is very appealing and we’ve seen various ballot measures over the years that are healthcare oriented and we find that they often play well. For people who feel really strongly about this area of research, they may feel happy to have the opportunity to vote on something like this and set aside a pot of money that is just for this kind of research. On the other hand, the way that this proposition is worded and the way the money would be distributed looks very, very different from the kind of process that’s used at the federal level. So you’re not just creating a new fund for stability, you’re actually creating a new way of how that science gets funded and how the money gets distributed. Propositions like this, you could say are direct democracy, but in another way, they also circumvent that other democratic process.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:15:35] \u003c/em>Well, April Dombosky, thank you so much for breaking this down. Appreciate it.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:15:35] \u003c/em>Well, April Dombosky, thank you so much for breaking this down. Appreciate it.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>April Dembosky: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:15:40] \u003c/em>Thanks, Ericka.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>April Dembosky: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:15:40] \u003c/em>Thanks, Ericka.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:15:42] \u003c/em>In a nutshell, a yes vote on this measure means the state could borrow $8.4 billion to support medical research in immunology and immunotherapy. A no vote means the state cannot borrow 8.4 billion for immunology, and immunotherapy research. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:15:42] \u003c/em>In a nutshell, a yes vote on this measure means the state could borrow $8.4 billion to support medical research in immunology and immunotherapy. A no vote means the state cannot borrow 8.4 billion for immunology, and immunotherapy research. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:16:02] \u003c/em>And that’s it for our latest episode of PropFest, a collaboration between The Bay and Bay Curious. If this series is helping you get educated on all the statewide props, we sure hope that you’re going to share them with your friends and family. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:16:02] \u003c/em>And that’s it for our latest episode of PropFest, a collaboration between The Bay and Bay Curious. If this series is helping you get educated on all the statewide props, we sure hope that you’re going to share them with your friends and family. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:16:16] \u003c/em>The link is kqed.org slash propfest and we’ll be dropping new breakdowns until October 9th. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:16:16] \u003c/em>The link is kqed.org slash propfest and we’ll be dropping new breakdowns until October 9th. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:16:24] \u003c/em>PropFest is made possible thanks to Katrina Schwartz, Pauline Bartolone, Anna Casalme, Ericka Cruz Guevara, Gabriela Glueck. Christopher Beale, Alan Montecillo. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:16:24] \u003c/em>PropFest is made possible thanks to Katrina Schwartz, Pauline Bartolone, Anna Casalme, Ericka Cruz Guevara, Gabriela Glueck. Christopher Beale, Alan Montecillo. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:16:35] \u003c/em>And me, Olivia Allen Price. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:16:35] \u003c/em>And me, Olivia Allen Price. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:16:37] \u003c/em>We get extra support from Maha Sanad, Katie Springer, Jen Chien. Ethan Tovan Lindsey and everyone on Team KQED. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:16:37] \u003c/em>We get extra support from Maha Sanad, Katie Springer, Jen Chien. Ethan Tovan Lindsey and everyone on Team KQED. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:16:46] \u003c/em>Our show is made in San Francisco at member-supported KQED.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:16:46] \u003c/em>Our show is made in San Francisco at member-supported KQED.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:16:51] \u003c/em>Support for The Bay is provided in part by the Osher Production Fund. Some members of the KQED podcast team are represented by the Screen Actors Guild, American Federation of Television and Radio Artists, San Francisco, Northern California Local. I’m Ericka Cruz Guevarra. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:16:51] \u003c/em>Support for The Bay is provided in part by the Osher Production Fund. Some members of the KQED podcast team are represented by the Screen Actors Guild, American Federation of Television and Radio Artists, San Francisco, Northern California Local. I’m Ericka Cruz Guevarra. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:17:08] \u003c/em>And I’m Olivia Allen-Price. Have a good one. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:17:08] \u003c/em>And I’m Olivia Allen-Price. Have a good one. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cem>Some members of the KQED podcast team are represented by The Screen Actors Guild, American Federation of Television and Radio Artists, San Francisco-Northern California Local.\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cem>Some members of the KQED podcast team are represented by The Screen Actors Guild, American Federation of Television and Radio Artists, San Francisco-Northern California Local.\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
}
],
"excerpt": "This $8.4 billion bond measure would fund immunology research, with half of the funds going to UCLA.",
"status": "publish",
"parent": 0,
"modified": 1790891793,
"stats": {
"hasAudio": false,
"hasVideo": false,
"hasChartOrMap": false,
"iframeSrcs": [],
"hasGoogleForm": false,
"hasGallery": false,
"hasHearkenModule": false,
"hasPolis": false,
"paragraphCount": 58,
"wordCount": 2960
},
"headData": {
"title": "Prop 38: Borrows $8.4 Billion to Fund Immunology Research | KQED",
"description": "This $8.4 billion bond measure would fund immunology research, with half of the funds going to UCLA.",
"ogTitle": "",
"ogDescription": "",
"ogImgId": "",
"twTitle": "",
"twDescription": "",
"twImgId": "",
"socialDescription": "This $8.4 billion bond measure would fund immunology research, with half of the funds going to UCLA.",
"schema": {
"@context": "https://schema.org",
"@type": "NewsArticle",
"headline": "Prop 38: Borrows $8.4 Billion to Fund Immunology Research",
"datePublished": "2026-10-02T03:00:00-07:00",
"dateModified": "2026-10-01T14:56:33-07:00",
"image": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"isAccessibleForFree": "True",
"publisher": {
"@type": "NewsMediaOrganization",
"@id": "https://www.kqed.org/#organization",
"name": "KQED",
"logo": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"url": "https://www.kqed.org",
"sameAs": [
"https://www.facebook.com/KQED",
"https://twitter.com/KQED",
"https://www.instagram.com/kqed/",
"https://www.tiktok.com/@kqedofficial",
"https://www.linkedin.com/company/kqed",
"https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCeC0IOo7i1P_61zVUWbJ4nw"
]
}
}
},
"primaryCategory": {
"termId": 33520,
"slug": "podcast",
"name": "Podcast"
},
"source": "Prop Fest 2026",
"sourceUrl": "https://www.kqed.org/propfest",
"audioUrl": "https://www.podtrac.com/pts/redirect.mp3/traffic.megaphone.fm/KQINC1095371918.mp3",
"sticky": false,
"templateType": "standard",
"featuredImageType": "standard",
"excludeFromSiteSearch": "Include",
"articleAge": "0",
"path": "/news/12102150/prop-38-borrows-8-4-billion-to-fund-immunology-research",
"audioTrackLength": null,
"parsedContent": [
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>\n\u003ch2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Transcript\u003c/h2>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:00:00] \u003c/em>Immunotherapy has been around for a really long time. Things like vaccines are considered part of immunology, but it also includes more recent innovations like newer treatments for blood and skin cancers. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:00:15] \u003c/em>In simple terms, immunotherapy is individualized treatment designed to harness a patient’s immune system to fight disease. For some, immunotherapy has been life-changing. And voters are being asked this November whether to fund immunology and immunotherapy research with one very specific beneficiary in mind. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:00:38] \u003c/em>I’m Ericka Cruz Guevarra, host of The Bay. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:00:41] \u003c/em>And I’m Olivia Allen-Price, host of Bay Curious. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:00:44] \u003c/em>And welcome to Prop Fest. A collaboration between the Bay and Bay Curious, where we break down all 14 statewide propositions on your ballot this year November. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:00:54] \u003c/em>And we’re back at it again with Proposition 38. Here’s how it reads on your ballot. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Reporter: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:01:01] \u003c/em>Prop 38 authorizes bonds for immunology medical research. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:01:08] \u003c/em>Here to walk us through all of this is KQED Health Correspondent April Dembosky. April, first of all, what is Prop 38 all about? \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>April Dembosky: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:01:16] \u003c/em>Prop 38 is a bond measure that would fund immunology and immunotherapy research. It would allow the state to borrow $8.4 billion and distribute it to nonprofit research centers that are studying immunotherapy treatments for cancer, heart disease, and Alzheimer’s. The measure is expected to cost the state about $500 million a year for 20 years in bond repayments. And about $4 billion of that would be interest payments on top of the original 8.4 billion for a total cost of about $12 billion. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:01:58] \u003c/em>There is sort of an interesting story about how this came on the ballot in the first place, right? Can you actually talk about why voters are even being asked to fund immunotherapy in this year’s election?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>April Dembosky: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:02:11] \u003c/em>Prop 38 was the brainchild of a philanthropist named Gary Michelson. He raised the money to collect the signatures and put Prop 38 on the ballot. Something that’s really interesting about the initiative is how it’s worded. The language is very careful. It lists very strict criteria for the type of academic institution that should receive half of the money. This criteria is so specific. That only one university in the state meets the criteria, and that is UCLA. Half the funds would go toward launching a new immunology institute at UCLA, and the other half would be awarded through competitive grants to other institutes also in California. And so, as it turns out, Michelson has already donated $120 million of his own money to establish a new institute for immunotherapy at UCLA. It’s called the California Institute for Immunology and Immunotherapy. That same institution would also be the touch point for all the research. So the other half of the funding that would get distributed in competitive grants would all be sort of centered at UCLA. So it’s safe to say that this is on the ballot because a very wealthy philanthropist put it there as a way to finance a research institution focused on his interest, which is immunology and immunotherapy.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:03:50] \u003c/em>Okay, April, so Prop 38 was put on the ballot by this wealthy philanthropist, Gary Michelson, and it’s written in this way that would, it sounds like directly benefit a research institute at UCLA that he’s helping to fund. So clearly he has some skin in the game here. Is Prop 38 getting much support from elsewhere? Like how else is the pro-Prop 38 side kind of shaping up?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>April Dembosky: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:04:18] \u003c/em>There’s a long list of foundations and advocacy groups that have signed on in support of Prop 38, places like Blood Cancer United, the Melanoma Research Alliance, the Alzheimer’s Association, the ALS Association, the National Multiple Sclerosis Society, the Michael J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson’s Research. So these are groups that hope and believe that new immunotherapies could be developed to treat these specific diseases. Proponents also say this initiative is necessary because federal funding for this kind of research has become unreliable under the current administration. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Jillian McCool: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:04:58] \u003c/em>The big thing right now is that current CAR T therapy is really expensive. It’s not as efficient as we want it to be. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>April Dembosky: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:05:05] \u003c/em>So I spoke to one researcher who was working on a project funded by the NIH, the National Institutes of Health. Her name is Jillian McCool, and she was working at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory studying vaccines and a kind of therapy for cancer. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Jillian McCool: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:05:20] \u003c/em>We basically can take your immune cells and we can take them out of your body and we an alter them so they’re better fit and better suited to fight cancer cells specifically. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>April Dembosky: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:05:29] \u003c/em>And then some of their grants ran out after they reached the end of the term, but then some of the funding was paused because of the most recent government shutdown. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Jillian McCool: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:05:38] \u003c/em>All of the sudden we have this weird rhetoric around vaccines and all of the sudden there’s this new administration coming in that’s kind of pushing that rhetoric. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>April Dembosky: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:05:47] \u003c/em>McCool says about 100 scientists were laid off, including her. She was out of work for a year and a half. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Jillian McCool: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:05:54] \u003c/em>And then the public is no longer trusting scientists and what they have to say in the data we’ve collected, it kind of makes you question your whole career in general. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>April Dembosky: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:06:05] \u003c/em>So it’s personal for McCool, but she says Prop 38 is a way to correct what’s happening at the federal level and protect the jobs of lots of other scientists. She also says, you know, California is a center of excellence in this kind of research, and so it makes sense to root it here. She also points out that the measure is designed to be cost neutral, with 10% of revenues generated from successful discoveries being funneled back to the state. Californians would also be entitled to a 20% discount on any new therapies that are generated from the bond money.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:06:41] \u003c/em>And a big part of immunotherapy research is directed towards cancer research and you actually met a cancer patient who’s pretty gung-ho about Prop 38, right? Tell me about her. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Laurie Adami: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:06:52] \u003c/em>My name is Laurie Adami and I live in Los Angeles, California. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>April Dembosky: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:06:57] \u003c/em>Laurie was diagnosed with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. It’s a kind of blood cancer, and this was 20 years ago. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Laurie Adami: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:07:04] \u003c/em>And when I got sick and I ended up losing my career as a result of my very long battle with cancer. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>April Dembosky: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:07:13] \u003c/em>Several years ago, she enrolled in a clinical trial for an immunotherapy called CAR-T. So, Laurie had one infusion of this immunotherapy about eight years ago and her cancer has not come back since. Now, she’s only one person. You know, it’s important to point out there’s still a large proportion of patients who participated in these trials who did not respond in the same way. But as you can imagine, Laurie is pretty gung-ho for Prop 38. Because of the prospect that it could fund more research and develop more treatments like this to fight other kinds of cancers and other diseases and help more people. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Laurie Adami: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:07:54] \u003c/em>You know, not every family is gonna be affected by cancer, but every family is gonna affected by these other diseases. And so I am a huge proponent and supporter because immunotherapy saved my life. So why wouldn’t I believe? And why wouldn’t I want more patients to be able to access the type of treatment that finally saved my live? \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:08:23] \u003c/em>We’ll have more on Proposition 38 right after this. By the way, if you appreciate the work we’re doing here on PropFest, consider becoming a sustaining member of KQED. We can’t do this work without you. Just go to donate.kqed.org slash podcasts. We’ll be right back. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:08:47] \u003c/em>And we’re back breaking down Proposition 38 with KQED’s April Dembosky. April, you talked about the various different groups supporting Prop 38, including a patient who really believes in the power of immunotherapy research to potentially save lives. So who’s coming out against Prop 38 and what is their argument? \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>April Dembosky: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:09:10] \u003c/em>Yeah, so there’s a very small group of opponents. They’re pretty much all volunteers. It’s very grassroots. And they have organized to point out what they see as the weaknesses and even what they might call the dangers of Prop 38\u003cem>.\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Robert Kaplan: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:09:26] \u003c/em>I just think that there are inherent conflicts of interest. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>April Dembosky: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:09:29] \u003c/em>The main one is Robert Kaplan. He’s a biomedical researcher and administrator at Stanford University School of Medicine. And he also worked at the NIH, the National Institutes of Health. So he has a lot of experience coordinating the kind of research that we’re talking about and at a really grand scale. So he says he supports biomedical research. He’s in favor of science, including immunotherapy. But he says this proposition is not the way to fund it. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Robert Kaplan: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:09:58] \u003c/em>If you look at NIH support for biomedical research in general or immunology research, there are several institutions in California that are the national leaders, but because of the sort of arbitrary criteria in Proposition 38, they’re not eligible to compete. And we think that’s not right.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>April Dembosky: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:10:17] \u003c/em>So science grants are usually awarded based on an open, competitive process. People have to have a proven track record. He says it’s a good idea to spread that kind of research across different institutions, so you have different people with different ideas and different methodology. But half of the money for Prop 38 goes directly to one brand new institute that is barely off the ground yet, and it has zero track record. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Robert Kaplan: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:10:47] \u003c/em>I think [if] taxpayers are going to have to repay these bonds. We think that should be a fair competition that allows all of these excellent institutions in California to have an opportunity to be in that competition. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>April Dembosky: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:10:59] \u003c/em>The opponents would really point out it’s only for immunotherapy and immunology research. So if you think that there are other kinds of health priorities, like mental illness or kidney disease or other kinds treatments, those are not included here. The other people speaking out against Prop 38, they’re a very interesting group. They are financial analysts who used to work at the LAO. That’s the Legislative Analyst’s Office. And this is a nonpartisan state agency. It’s tasked with evaluating proposed legislation and ballot measures like this one. And they are trained to never take a stand on political issues. And in this case, three retired analysts from the LAOs are breaking that wall, because of their concerns on Prop 38.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Dan Carson: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:11:56] \u003c/em>Hi. I’m Dan Carson. I’m here today as a cancer survivor myself, who is obviously not against good medical research.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>April Dembosky: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:12:05] \u003c/em>So one of them is Dan Carson. He ran the health section of the LAO back in 2004 when another bond measure was on the ballot to fund stem cell research. So proponents said the $3 billion for that initiative would be paid back by all the new stem cell discoveries that researchers made with the money.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Dan Carson: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:12:26] \u003c/em>In fact, as our analysis at the time made really clear, the state eventually received only a tiny fraction of the billions of dollars we were promised. So here we go again with Prop 38. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>April Dembosky: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:12:41] \u003c/em>The opponents of Prop 38 take issue with one of the main claims that the supporters of Prop 38 have, which is they say that the proposition will be cost neutral, that the money that California borrows and spends on the research will be made back by revenues from all of the scientific discoveries that they made. The LAO analysts say the math just doesn’t add up. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Dan Carson: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:13:08] \u003c/em>Oh, once again, we’re being promised in this initiative and by its advocates that will quote, pay for itself with no net cost to the state or taxpayers, closed quote. I’m here to tell you that after reviewing the fine print of this ballot measure, that won’t happen. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:13:32] \u003c/em>April, what’s spending on Prop 38 looking like on either side, the yes and the no side? \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>April Dembosky: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:13:38] \u003c/em>So the Yes on Prop 38 campaign has raised about $27 million so far, and that comes mainly from Gary Michaelson and another billionaire who have donated to the same institute that would be the main beneficiary of the Prop 38 funds. The no side has not raised any money so far.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:13:59] \u003c/em>It seems like we as voters are sort of being asked to decide how scientific research should happen almost and the best way to go about that. How do you think voters should sort of navigate the question being asked before them? \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>April Dembosky: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:14:15] \u003c/em>It’s such a tricky one to put voters in a position of having to become experts on a field of science that maybe they haven’t even heard about. Totally, that’s how I feel. Right. You know, I think on its face, Prop 38 is very appealing and we’ve seen various ballot measures over the years that are healthcare oriented and we find that they often play well. For people who feel really strongly about this area of research, they may feel happy to have the opportunity to vote on something like this and set aside a pot of money that is just for this kind of research. On the other hand, the way that this proposition is worded and the way the money would be distributed looks very, very different from the kind of process that’s used at the federal level. So you’re not just creating a new fund for stability, you’re actually creating a new way of how that science gets funded and how the money gets distributed. Propositions like this, you could say are direct democracy, but in another way, they also circumvent that other democratic process.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:15:35] \u003c/em>Well, April Dombosky, thank you so much for breaking this down. Appreciate it.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>April Dembosky: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:15:40] \u003c/em>Thanks, Ericka.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:15:42] \u003c/em>In a nutshell, a yes vote on this measure means the state could borrow $8.4 billion to support medical research in immunology and immunotherapy. A no vote means the state cannot borrow 8.4 billion for immunology, and immunotherapy research. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:16:02] \u003c/em>And that’s it for our latest episode of PropFest, a collaboration between The Bay and Bay Curious. If this series is helping you get educated on all the statewide props, we sure hope that you’re going to share them with your friends and family. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:16:16] \u003c/em>The link is kqed.org slash propfest and we’ll be dropping new breakdowns until October 9th. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:16:24] \u003c/em>PropFest is made possible thanks to Katrina Schwartz, Pauline Bartolone, Anna Casalme, Ericka Cruz Guevara, Gabriela Glueck. Christopher Beale, Alan Montecillo. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:16:35] \u003c/em>And me, Olivia Allen Price. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:16:37] \u003c/em>We get extra support from Maha Sanad, Katie Springer, Jen Chien. Ethan Tovan Lindsey and everyone on Team KQED. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:16:46] \u003c/em>Our show is made in San Francisco at member-supported KQED.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:16:51] \u003c/em>Support for The Bay is provided in part by the Osher Production Fund. Some members of the KQED podcast team are represented by the Screen Actors Guild, American Federation of Television and Radio Artists, San Francisco, Northern California Local. I’m Ericka Cruz Guevarra. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>\u003cem>[00:17:08] \u003c/em>And I’m Olivia Allen-Price. Have a good one. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cem>Some members of the KQED podcast team are represented by The Screen Actors Guild, American Federation of Television and Radio Artists, San Francisco-Northern California Local.\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n\u003c/div>\u003c/p>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
}
],
"link": "/news/12102150/prop-38-borrows-8-4-billion-to-fund-immunology-research",
"authors": [
"8654",
"3205",
"11946",
"11649"
],
"programs": [
"news_33523",
"news_34552"
],
"series": [
"news_17986"
],
"categories": [
"news_457",
"news_8",
"news_33520"
],
"tags": [
"news_35118",
"news_33812",
"news_28645",
"news_37131",
"news_22598"
],
"featImg": "news_12102151",
"label": "source_news_12102150"
},
"news_12101434": {
"type": "posts",
"id": "news_12101434",
"meta": {
"index": "posts_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "12101434",
"score": null,
"sort": [
1790848800000
]
},
"guestAuthors": [],
"slug": "prop-37-creates-middle-income-homebuying-program",
"title": "Prop 37: Creates Middle-Income Homebuying Program",
"publishDate": 1790848800,
"format": "standard",
"headTitle": "Prop 37: Creates Middle-Income Homebuying Program | KQED",
"labelTerm": {},
"content": "\n\u003ch2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Episode Transcript:\u003c/h2>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>For would-be homebuyers in California, there are a seemingly endless number of hurdles to jump over. But perhaps the biggest one for most people is saving for the down payment. When homes cost as much as they do in California, coming up with that initial chunk of cash hurts.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>It’s pretty standard to put down 20% of the cost of a home for a down payment. And if you can’t, you may be required to get mortgage insurance, which is just one more extra fee. The median cost of a single-family home in California is $980,000. That means you’ll need $200,000 for a down payment.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And of course most homes here in the Bay Area where we’re recording cost way, way more.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>It’s this issue that the proponents of Proposition 37 set out to tackle. Here’s how the measure reads on your ballot. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Voice Over: \u003c/strong>Proposition37 creates a loan program for middle-income buyers of qualified new homes. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>I’m Ericka Cruz Guevarra, host of The Bay.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And I’m Olivia Allen-Price, host of Bay Curious. Today, we continue on with PropFest, breaking down each of the 14 initiatives on the statewide ballot.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>You heard that right, 14. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Direct democracy, baby. Here we go. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Today, we’re going through Proposition 37, a $25 billion bond to fund a program to help moderate income Californians buy homes. Here to walk us through it is KQED’s housing reporter, Adhiti Bandlamudi. Welcome, Adhiti. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Adhiti Bandlamudi: \u003c/strong>Hey Olivia, I’m ready to talk bonds. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Let’s do it. Let’s start big picture on this one. What’s the context for Prop 37 and why is it on our ballot?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Adhiti Bandlamudi: \u003c/strong>Yeah, California has one of the lowest rates of homeownership compared to other states. The national average is 66 percent, but California’s is 10 percent lower. It’s like 56 percent. That’s largely because the homes here are so expensive. More than half of Californians don’t own a home until they’re in their late 40s. And for a lot of people, the down payment is the sticking point. They could make a mortgage, but they don’t have enough savings to get into the game. And what could Prop 37 do to help that situation? So it directs the California Housing Finance Agency, also called Cal HFA, to create a middle-class home buyer down payment assistance program funded with up to $25 billion in revenue bonds, which means the bond would be paid back by mortgage payments home buyers make, not by taxpayers who aren’t buying homes. There’s an interesting catch here though. This program only applies to newly constructed homes. So on the whole, this bond is trying to do two things, help middle-class home buyers buy homes and also jumpstart the housing construction industry. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Okay, so unlike Prop 1, the other housing bond on this year’s ballot, which we talked about the other day. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Adhiti Bandlamudi: \u003c/strong>I’m familiar with it, yes. Yes, \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Which funds all sorts of programs. This one is specifically targeting that middle income group of people who often don’t qualify for other programs from the state.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Adhiti Bandlamudi: \u003c/strong>Correct, and we should be clear, the way that this bond defines middle class is a bit tricky. So it’s defined as making 200% of area median income. Another way of thinking about that is that it’s roughly double of what a typical family in the area makes. Now, because it’s tied to what local incomes are in a particular place, qualifying for this program is going to vary greatly depending on where you are living in California. The California Budget Center has a really nice breakdown of what this would mean on a county level for a family of one, two, three, four. So let’s take a family four. This would mean that in San Francisco, for example, the family could make up to $342,000 and still qualify. If the family lived in San Mateo, that number would be a little bit higher. In Solano County, on the other hand, that number would be about $100,000 lower. So again, qualifying for this program really depends on where you live in the state. And this proposition really focuses on connecting new homeowners to new housing by helping people come up with the money for a down payment, which is really interesting to watch if this passes because it can only be used for newly constructed homes, which also means that it’s gonna take time for people to use this program to buy a home because the homes have to be built.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And really it will be more useful for potential home buyers in certain places where new homes can be built.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Adhiti Bandlamudi: \u003c/strong>Exactly. It’s really going to depend on the cities and the counties that are willing to build more homes, that have space to build, more homes that have public political pressure to build more homes. So it’ll be interesting to watch. Walk me through how this would actually work from the homebuyers’ perspective. Okay, so here are the mechanics of it. So buyers would have to put down at least 3% of the down payment themselves. The bond would basically allow the state to cover 17% of home price. So 17 plus three, we got 20% down, which is the standard amount needed to avoid paying mortgage insurance. Now, the bond would require that home buyers pay back that 17% down payment assistance with interest, which means they’d be paying that back along with their monthly mortgage payments. What’s required of homebuyers who want to take part in this program? Unlike other down payment assistance programs, it doesn’t require the applicant to be a first-time or first-generation homebuyer. And it also doesn’t have any rules that would mean the homebuyer owes the state any equity gained on the house. Homebuyers have to qualify for a mortgage, meet the income requirements, occupy the home as their primary residence, make monthly payments, and they would have to fully repay their loans. What’s all this going to cost taxpayers? This would not cost taxpayers anything because the interest payments homebuyers would make to the state would cover the interest on the bond.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>We’ve got to hit pause for a minute, but when we return, more on Prop 37, including who’s behind it and what supporters and opponents say. Stay with us. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cem>Sponsor messages\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Welcome back to PropFest. We’re talking about Proposition 37. Arati, this measure was placed on the ballot by a group, not the state legislature. Who’s behind it?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Adhiti Bandlamudi: \u003c/strong>Bob Hertzberg, he is the former state Senate majority leader. He’s now retired from the legislature, but he still gets involved with causes he cares about. He started thinking about this bill back in 2008, right after the financial crash. He saw that we immediately stopped building homes, and there weren’t a lot of incentives for developers to build middle class housing.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Bob Hertzberg: \u003c/strong>You know, so many things we do in government either help the super wealthy and powerful or the people that are otherwise in trouble in so many ways, and it’s the right thing to do, but the middle class feels like they’re out of the loop.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>In addition to Hertzberg, who else is supporting this measure? \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Adhiti Bandlamudi: \u003c/strong>There’s a lot of broad support for this proposition. The Democratic Party, various construction and realtor groups have also shown support, as well as Javier Becerra, who’s running for governor. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Hmm. And what about opponents? What do they have to say, and who are they? \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Adhiti Bandlamudi: \u003c/strong>So there are no official opponents to this bill, but there are some arguments for why it may not have its intended effect. So first off, there’s a real question right now as to whether home ownership in a state like California is still the most advantageous path. The premium to buy a house, like all those extra fees and things like insurance and interest, they can outweigh the historical benefit of buying a home and owning one. Second, while this proposition states an intent to keep the interest rate on the down payment loans low, it doesn’t guarantee it. Critics argue that because home buyers would be paying their mortgage and paying back the down payment assistance loan, it’s a second mortgage. And investors could see that as more risky and in turn that could lead to higher interest rates. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Also, some people say that this could actually exacerbate racial disparities in home ownership because there are barriers to participating. According to the Public Policy Institute of California, the median amount in Californians’ checking and savings accounts was just over $18,000 in 2025. This means that a 3% down payment could still almost or entirely wipe out the savings of what an average family has. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Third, California already has several down payment assistance programs. There are estate ones, there are ones run by counties, by local banks. Does it really need another one, especially one that’s so focused on newly built homes? And also, while we’re on the topic of newly built homes, right now, home building is pretty slow going with borrowing costs, labor costs, materials, all being really expensive. So while this bond is trying to provide incentives, there’s no guarantee that developers will bite and actually build the homes. Reform California has come out against it. Carl DeMaio is a Republican assembly member from San Diego, and he says it’s a lot of money to be borrowing right now. And he’s also worried that this bond isn’t really for home buyers, but for developers.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Carl DeMaio: \u003c/strong>This bond program basically becomes a subsidy for rich developers who give campaign contributions back to politicians. It really only helps a few people when it comes to housing, the lucky few that might win the lottery. This is not the approach for affordable housing.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>What does spending look like for Prop 37?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Adhiti Bandlamudi: \u003c/strong>Supporters of the proposition have raised $12.7 million as of this taping. The opposition hasn’t spent any money on this measure. All right.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Aditi Bandlamudi, thank you for breaking Prop 37 down for us. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Adhiti Bandlamudi: \u003c/strong>Yeah, thanks for having me. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>In a nutshell, a vote yes on Prop 37 gives the state permission to borrow up to $25 billion to create a down-payment assistance program for middle-income people. It would be repaid by people who receive those loans. A vote no means you do not want the state to borrow up to 25 billion dollars to create this program.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>That’s it for PropFest today. We’ll be back tomorrow with an explainer on Proposition 38, another bond, this time for immunology and immunotherapy research, and Proposition 39 about voter ID.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>We’re dropping episodes every weekday from now until October 9th on the Bay and Bay Curious podcast feeds. Make sure you’re subscribed so you don’t miss out.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>PropFest is a collaboration between the Bay and Bay Curious podcasts. It’s produced by Alan Montecillo, Gabriella Glueck, Pauline Bartolone, Olivia Allen-Price, Katrina Schwartz, Christopher Beale, Anna Casalme, and me.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>We get extra support from Ethan Tovan Lindsey, Maha Sanad, and the whole KQED family. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>You can find audio and transcripts for this series at kqed.org slash prop fest. Some members of the KQEd podcast team are represented by the Screen Actors Guild, American Federation of Television and Radio Artists, San Francisco, Northern California local.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>Support for The Bay is provided in part by the Osher Production Fund. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Our show is made in San Francisco at member-supported KQED. If you value podcasts like this one, please consider becoming a sustaining KQed member. Learn more at donate.kqed.org. I’m Olivia Ellen Price. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>And I’m Erika Cruz-Gavarra. We’ll see you tomorrow. Bye!\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n",
"blocks": [
{
"blockName": "core/heading",
"attrs": {
"text": "Episode Transcript:",
"level": 2
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003ch2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Episode Transcript:\u003c/h2>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003ch2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Episode Transcript:\u003c/h2>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>For would-be homebuyers in California, there are a seemingly endless number of hurdles to jump over. But perhaps the biggest one for most people is saving for the down payment. When homes cost as much as they do in California, coming up with that initial chunk of cash hurts.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>For would-be homebuyers in California, there are a seemingly endless number of hurdles to jump over. But perhaps the biggest one for most people is saving for the down payment. When homes cost as much as they do in California, coming up with that initial chunk of cash hurts.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>It’s pretty standard to put down 20% of the cost of a home for a down payment. And if you can’t, you may be required to get mortgage insurance, which is just one more extra fee. The median cost of a single-family home in California is $980,000. That means you’ll need $200,000 for a down payment.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>It’s pretty standard to put down 20% of the cost of a home for a down payment. And if you can’t, you may be required to get mortgage insurance, which is just one more extra fee. The median cost of a single-family home in California is $980,000. That means you’ll need $200,000 for a down payment.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And of course most homes here in the Bay Area where we’re recording cost way, way more.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And of course most homes here in the Bay Area where we’re recording cost way, way more.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>It’s this issue that the proponents of Proposition 37 set out to tackle. Here’s how the measure reads on your ballot. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>It’s this issue that the proponents of Proposition 37 set out to tackle. Here’s how the measure reads on your ballot. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Voice Over: \u003c/strong>Proposition37 creates a loan program for middle-income buyers of qualified new homes. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Voice Over: \u003c/strong>Proposition37 creates a loan program for middle-income buyers of qualified new homes. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>I’m Ericka Cruz Guevarra, host of The Bay.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>I’m Ericka Cruz Guevarra, host of The Bay.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And I’m Olivia Allen-Price, host of Bay Curious. Today, we continue on with PropFest, breaking down each of the 14 initiatives on the statewide ballot.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And I’m Olivia Allen-Price, host of Bay Curious. Today, we continue on with PropFest, breaking down each of the 14 initiatives on the statewide ballot.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>You heard that right, 14. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>You heard that right, 14. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Direct democracy, baby. Here we go. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Direct democracy, baby. Here we go. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>Today, we’re going through Proposition 37, a $25 billion bond to fund a program to help moderate income Californians buy homes. Here to walk us through it is KQED’s housing reporter, Adhiti Bandlamudi. Welcome, Adhiti. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>Today, we’re going through Proposition 37, a $25 billion bond to fund a program to help moderate income Californians buy homes. Here to walk us through it is KQED’s housing reporter, Adhiti Bandlamudi. Welcome, Adhiti. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Adhiti Bandlamudi: \u003c/strong>Hey Olivia, I’m ready to talk bonds. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Adhiti Bandlamudi: \u003c/strong>Hey Olivia, I’m ready to talk bonds. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Let’s do it. Let’s start big picture on this one. What’s the context for Prop 37 and why is it on our ballot?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Let’s do it. Let’s start big picture on this one. What’s the context for Prop 37 and why is it on our ballot?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Adhiti Bandlamudi: \u003c/strong>Yeah, California has one of the lowest rates of homeownership compared to other states. The national average is 66 percent, but California’s is 10 percent lower. It’s like 56 percent. That’s largely because the homes here are so expensive. More than half of Californians don’t own a home until they’re in their late 40s. And for a lot of people, the down payment is the sticking point. They could make a mortgage, but they don’t have enough savings to get into the game. And what could Prop 37 do to help that situation? So it directs the California Housing Finance Agency, also called Cal HFA, to create a middle-class home buyer down payment assistance program funded with up to $25 billion in revenue bonds, which means the bond would be paid back by mortgage payments home buyers make, not by taxpayers who aren’t buying homes. There’s an interesting catch here though. This program only applies to newly constructed homes. So on the whole, this bond is trying to do two things, help middle-class home buyers buy homes and also jumpstart the housing construction industry. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Adhiti Bandlamudi: \u003c/strong>Yeah, California has one of the lowest rates of homeownership compared to other states. The national average is 66 percent, but California’s is 10 percent lower. It’s like 56 percent. That’s largely because the homes here are so expensive. More than half of Californians don’t own a home until they’re in their late 40s. And for a lot of people, the down payment is the sticking point. They could make a mortgage, but they don’t have enough savings to get into the game. And what could Prop 37 do to help that situation? So it directs the California Housing Finance Agency, also called Cal HFA, to create a middle-class home buyer down payment assistance program funded with up to $25 billion in revenue bonds, which means the bond would be paid back by mortgage payments home buyers make, not by taxpayers who aren’t buying homes. There’s an interesting catch here though. This program only applies to newly constructed homes. So on the whole, this bond is trying to do two things, help middle-class home buyers buy homes and also jumpstart the housing construction industry. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Okay, so unlike Prop 1, the other housing bond on this year’s ballot, which we talked about the other day. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Okay, so unlike Prop 1, the other housing bond on this year’s ballot, which we talked about the other day. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Adhiti Bandlamudi: \u003c/strong>I’m familiar with it, yes. Yes, \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Adhiti Bandlamudi: \u003c/strong>I’m familiar with it, yes. Yes, \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Which funds all sorts of programs. This one is specifically targeting that middle income group of people who often don’t qualify for other programs from the state.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Which funds all sorts of programs. This one is specifically targeting that middle income group of people who often don’t qualify for other programs from the state.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Adhiti Bandlamudi: \u003c/strong>Correct, and we should be clear, the way that this bond defines middle class is a bit tricky. So it’s defined as making 200% of area median income. Another way of thinking about that is that it’s roughly double of what a typical family in the area makes. Now, because it’s tied to what local incomes are in a particular place, qualifying for this program is going to vary greatly depending on where you are living in California. The California Budget Center has a really nice breakdown of what this would mean on a county level for a family of one, two, three, four. So let’s take a family four. This would mean that in San Francisco, for example, the family could make up to $342,000 and still qualify. If the family lived in San Mateo, that number would be a little bit higher. In Solano County, on the other hand, that number would be about $100,000 lower. So again, qualifying for this program really depends on where you live in the state. And this proposition really focuses on connecting new homeowners to new housing by helping people come up with the money for a down payment, which is really interesting to watch if this passes because it can only be used for newly constructed homes, which also means that it’s gonna take time for people to use this program to buy a home because the homes have to be built.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Adhiti Bandlamudi: \u003c/strong>Correct, and we should be clear, the way that this bond defines middle class is a bit tricky. So it’s defined as making 200% of area median income. Another way of thinking about that is that it’s roughly double of what a typical family in the area makes. Now, because it’s tied to what local incomes are in a particular place, qualifying for this program is going to vary greatly depending on where you are living in California. The California Budget Center has a really nice breakdown of what this would mean on a county level for a family of one, two, three, four. So let’s take a family four. This would mean that in San Francisco, for example, the family could make up to $342,000 and still qualify. If the family lived in San Mateo, that number would be a little bit higher. In Solano County, on the other hand, that number would be about $100,000 lower. So again, qualifying for this program really depends on where you live in the state. And this proposition really focuses on connecting new homeowners to new housing by helping people come up with the money for a down payment, which is really interesting to watch if this passes because it can only be used for newly constructed homes, which also means that it’s gonna take time for people to use this program to buy a home because the homes have to be built.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And really it will be more useful for potential home buyers in certain places where new homes can be built.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And really it will be more useful for potential home buyers in certain places where new homes can be built.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Adhiti Bandlamudi: \u003c/strong>Exactly. It’s really going to depend on the cities and the counties that are willing to build more homes, that have space to build, more homes that have public political pressure to build more homes. So it’ll be interesting to watch. Walk me through how this would actually work from the homebuyers’ perspective. Okay, so here are the mechanics of it. So buyers would have to put down at least 3% of the down payment themselves. The bond would basically allow the state to cover 17% of home price. So 17 plus three, we got 20% down, which is the standard amount needed to avoid paying mortgage insurance. Now, the bond would require that home buyers pay back that 17% down payment assistance with interest, which means they’d be paying that back along with their monthly mortgage payments. What’s required of homebuyers who want to take part in this program? Unlike other down payment assistance programs, it doesn’t require the applicant to be a first-time or first-generation homebuyer. And it also doesn’t have any rules that would mean the homebuyer owes the state any equity gained on the house. Homebuyers have to qualify for a mortgage, meet the income requirements, occupy the home as their primary residence, make monthly payments, and they would have to fully repay their loans. What’s all this going to cost taxpayers? This would not cost taxpayers anything because the interest payments homebuyers would make to the state would cover the interest on the bond.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Adhiti Bandlamudi: \u003c/strong>Exactly. It’s really going to depend on the cities and the counties that are willing to build more homes, that have space to build, more homes that have public political pressure to build more homes. So it’ll be interesting to watch. Walk me through how this would actually work from the homebuyers’ perspective. Okay, so here are the mechanics of it. So buyers would have to put down at least 3% of the down payment themselves. The bond would basically allow the state to cover 17% of home price. So 17 plus three, we got 20% down, which is the standard amount needed to avoid paying mortgage insurance. Now, the bond would require that home buyers pay back that 17% down payment assistance with interest, which means they’d be paying that back along with their monthly mortgage payments. What’s required of homebuyers who want to take part in this program? Unlike other down payment assistance programs, it doesn’t require the applicant to be a first-time or first-generation homebuyer. And it also doesn’t have any rules that would mean the homebuyer owes the state any equity gained on the house. Homebuyers have to qualify for a mortgage, meet the income requirements, occupy the home as their primary residence, make monthly payments, and they would have to fully repay their loans. What’s all this going to cost taxpayers? This would not cost taxpayers anything because the interest payments homebuyers would make to the state would cover the interest on the bond.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>We’ve got to hit pause for a minute, but when we return, more on Prop 37, including who’s behind it and what supporters and opponents say. Stay with us. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>We’ve got to hit pause for a minute, but when we return, more on Prop 37, including who’s behind it and what supporters and opponents say. Stay with us. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cem>Sponsor messages\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cem>Sponsor messages\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Welcome back to PropFest. We’re talking about Proposition 37. Arati, this measure was placed on the ballot by a group, not the state legislature. Who’s behind it?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Welcome back to PropFest. We’re talking about Proposition 37. Arati, this measure was placed on the ballot by a group, not the state legislature. Who’s behind it?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Adhiti Bandlamudi: \u003c/strong>Bob Hertzberg, he is the former state Senate majority leader. He’s now retired from the legislature, but he still gets involved with causes he cares about. He started thinking about this bill back in 2008, right after the financial crash. He saw that we immediately stopped building homes, and there weren’t a lot of incentives for developers to build middle class housing.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Adhiti Bandlamudi: \u003c/strong>Bob Hertzberg, he is the former state Senate majority leader. He’s now retired from the legislature, but he still gets involved with causes he cares about. He started thinking about this bill back in 2008, right after the financial crash. He saw that we immediately stopped building homes, and there weren’t a lot of incentives for developers to build middle class housing.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Bob Hertzberg: \u003c/strong>You know, so many things we do in government either help the super wealthy and powerful or the people that are otherwise in trouble in so many ways, and it’s the right thing to do, but the middle class feels like they’re out of the loop.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Bob Hertzberg: \u003c/strong>You know, so many things we do in government either help the super wealthy and powerful or the people that are otherwise in trouble in so many ways, and it’s the right thing to do, but the middle class feels like they’re out of the loop.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>In addition to Hertzberg, who else is supporting this measure? \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>In addition to Hertzberg, who else is supporting this measure? \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Adhiti Bandlamudi: \u003c/strong>There’s a lot of broad support for this proposition. The Democratic Party, various construction and realtor groups have also shown support, as well as Javier Becerra, who’s running for governor. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Adhiti Bandlamudi: \u003c/strong>There’s a lot of broad support for this proposition. The Democratic Party, various construction and realtor groups have also shown support, as well as Javier Becerra, who’s running for governor. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Hmm. And what about opponents? What do they have to say, and who are they? \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Hmm. And what about opponents? What do they have to say, and who are they? \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Adhiti Bandlamudi: \u003c/strong>So there are no official opponents to this bill, but there are some arguments for why it may not have its intended effect. So first off, there’s a real question right now as to whether home ownership in a state like California is still the most advantageous path. The premium to buy a house, like all those extra fees and things like insurance and interest, they can outweigh the historical benefit of buying a home and owning one. Second, while this proposition states an intent to keep the interest rate on the down payment loans low, it doesn’t guarantee it. Critics argue that because home buyers would be paying their mortgage and paying back the down payment assistance loan, it’s a second mortgage. And investors could see that as more risky and in turn that could lead to higher interest rates. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Adhiti Bandlamudi: \u003c/strong>So there are no official opponents to this bill, but there are some arguments for why it may not have its intended effect. So first off, there’s a real question right now as to whether home ownership in a state like California is still the most advantageous path. The premium to buy a house, like all those extra fees and things like insurance and interest, they can outweigh the historical benefit of buying a home and owning one. Second, while this proposition states an intent to keep the interest rate on the down payment loans low, it doesn’t guarantee it. Critics argue that because home buyers would be paying their mortgage and paying back the down payment assistance loan, it’s a second mortgage. And investors could see that as more risky and in turn that could lead to higher interest rates. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>Also, some people say that this could actually exacerbate racial disparities in home ownership because there are barriers to participating. According to the Public Policy Institute of California, the median amount in Californians’ checking and savings accounts was just over $18,000 in 2025. This means that a 3% down payment could still almost or entirely wipe out the savings of what an average family has. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>Also, some people say that this could actually exacerbate racial disparities in home ownership because there are barriers to participating. According to the Public Policy Institute of California, the median amount in Californians’ checking and savings accounts was just over $18,000 in 2025. This means that a 3% down payment could still almost or entirely wipe out the savings of what an average family has. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>Third, California already has several down payment assistance programs. There are estate ones, there are ones run by counties, by local banks. Does it really need another one, especially one that’s so focused on newly built homes? And also, while we’re on the topic of newly built homes, right now, home building is pretty slow going with borrowing costs, labor costs, materials, all being really expensive. So while this bond is trying to provide incentives, there’s no guarantee that developers will bite and actually build the homes. Reform California has come out against it. Carl DeMaio is a Republican assembly member from San Diego, and he says it’s a lot of money to be borrowing right now. And he’s also worried that this bond isn’t really for home buyers, but for developers.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>Third, California already has several down payment assistance programs. There are estate ones, there are ones run by counties, by local banks. Does it really need another one, especially one that’s so focused on newly built homes? And also, while we’re on the topic of newly built homes, right now, home building is pretty slow going with borrowing costs, labor costs, materials, all being really expensive. So while this bond is trying to provide incentives, there’s no guarantee that developers will bite and actually build the homes. Reform California has come out against it. Carl DeMaio is a Republican assembly member from San Diego, and he says it’s a lot of money to be borrowing right now. And he’s also worried that this bond isn’t really for home buyers, but for developers.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Carl DeMaio: \u003c/strong>This bond program basically becomes a subsidy for rich developers who give campaign contributions back to politicians. It really only helps a few people when it comes to housing, the lucky few that might win the lottery. This is not the approach for affordable housing.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Carl DeMaio: \u003c/strong>This bond program basically becomes a subsidy for rich developers who give campaign contributions back to politicians. It really only helps a few people when it comes to housing, the lucky few that might win the lottery. This is not the approach for affordable housing.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>What does spending look like for Prop 37?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>What does spending look like for Prop 37?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Adhiti Bandlamudi: \u003c/strong>Supporters of the proposition have raised $12.7 million as of this taping. The opposition hasn’t spent any money on this measure. All right.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Adhiti Bandlamudi: \u003c/strong>Supporters of the proposition have raised $12.7 million as of this taping. The opposition hasn’t spent any money on this measure. All right.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Aditi Bandlamudi, thank you for breaking Prop 37 down for us. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Aditi Bandlamudi, thank you for breaking Prop 37 down for us. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Adhiti Bandlamudi: \u003c/strong>Yeah, thanks for having me. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Adhiti Bandlamudi: \u003c/strong>Yeah, thanks for having me. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>In a nutshell, a vote yes on Prop 37 gives the state permission to borrow up to $25 billion to create a down-payment assistance program for middle-income people. It would be repaid by people who receive those loans. A vote no means you do not want the state to borrow up to 25 billion dollars to create this program.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>In a nutshell, a vote yes on Prop 37 gives the state permission to borrow up to $25 billion to create a down-payment assistance program for middle-income people. It would be repaid by people who receive those loans. A vote no means you do not want the state to borrow up to 25 billion dollars to create this program.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>That’s it for PropFest today. We’ll be back tomorrow with an explainer on Proposition 38, another bond, this time for immunology and immunotherapy research, and Proposition 39 about voter ID.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>That’s it for PropFest today. We’ll be back tomorrow with an explainer on Proposition 38, another bond, this time for immunology and immunotherapy research, and Proposition 39 about voter ID.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>We’re dropping episodes every weekday from now until October 9th on the Bay and Bay Curious podcast feeds. Make sure you’re subscribed so you don’t miss out.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>We’re dropping episodes every weekday from now until October 9th on the Bay and Bay Curious podcast feeds. Make sure you’re subscribed so you don’t miss out.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>PropFest is a collaboration between the Bay and Bay Curious podcasts. It’s produced by Alan Montecillo, Gabriella Glueck, Pauline Bartolone, Olivia Allen-Price, Katrina Schwartz, Christopher Beale, Anna Casalme, and me.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>PropFest is a collaboration between the Bay and Bay Curious podcasts. It’s produced by Alan Montecillo, Gabriella Glueck, Pauline Bartolone, Olivia Allen-Price, Katrina Schwartz, Christopher Beale, Anna Casalme, and me.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>We get extra support from Ethan Tovan Lindsey, Maha Sanad, and the whole KQED family. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>We get extra support from Ethan Tovan Lindsey, Maha Sanad, and the whole KQED family. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>You can find audio and transcripts for this series at kqed.org slash prop fest. Some members of the KQEd podcast team are represented by the Screen Actors Guild, American Federation of Television and Radio Artists, San Francisco, Northern California local.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>You can find audio and transcripts for this series at kqed.org slash prop fest. Some members of the KQEd podcast team are represented by the Screen Actors Guild, American Federation of Television and Radio Artists, San Francisco, Northern California local.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>Support for The Bay is provided in part by the Osher Production Fund. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>Support for The Bay is provided in part by the Osher Production Fund. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Our show is made in San Francisco at member-supported KQED. If you value podcasts like this one, please consider becoming a sustaining KQed member. Learn more at donate.kqed.org. I’m Olivia Ellen Price. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Our show is made in San Francisco at member-supported KQED. If you value podcasts like this one, please consider becoming a sustaining KQed member. Learn more at donate.kqed.org. I’m Olivia Ellen Price. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>And I’m Erika Cruz-Gavarra. We’ll see you tomorrow. Bye!\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>And I’m Erika Cruz-Gavarra. We’ll see you tomorrow. Bye!\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
}
],
"excerpt": "Prop 37 authorizes the state to borrow money for a home buying program for middle-income Californians.",
"status": "publish",
"parent": 0,
"modified": 1790721793,
"stats": {
"hasAudio": false,
"hasVideo": false,
"hasChartOrMap": false,
"iframeSrcs": [],
"hasGoogleForm": false,
"hasGallery": false,
"hasHearkenModule": false,
"hasPolis": false,
"paragraphCount": 45,
"wordCount": 2201
},
"headData": {
"title": "Prop 37: Creates Middle-Income Homebuying Program | KQED",
"description": "Prop 37 authorizes the state to borrow money for a home buying program for middle-income Californians.",
"ogTitle": "",
"ogDescription": "",
"ogImgId": "",
"twTitle": "",
"twDescription": "",
"twImgId": "",
"schema": {
"@context": "https://schema.org",
"@type": "NewsArticle",
"headline": "Prop 37: Creates Middle-Income Homebuying Program",
"datePublished": "2026-10-01T03:00:00-07:00",
"dateModified": "2026-09-29T15:43:13-07:00",
"image": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"isAccessibleForFree": "True",
"publisher": {
"@type": "NewsMediaOrganization",
"@id": "https://www.kqed.org/#organization",
"name": "KQED",
"logo": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"url": "https://www.kqed.org",
"sameAs": [
"https://www.facebook.com/KQED",
"https://twitter.com/KQED",
"https://www.instagram.com/kqed/",
"https://www.tiktok.com/@kqedofficial",
"https://www.linkedin.com/company/kqed",
"https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCeC0IOo7i1P_61zVUWbJ4nw"
]
}
}
},
"primaryCategory": {
"termId": 31795,
"slug": "california",
"name": "California"
},
"source": "Prop Fest 2026",
"sourceUrl": "http://kqed.org/propfest",
"audioUrl": "https://www.podtrac.com/pts/redirect.mp3/pdst.fm/e/traffic.megaphone.fm/KQINC6322228604.mp3",
"sticky": false,
"templateType": "standard",
"featuredImageType": "standard",
"excludeFromSiteSearch": "Include",
"articleAge": "0",
"path": "/news/12101434/prop-37-creates-middle-income-homebuying-program",
"audioTrackLength": null,
"parsedContent": [
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>\n\u003ch2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Episode Transcript:\u003c/h2>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>For would-be homebuyers in California, there are a seemingly endless number of hurdles to jump over. But perhaps the biggest one for most people is saving for the down payment. When homes cost as much as they do in California, coming up with that initial chunk of cash hurts.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>It’s pretty standard to put down 20% of the cost of a home for a down payment. And if you can’t, you may be required to get mortgage insurance, which is just one more extra fee. The median cost of a single-family home in California is $980,000. That means you’ll need $200,000 for a down payment.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And of course most homes here in the Bay Area where we’re recording cost way, way more.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>It’s this issue that the proponents of Proposition 37 set out to tackle. Here’s how the measure reads on your ballot. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Voice Over: \u003c/strong>Proposition37 creates a loan program for middle-income buyers of qualified new homes. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>I’m Ericka Cruz Guevarra, host of The Bay.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And I’m Olivia Allen-Price, host of Bay Curious. Today, we continue on with PropFest, breaking down each of the 14 initiatives on the statewide ballot.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>You heard that right, 14. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Direct democracy, baby. Here we go. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Today, we’re going through Proposition 37, a $25 billion bond to fund a program to help moderate income Californians buy homes. Here to walk us through it is KQED’s housing reporter, Adhiti Bandlamudi. Welcome, Adhiti. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Adhiti Bandlamudi: \u003c/strong>Hey Olivia, I’m ready to talk bonds. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Let’s do it. Let’s start big picture on this one. What’s the context for Prop 37 and why is it on our ballot?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Adhiti Bandlamudi: \u003c/strong>Yeah, California has one of the lowest rates of homeownership compared to other states. The national average is 66 percent, but California’s is 10 percent lower. It’s like 56 percent. That’s largely because the homes here are so expensive. More than half of Californians don’t own a home until they’re in their late 40s. And for a lot of people, the down payment is the sticking point. They could make a mortgage, but they don’t have enough savings to get into the game. And what could Prop 37 do to help that situation? So it directs the California Housing Finance Agency, also called Cal HFA, to create a middle-class home buyer down payment assistance program funded with up to $25 billion in revenue bonds, which means the bond would be paid back by mortgage payments home buyers make, not by taxpayers who aren’t buying homes. There’s an interesting catch here though. This program only applies to newly constructed homes. So on the whole, this bond is trying to do two things, help middle-class home buyers buy homes and also jumpstart the housing construction industry. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Okay, so unlike Prop 1, the other housing bond on this year’s ballot, which we talked about the other day. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Adhiti Bandlamudi: \u003c/strong>I’m familiar with it, yes. Yes, \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Which funds all sorts of programs. This one is specifically targeting that middle income group of people who often don’t qualify for other programs from the state.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Adhiti Bandlamudi: \u003c/strong>Correct, and we should be clear, the way that this bond defines middle class is a bit tricky. So it’s defined as making 200% of area median income. Another way of thinking about that is that it’s roughly double of what a typical family in the area makes. Now, because it’s tied to what local incomes are in a particular place, qualifying for this program is going to vary greatly depending on where you are living in California. The California Budget Center has a really nice breakdown of what this would mean on a county level for a family of one, two, three, four. So let’s take a family four. This would mean that in San Francisco, for example, the family could make up to $342,000 and still qualify. If the family lived in San Mateo, that number would be a little bit higher. In Solano County, on the other hand, that number would be about $100,000 lower. So again, qualifying for this program really depends on where you live in the state. And this proposition really focuses on connecting new homeowners to new housing by helping people come up with the money for a down payment, which is really interesting to watch if this passes because it can only be used for newly constructed homes, which also means that it’s gonna take time for people to use this program to buy a home because the homes have to be built.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And really it will be more useful for potential home buyers in certain places where new homes can be built.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Adhiti Bandlamudi: \u003c/strong>Exactly. It’s really going to depend on the cities and the counties that are willing to build more homes, that have space to build, more homes that have public political pressure to build more homes. So it’ll be interesting to watch. Walk me through how this would actually work from the homebuyers’ perspective. Okay, so here are the mechanics of it. So buyers would have to put down at least 3% of the down payment themselves. The bond would basically allow the state to cover 17% of home price. So 17 plus three, we got 20% down, which is the standard amount needed to avoid paying mortgage insurance. Now, the bond would require that home buyers pay back that 17% down payment assistance with interest, which means they’d be paying that back along with their monthly mortgage payments. What’s required of homebuyers who want to take part in this program? Unlike other down payment assistance programs, it doesn’t require the applicant to be a first-time or first-generation homebuyer. And it also doesn’t have any rules that would mean the homebuyer owes the state any equity gained on the house. Homebuyers have to qualify for a mortgage, meet the income requirements, occupy the home as their primary residence, make monthly payments, and they would have to fully repay their loans. What’s all this going to cost taxpayers? This would not cost taxpayers anything because the interest payments homebuyers would make to the state would cover the interest on the bond.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>We’ve got to hit pause for a minute, but when we return, more on Prop 37, including who’s behind it and what supporters and opponents say. Stay with us. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cem>Sponsor messages\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Welcome back to PropFest. We’re talking about Proposition 37. Arati, this measure was placed on the ballot by a group, not the state legislature. Who’s behind it?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Adhiti Bandlamudi: \u003c/strong>Bob Hertzberg, he is the former state Senate majority leader. He’s now retired from the legislature, but he still gets involved with causes he cares about. He started thinking about this bill back in 2008, right after the financial crash. He saw that we immediately stopped building homes, and there weren’t a lot of incentives for developers to build middle class housing.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Bob Hertzberg: \u003c/strong>You know, so many things we do in government either help the super wealthy and powerful or the people that are otherwise in trouble in so many ways, and it’s the right thing to do, but the middle class feels like they’re out of the loop.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>In addition to Hertzberg, who else is supporting this measure? \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Adhiti Bandlamudi: \u003c/strong>There’s a lot of broad support for this proposition. The Democratic Party, various construction and realtor groups have also shown support, as well as Javier Becerra, who’s running for governor. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Hmm. And what about opponents? What do they have to say, and who are they? \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Adhiti Bandlamudi: \u003c/strong>So there are no official opponents to this bill, but there are some arguments for why it may not have its intended effect. So first off, there’s a real question right now as to whether home ownership in a state like California is still the most advantageous path. The premium to buy a house, like all those extra fees and things like insurance and interest, they can outweigh the historical benefit of buying a home and owning one. Second, while this proposition states an intent to keep the interest rate on the down payment loans low, it doesn’t guarantee it. Critics argue that because home buyers would be paying their mortgage and paying back the down payment assistance loan, it’s a second mortgage. And investors could see that as more risky and in turn that could lead to higher interest rates. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Also, some people say that this could actually exacerbate racial disparities in home ownership because there are barriers to participating. According to the Public Policy Institute of California, the median amount in Californians’ checking and savings accounts was just over $18,000 in 2025. This means that a 3% down payment could still almost or entirely wipe out the savings of what an average family has. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Third, California already has several down payment assistance programs. There are estate ones, there are ones run by counties, by local banks. Does it really need another one, especially one that’s so focused on newly built homes? And also, while we’re on the topic of newly built homes, right now, home building is pretty slow going with borrowing costs, labor costs, materials, all being really expensive. So while this bond is trying to provide incentives, there’s no guarantee that developers will bite and actually build the homes. Reform California has come out against it. Carl DeMaio is a Republican assembly member from San Diego, and he says it’s a lot of money to be borrowing right now. And he’s also worried that this bond isn’t really for home buyers, but for developers.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Carl DeMaio: \u003c/strong>This bond program basically becomes a subsidy for rich developers who give campaign contributions back to politicians. It really only helps a few people when it comes to housing, the lucky few that might win the lottery. This is not the approach for affordable housing.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>What does spending look like for Prop 37?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Adhiti Bandlamudi: \u003c/strong>Supporters of the proposition have raised $12.7 million as of this taping. The opposition hasn’t spent any money on this measure. All right.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Aditi Bandlamudi, thank you for breaking Prop 37 down for us. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Adhiti Bandlamudi: \u003c/strong>Yeah, thanks for having me. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>In a nutshell, a vote yes on Prop 37 gives the state permission to borrow up to $25 billion to create a down-payment assistance program for middle-income people. It would be repaid by people who receive those loans. A vote no means you do not want the state to borrow up to 25 billion dollars to create this program.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>That’s it for PropFest today. We’ll be back tomorrow with an explainer on Proposition 38, another bond, this time for immunology and immunotherapy research, and Proposition 39 about voter ID.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>We’re dropping episodes every weekday from now until October 9th on the Bay and Bay Curious podcast feeds. Make sure you’re subscribed so you don’t miss out.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>PropFest is a collaboration between the Bay and Bay Curious podcasts. It’s produced by Alan Montecillo, Gabriella Glueck, Pauline Bartolone, Olivia Allen-Price, Katrina Schwartz, Christopher Beale, Anna Casalme, and me.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>We get extra support from Ethan Tovan Lindsey, Maha Sanad, and the whole KQED family. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>You can find audio and transcripts for this series at kqed.org slash prop fest. Some members of the KQEd podcast team are represented by the Screen Actors Guild, American Federation of Television and Radio Artists, San Francisco, Northern California local.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>Support for The Bay is provided in part by the Osher Production Fund. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Our show is made in San Francisco at member-supported KQED. If you value podcasts like this one, please consider becoming a sustaining KQed member. Learn more at donate.kqed.org. I’m Olivia Ellen Price. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>And I’m Erika Cruz-Gavarra. We’ll see you tomorrow. Bye!\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n\u003c/div>\u003c/p>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
}
],
"link": "/news/12101434/prop-37-creates-middle-income-homebuying-program",
"authors": [
"234",
"11672",
"102"
],
"programs": [
"news_28779",
"news_33523",
"news_34552"
],
"series": [
"news_17986"
],
"categories": [
"news_31795",
"news_13"
],
"tags": [
"news_28645",
"news_22598"
],
"featImg": "news_12101459",
"label": "source_news_12101434"
},
"news_12100623": {
"type": "posts",
"id": "news_12100623",
"meta": {
"index": "posts_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "12100623",
"score": null,
"sort": [
1790762700000
]
},
"guestAuthors": [],
"slug": "proposition-5-would-change-the-state-recall-election-process",
"title": "Prop 5: Changes to the State Recall Election Process",
"publishDate": 1790762700,
"format": "standard",
"headTitle": "Prop 5: Changes to the State Recall Election Process | KQED",
"labelTerm": {},
"content": "\n\u003ch2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Transcript\u003c/h2>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:00:00] You may remember that in 2021, California voters were asked whether or not to recall Governor Gavin Newsom from office.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price \u003c/strong>[00:00:08] But there was also a second question on the ballot. Who should replace him if he was recalled?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:00:15] Obviously, the recall failed, but if it was successful, Newsom would have technically been replaced by Republican Larry Elder, who won about 48% of the vote in that second question.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price \u003c/strong>[00:00:29] And that’s how the process works for state-wide recall elections right now.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:00:33] But proposition five could change that.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price \u003c/strong>[00:00:37] I’m Olivia Allen Price, host of Bay Curious.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:00:40] And I’m Ericka Cruz Guevara, host of The Bay.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price \u003c/strong>[00:00:43] Welcome to Prop Fest, a collaboration between The Bay and BayCurious. And we’re back again with another episode to help you get up to speed on all the statewide propositions on the ballot this November.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:00:54] Today, we’re breaking down proposition five. Here’s how it reads on your ballot.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Voiceover \u003c/strong>[00:01:00] Prop 5 – Changes recall election process for statewide officers\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:01:07] Here to break it down for us is KQED’s politics and government correspondent, Guy Marzorati. Hey Guy.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:01:14] Hey, how’s it going?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:01:15] Good. So this proposition that we’re talking about today pertains to recall reform. Before we dive in here, how exactly do recalls for people in statewide office currently work in California?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:01:31] Yeah, so the rules for recall in California are different for state office and local office. For local office, it’s probably somewhat of a familiar process for people. There’s a question on the ballot, should this person be removed from office? If they are removed, then how the next person gets chosen can result in a variety of ways. So if you remember the Oakland mayor recall, there was a special election after that. There was the district attorney recalls in Alameda and SF. The replacements there were appointed. State recalls work a little bit differently where voters are asked two questions on the ballot. One is, should this statewide official be removed? And then the second question is, if they are removed, who should replace them? And there’s a list of candidates that voters get to choose from. And what proposition five would do is eliminate that second question, that question about the successor.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:02:30] And as you just mentioned, and just to clarify for voters, Prop 5 specifically pertains to recalls for statewide office, right? Not local office. So what kinds of elected positions are we talking about here?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:02:45] That’s right, so this would only apply to statewide offices like governor, like attorney general and like state legislative offices, so assembly and Senate. And basically what it would do is make state recall elections more like local recall elections where there’s only one question on the ballot and it’s asking whether or not this elected official should be removed from office.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:03:06] And just for some background here, Guy, how often have recall campaigns been actually put before California voters in the past when it comes to these statewide offices? Like have sitting politicians actually even been recalled before?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:03:23] Yes. So since voters in California approved this recall process more than a hundred years ago, goes all the way back to 1911, there have been 11 recall elections against statewide officials. Of those six recalls have been successful. Five recall elections have been unsuccessful. The most famous successful recall election was in 2003, when Governor Gray Davis, a Democrat, was recalled by voters. And Republican Arnold Schwarzenegger won the successor election and became governor.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Voiceover \u003c/strong>[00:03:55] The recall campaign against Governor Gray-Davis is gathering steam with the launch of the\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Voiceover \u003c/strong>[00:03:59] Governor Gray Davis is hurting our state and our people. First question you’re asked, do you believe it should be recalled? Then the second question is, should it be recalled, who would you like to see replace it? And it’s an open primary, one ballot. And whoever gets the most vote, if a majority say yes on recall, immediately becomes the governor of California.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:04:23] And the proponents of this measure sort of point to that election as a reason to make these kind of changes that Prop 5 is proposing, right?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:04:36] Yeah, you know, I think supporters say it’s fundamentally unfair that someone can win a successor election on a recall ballot and not get a majority vote, which can happen if there’s a if there is a recall against a state official and a majority of voters elect to recall that official, the top replacement candidate doesn’t need to get a majority vote. They just need to finish first and suddenly they take that office. So supporters of Proposition 5 say… This is basically a loophole. This is a workaround where someone could potentially become governor of California without ever getting a majority vote.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:05:13] So I get that that second question won’t be there on the ballot if Prop 5 is passed, but let’s say that the person does get recalled. What happens next in this Prop 5 universe? Like are they outed immediately or who takes their place at least temporarily?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:05:32] If you’re recalling a state legislator, so a state senator or a state assembly member, what will happen is there could be a special election called after the fact, where a new state legislate is picked. In the case of statewide offices, like attorney general, like secretary of state, a new secretary of State, a new attorney general will be appointed. In the cases of the governor, basically the lieutenant governor would take over And then there would be. An election to replace or to pick the next governor. So if it happens early in the governor’s term, there would be a special election taking place at the next statewide election where our voters would get to choose and vote on a new governor. If it happens late in that governor’s turn, the lieutenant governor would simply just fill the seat until the regularly scheduled election for governor.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:06:24] We’ll have more with KQED’s Guy Marzorati right after this break. By the way, if you appreciate the work we’re doing here on PopFest, consider becoming a sustaining KQED member. We can’t do this work without you. Just go to donate.kqed.org slash podcasts. We’ll be right back.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:06:49] And let’s get into the politics of this a little bit, Guy. Who else is sort of pushing for Prop 5 to be passed?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:06:57] Yeah, so this is really turned into kind of a partisan divide on Proposition 5, where we see the California Democratic Party in support, almost entirely Democrats in the legislature voted to put this on the ballot. And one of the top supporters of Proposition five is Shirley Weber, who’s California the secretary of state, the top election official.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Shirley Weber \u003c/strong>[00:07:17] This was a way in which people could game the system, looking for a time when we had low voter turnout. Then we’d have all these folks on the ballot and then you’d pick somebody and they’d have 30% or 20% of whatever it was.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:07:27] She said her office started working on these potential reforms to introduce them after the unsuccessful recall of Newsom in 2021. And here’s Weber talking about their proposal at a state Senate hearing.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Shirley Weber \u003c/strong>[00:07:40] The whole election about, should this person be recalled? So that the discussion is on the merit of the recall itself, not on is there a better replacement, but should this be person be recall? Has there been enough?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:07:51] Proponents here are really arguing that the state should avoid what happened in the last two recall elections for governor. What we’ve seen in the past is, when there’s a recall facing someone like Gray Davis, or in 2021, we saw this, a recall-facing Gavin Newsom, there’s also this second campaign that plays out in parallel about, okay, well, who should the replacement candidate be? Who should the top replacement candidate? This would eliminate that second part, and supporters say, well yes, this will really allow the conversation and the debate to focus on whether or not this person facing a recall actually deserves to be removed from office.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:08:29] Who is opposed to this measure and why?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:08:31] The opposition has come from Republicans, California’s Republican Party, Republicans in the state legislature, who have really argued against making this change the state’s recall rules.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Carl DeMaio \u003c/strong>[00:08:43] This is insane. We should be able to continue the process for recalls where if someone is being recalled from office, we first vote on the ballot. And secondly, we say, if they’re recalled, here’s who we want to take over representation.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:08:57] Republican Assemblymember Carl DeMaio is running an effort to support and oppose a few different measures, including oppose Proposition 5. And the argument you really hear from opponents of Prop 5 is that the recall system is working as it is.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Carl DeMaio \u003c/strong>[00:09:12] Please don’t weaken the recall provision in the state constitution. It’s one of the only things we have to hold politicians accountable.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:09:19] There doesn’t need to be any changes to it. It has existed in the state for over 100 years. They say the idea of having a governor be removed by the will of the people, by the voters, only to have a lieutenant governor come in and take their place is not really the change that voters who are pushing a recall are looking for in the first place. We see in modern day in California, the governor and lieutenant governor are almost always Democratic. And so if there’s a recall election against the governor, voters are seeking change. Number one, having just the next Democrat in line take that office might not really reflect to the will of what brought the voters to a recall. And secondly, the lieutenant governor would then serve as governor without ever having been elected. So if the argument for Proposition 5 is that a successor could take office with less than 50% of the vote, well Under Prop 5, the lieutenant governor would take office and they didn’t get any of the vote for governor. So opponents of Prop 5 see this as real flaws with the measure.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:10:25] And is anyone throwing lots of money into Prop 5 on either side? And any sense guy of how likely this is to pass?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:10:36] You know, we haven’t seen any campaign spending with Proposition 5 on either side. In mid-September, the Public Policy Institute of California released polling on the statewide measures and it showed just 35% of voters supporting Proposition five with 59% opposed. In what really looks like another example of California voters appearing hesitant to make really any changes to the state system of direct democracy.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:11:02] Well, Guy, thank you so much, as always, for breaking this one down. Appreciate it.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:11:06] Of course, thanks for having me.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Your support makes KQED podcasts possible. You can show your love by going to \u003ca href=\"https://kqed.org/donate/podcasts\">https://kqed.org/donate/podcasts\u003c/a>\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>This story was reported by Guy Marzorati. Prop Fest is a collaboration between Bay Curious and The Bay. It’s made by Olivia Allen-Price, Katrina Schwartz, Christopher Beale, Anna Casalme, Ericka Cruz Guevarra, Alan Montecillo, Gabriela Glueck and Pauline Bartolone. Additional support from Jen Chien, Katie Sprenger, Maha Sanad, Ethan Toven-Lindsey and everyone on Team KQED.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cem>Some members of the KQED podcast team are represented by The Screen Actors Guild, American Federation of Television and Radio Artists, San Francisco-Northern California Local.\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n",
"blocks": [
{
"blockName": "core/heading",
"attrs": {
"text": "Transcript",
"level": 2
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003ch2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Transcript\u003c/h2>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003ch2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Transcript\u003c/h2>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:00:00] You may remember that in 2021, California voters were asked whether or not to recall Governor Gavin Newsom from office.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:00:00] You may remember that in 2021, California voters were asked whether or not to recall Governor Gavin Newsom from office.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price \u003c/strong>[00:00:08] But there was also a second question on the ballot. Who should replace him if he was recalled?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price \u003c/strong>[00:00:08] But there was also a second question on the ballot. Who should replace him if he was recalled?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:00:15] Obviously, the recall failed, but if it was successful, Newsom would have technically been replaced by Republican Larry Elder, who won about 48% of the vote in that second question.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:00:15] Obviously, the recall failed, but if it was successful, Newsom would have technically been replaced by Republican Larry Elder, who won about 48% of the vote in that second question.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price \u003c/strong>[00:00:29] And that’s how the process works for state-wide recall elections right now.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price \u003c/strong>[00:00:29] And that’s how the process works for state-wide recall elections right now.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:00:33] But proposition five could change that.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:00:33] But proposition five could change that.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price \u003c/strong>[00:00:37] I’m Olivia Allen Price, host of Bay Curious.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price \u003c/strong>[00:00:37] I’m Olivia Allen Price, host of Bay Curious.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:00:40] And I’m Ericka Cruz Guevara, host of The Bay.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:00:40] And I’m Ericka Cruz Guevara, host of The Bay.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price \u003c/strong>[00:00:43] Welcome to Prop Fest, a collaboration between The Bay and BayCurious. And we’re back again with another episode to help you get up to speed on all the statewide propositions on the ballot this November.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price \u003c/strong>[00:00:43] Welcome to Prop Fest, a collaboration between The Bay and BayCurious. And we’re back again with another episode to help you get up to speed on all the statewide propositions on the ballot this November.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:00:54] Today, we’re breaking down proposition five. Here’s how it reads on your ballot.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:00:54] Today, we’re breaking down proposition five. Here’s how it reads on your ballot.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Voiceover \u003c/strong>[00:01:00] Prop 5 – Changes recall election process for statewide officers\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Voiceover \u003c/strong>[00:01:00] Prop 5 – Changes recall election process for statewide officers\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:01:07] Here to break it down for us is KQED’s politics and government correspondent, Guy Marzorati. Hey Guy.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:01:07] Here to break it down for us is KQED’s politics and government correspondent, Guy Marzorati. Hey Guy.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:01:14] Hey, how’s it going?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:01:14] Hey, how’s it going?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:01:15] Good. So this proposition that we’re talking about today pertains to recall reform. Before we dive in here, how exactly do recalls for people in statewide office currently work in California?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:01:15] Good. So this proposition that we’re talking about today pertains to recall reform. Before we dive in here, how exactly do recalls for people in statewide office currently work in California?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:01:31] Yeah, so the rules for recall in California are different for state office and local office. For local office, it’s probably somewhat of a familiar process for people. There’s a question on the ballot, should this person be removed from office? If they are removed, then how the next person gets chosen can result in a variety of ways. So if you remember the Oakland mayor recall, there was a special election after that. There was the district attorney recalls in Alameda and SF. The replacements there were appointed. State recalls work a little bit differently where voters are asked two questions on the ballot. One is, should this statewide official be removed? And then the second question is, if they are removed, who should replace them? And there’s a list of candidates that voters get to choose from. And what proposition five would do is eliminate that second question, that question about the successor.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:01:31] Yeah, so the rules for recall in California are different for state office and local office. For local office, it’s probably somewhat of a familiar process for people. There’s a question on the ballot, should this person be removed from office? If they are removed, then how the next person gets chosen can result in a variety of ways. So if you remember the Oakland mayor recall, there was a special election after that. There was the district attorney recalls in Alameda and SF. The replacements there were appointed. State recalls work a little bit differently where voters are asked two questions on the ballot. One is, should this statewide official be removed? And then the second question is, if they are removed, who should replace them? And there’s a list of candidates that voters get to choose from. And what proposition five would do is eliminate that second question, that question about the successor.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:02:30] And as you just mentioned, and just to clarify for voters, Prop 5 specifically pertains to recalls for statewide office, right? Not local office. So what kinds of elected positions are we talking about here?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:02:30] And as you just mentioned, and just to clarify for voters, Prop 5 specifically pertains to recalls for statewide office, right? Not local office. So what kinds of elected positions are we talking about here?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:02:45] That’s right, so this would only apply to statewide offices like governor, like attorney general and like state legislative offices, so assembly and Senate. And basically what it would do is make state recall elections more like local recall elections where there’s only one question on the ballot and it’s asking whether or not this elected official should be removed from office.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:02:45] That’s right, so this would only apply to statewide offices like governor, like attorney general and like state legislative offices, so assembly and Senate. And basically what it would do is make state recall elections more like local recall elections where there’s only one question on the ballot and it’s asking whether or not this elected official should be removed from office.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:03:06] And just for some background here, Guy, how often have recall campaigns been actually put before California voters in the past when it comes to these statewide offices? Like have sitting politicians actually even been recalled before?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:03:06] And just for some background here, Guy, how often have recall campaigns been actually put before California voters in the past when it comes to these statewide offices? Like have sitting politicians actually even been recalled before?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:03:23] Yes. So since voters in California approved this recall process more than a hundred years ago, goes all the way back to 1911, there have been 11 recall elections against statewide officials. Of those six recalls have been successful. Five recall elections have been unsuccessful. The most famous successful recall election was in 2003, when Governor Gray Davis, a Democrat, was recalled by voters. And Republican Arnold Schwarzenegger won the successor election and became governor.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:03:23] Yes. So since voters in California approved this recall process more than a hundred years ago, goes all the way back to 1911, there have been 11 recall elections against statewide officials. Of those six recalls have been successful. Five recall elections have been unsuccessful. The most famous successful recall election was in 2003, when Governor Gray Davis, a Democrat, was recalled by voters. And Republican Arnold Schwarzenegger won the successor election and became governor.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Voiceover \u003c/strong>[00:03:55] The recall campaign against Governor Gray-Davis is gathering steam with the launch of the\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Voiceover \u003c/strong>[00:03:55] The recall campaign against Governor Gray-Davis is gathering steam with the launch of the\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Voiceover \u003c/strong>[00:03:59] Governor Gray Davis is hurting our state and our people. First question you’re asked, do you believe it should be recalled? Then the second question is, should it be recalled, who would you like to see replace it? And it’s an open primary, one ballot. And whoever gets the most vote, if a majority say yes on recall, immediately becomes the governor of California.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Voiceover \u003c/strong>[00:03:59] Governor Gray Davis is hurting our state and our people. First question you’re asked, do you believe it should be recalled? Then the second question is, should it be recalled, who would you like to see replace it? And it’s an open primary, one ballot. And whoever gets the most vote, if a majority say yes on recall, immediately becomes the governor of California.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:04:23] And the proponents of this measure sort of point to that election as a reason to make these kind of changes that Prop 5 is proposing, right?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:04:23] And the proponents of this measure sort of point to that election as a reason to make these kind of changes that Prop 5 is proposing, right?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:04:36] Yeah, you know, I think supporters say it’s fundamentally unfair that someone can win a successor election on a recall ballot and not get a majority vote, which can happen if there’s a if there is a recall against a state official and a majority of voters elect to recall that official, the top replacement candidate doesn’t need to get a majority vote. They just need to finish first and suddenly they take that office. So supporters of Proposition 5 say… This is basically a loophole. This is a workaround where someone could potentially become governor of California without ever getting a majority vote.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:04:36] Yeah, you know, I think supporters say it’s fundamentally unfair that someone can win a successor election on a recall ballot and not get a majority vote, which can happen if there’s a if there is a recall against a state official and a majority of voters elect to recall that official, the top replacement candidate doesn’t need to get a majority vote. They just need to finish first and suddenly they take that office. So supporters of Proposition 5 say… This is basically a loophole. This is a workaround where someone could potentially become governor of California without ever getting a majority vote.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:05:13] So I get that that second question won’t be there on the ballot if Prop 5 is passed, but let’s say that the person does get recalled. What happens next in this Prop 5 universe? Like are they outed immediately or who takes their place at least temporarily?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:05:13] So I get that that second question won’t be there on the ballot if Prop 5 is passed, but let’s say that the person does get recalled. What happens next in this Prop 5 universe? Like are they outed immediately or who takes their place at least temporarily?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:05:32] If you’re recalling a state legislator, so a state senator or a state assembly member, what will happen is there could be a special election called after the fact, where a new state legislate is picked. In the case of statewide offices, like attorney general, like secretary of state, a new secretary of State, a new attorney general will be appointed. In the cases of the governor, basically the lieutenant governor would take over And then there would be. An election to replace or to pick the next governor. So if it happens early in the governor’s term, there would be a special election taking place at the next statewide election where our voters would get to choose and vote on a new governor. If it happens late in that governor’s turn, the lieutenant governor would simply just fill the seat until the regularly scheduled election for governor.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:05:32] If you’re recalling a state legislator, so a state senator or a state assembly member, what will happen is there could be a special election called after the fact, where a new state legislate is picked. In the case of statewide offices, like attorney general, like secretary of state, a new secretary of State, a new attorney general will be appointed. In the cases of the governor, basically the lieutenant governor would take over And then there would be. An election to replace or to pick the next governor. So if it happens early in the governor’s term, there would be a special election taking place at the next statewide election where our voters would get to choose and vote on a new governor. If it happens late in that governor’s turn, the lieutenant governor would simply just fill the seat until the regularly scheduled election for governor.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:06:24] We’ll have more with KQED’s Guy Marzorati right after this break. By the way, if you appreciate the work we’re doing here on PopFest, consider becoming a sustaining KQED member. We can’t do this work without you. Just go to donate.kqed.org slash podcasts. We’ll be right back.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:06:24] We’ll have more with KQED’s Guy Marzorati right after this break. By the way, if you appreciate the work we’re doing here on PopFest, consider becoming a sustaining KQED member. We can’t do this work without you. Just go to donate.kqed.org slash podcasts. We’ll be right back.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:06:49] And let’s get into the politics of this a little bit, Guy. Who else is sort of pushing for Prop 5 to be passed?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:06:49] And let’s get into the politics of this a little bit, Guy. Who else is sort of pushing for Prop 5 to be passed?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:06:57] Yeah, so this is really turned into kind of a partisan divide on Proposition 5, where we see the California Democratic Party in support, almost entirely Democrats in the legislature voted to put this on the ballot. And one of the top supporters of Proposition five is Shirley Weber, who’s California the secretary of state, the top election official.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:06:57] Yeah, so this is really turned into kind of a partisan divide on Proposition 5, where we see the California Democratic Party in support, almost entirely Democrats in the legislature voted to put this on the ballot. And one of the top supporters of Proposition five is Shirley Weber, who’s California the secretary of state, the top election official.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Shirley Weber \u003c/strong>[00:07:17] This was a way in which people could game the system, looking for a time when we had low voter turnout. Then we’d have all these folks on the ballot and then you’d pick somebody and they’d have 30% or 20% of whatever it was.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Shirley Weber \u003c/strong>[00:07:17] This was a way in which people could game the system, looking for a time when we had low voter turnout. Then we’d have all these folks on the ballot and then you’d pick somebody and they’d have 30% or 20% of whatever it was.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:07:27] She said her office started working on these potential reforms to introduce them after the unsuccessful recall of Newsom in 2021. And here’s Weber talking about their proposal at a state Senate hearing.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:07:27] She said her office started working on these potential reforms to introduce them after the unsuccessful recall of Newsom in 2021. And here’s Weber talking about their proposal at a state Senate hearing.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Shirley Weber \u003c/strong>[00:07:40] The whole election about, should this person be recalled? So that the discussion is on the merit of the recall itself, not on is there a better replacement, but should this be person be recall? Has there been enough?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Shirley Weber \u003c/strong>[00:07:40] The whole election about, should this person be recalled? So that the discussion is on the merit of the recall itself, not on is there a better replacement, but should this be person be recall? Has there been enough?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:07:51] Proponents here are really arguing that the state should avoid what happened in the last two recall elections for governor. What we’ve seen in the past is, when there’s a recall facing someone like Gray Davis, or in 2021, we saw this, a recall-facing Gavin Newsom, there’s also this second campaign that plays out in parallel about, okay, well, who should the replacement candidate be? Who should the top replacement candidate? This would eliminate that second part, and supporters say, well yes, this will really allow the conversation and the debate to focus on whether or not this person facing a recall actually deserves to be removed from office.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:07:51] Proponents here are really arguing that the state should avoid what happened in the last two recall elections for governor. What we’ve seen in the past is, when there’s a recall facing someone like Gray Davis, or in 2021, we saw this, a recall-facing Gavin Newsom, there’s also this second campaign that plays out in parallel about, okay, well, who should the replacement candidate be? Who should the top replacement candidate? This would eliminate that second part, and supporters say, well yes, this will really allow the conversation and the debate to focus on whether or not this person facing a recall actually deserves to be removed from office.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:08:29] Who is opposed to this measure and why?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:08:29] Who is opposed to this measure and why?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:08:31] The opposition has come from Republicans, California’s Republican Party, Republicans in the state legislature, who have really argued against making this change the state’s recall rules.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:08:31] The opposition has come from Republicans, California’s Republican Party, Republicans in the state legislature, who have really argued against making this change the state’s recall rules.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Carl DeMaio \u003c/strong>[00:08:43] This is insane. We should be able to continue the process for recalls where if someone is being recalled from office, we first vote on the ballot. And secondly, we say, if they’re recalled, here’s who we want to take over representation.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Carl DeMaio \u003c/strong>[00:08:43] This is insane. We should be able to continue the process for recalls where if someone is being recalled from office, we first vote on the ballot. And secondly, we say, if they’re recalled, here’s who we want to take over representation.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:08:57] Republican Assemblymember Carl DeMaio is running an effort to support and oppose a few different measures, including oppose Proposition 5. And the argument you really hear from opponents of Prop 5 is that the recall system is working as it is.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:08:57] Republican Assemblymember Carl DeMaio is running an effort to support and oppose a few different measures, including oppose Proposition 5. And the argument you really hear from opponents of Prop 5 is that the recall system is working as it is.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Carl DeMaio \u003c/strong>[00:09:12] Please don’t weaken the recall provision in the state constitution. It’s one of the only things we have to hold politicians accountable.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Carl DeMaio \u003c/strong>[00:09:12] Please don’t weaken the recall provision in the state constitution. It’s one of the only things we have to hold politicians accountable.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:09:19] There doesn’t need to be any changes to it. It has existed in the state for over 100 years. They say the idea of having a governor be removed by the will of the people, by the voters, only to have a lieutenant governor come in and take their place is not really the change that voters who are pushing a recall are looking for in the first place. We see in modern day in California, the governor and lieutenant governor are almost always Democratic. And so if there’s a recall election against the governor, voters are seeking change. Number one, having just the next Democrat in line take that office might not really reflect to the will of what brought the voters to a recall. And secondly, the lieutenant governor would then serve as governor without ever having been elected. So if the argument for Proposition 5 is that a successor could take office with less than 50% of the vote, well Under Prop 5, the lieutenant governor would take office and they didn’t get any of the vote for governor. So opponents of Prop 5 see this as real flaws with the measure.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:09:19] There doesn’t need to be any changes to it. It has existed in the state for over 100 years. They say the idea of having a governor be removed by the will of the people, by the voters, only to have a lieutenant governor come in and take their place is not really the change that voters who are pushing a recall are looking for in the first place. We see in modern day in California, the governor and lieutenant governor are almost always Democratic. And so if there’s a recall election against the governor, voters are seeking change. Number one, having just the next Democrat in line take that office might not really reflect to the will of what brought the voters to a recall. And secondly, the lieutenant governor would then serve as governor without ever having been elected. So if the argument for Proposition 5 is that a successor could take office with less than 50% of the vote, well Under Prop 5, the lieutenant governor would take office and they didn’t get any of the vote for governor. So opponents of Prop 5 see this as real flaws with the measure.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:10:25] And is anyone throwing lots of money into Prop 5 on either side? And any sense guy of how likely this is to pass?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:10:25] And is anyone throwing lots of money into Prop 5 on either side? And any sense guy of how likely this is to pass?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:10:36] You know, we haven’t seen any campaign spending with Proposition 5 on either side. In mid-September, the Public Policy Institute of California released polling on the statewide measures and it showed just 35% of voters supporting Proposition five with 59% opposed. In what really looks like another example of California voters appearing hesitant to make really any changes to the state system of direct democracy.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:10:36] You know, we haven’t seen any campaign spending with Proposition 5 on either side. In mid-September, the Public Policy Institute of California released polling on the statewide measures and it showed just 35% of voters supporting Proposition five with 59% opposed. In what really looks like another example of California voters appearing hesitant to make really any changes to the state system of direct democracy.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:11:02] Well, Guy, thank you so much, as always, for breaking this one down. Appreciate it.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:11:02] Well, Guy, thank you so much, as always, for breaking this one down. Appreciate it.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:11:06] Of course, thanks for having me.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:11:06] Of course, thanks for having me.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>Your support makes KQED podcasts possible. You can show your love by going to \u003ca href=\"https://kqed.org/donate/podcasts\">https://kqed.org/donate/podcasts\u003c/a>\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>Your support makes KQED podcasts possible. You can show your love by going to \u003ca href=\"https://kqed.org/donate/podcasts\">https://kqed.org/donate/podcasts\u003c/a>\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>This story was reported by Guy Marzorati. Prop Fest is a collaboration between Bay Curious and The Bay. It’s made by Olivia Allen-Price, Katrina Schwartz, Christopher Beale, Anna Casalme, Ericka Cruz Guevarra, Alan Montecillo, Gabriela Glueck and Pauline Bartolone. Additional support from Jen Chien, Katie Sprenger, Maha Sanad, Ethan Toven-Lindsey and everyone on Team KQED.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>This story was reported by Guy Marzorati. Prop Fest is a collaboration between Bay Curious and The Bay. It’s made by Olivia Allen-Price, Katrina Schwartz, Christopher Beale, Anna Casalme, Ericka Cruz Guevarra, Alan Montecillo, Gabriela Glueck and Pauline Bartolone. Additional support from Jen Chien, Katie Sprenger, Maha Sanad, Ethan Toven-Lindsey and everyone on Team KQED.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cem>Some members of the KQED podcast team are represented by The Screen Actors Guild, American Federation of Television and Radio Artists, San Francisco-Northern California Local.\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cem>Some members of the KQED podcast team are represented by The Screen Actors Guild, American Federation of Television and Radio Artists, San Francisco-Northern California Local.\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
}
],
"excerpt": "In 2021, California voters were asked whether to recall Gov. Gavin Newsom. But there was also a second question: Who should replace him?",
"status": "publish",
"parent": 0,
"modified": 1790364038,
"stats": {
"hasAudio": false,
"hasVideo": false,
"hasChartOrMap": false,
"iframeSrcs": [],
"hasGoogleForm": false,
"hasGallery": false,
"hasHearkenModule": false,
"hasPolis": false,
"paragraphCount": 44,
"wordCount": 2212
},
"headData": {
"title": "Prop 5: Changes to the State Recall Election Process | KQED",
"description": "In 2021, California voters were asked whether to recall Gov. Gavin Newsom. But there was also a second question: Who should replace him?",
"ogTitle": "",
"ogDescription": "",
"ogImgId": "",
"twTitle": "",
"twDescription": "",
"twImgId": "",
"socialDescription": "In 2021, California voters were asked whether to recall Gov. Gavin Newsom. But there was also a second question: Who should replace him?",
"schema": {
"@context": "https://schema.org",
"@type": "NewsArticle",
"headline": "Prop 5: Changes to the State Recall Election Process",
"datePublished": "2026-09-30T03:05:00-07:00",
"dateModified": "2026-09-25T12:20:38-07:00",
"image": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"isAccessibleForFree": "True",
"publisher": {
"@type": "NewsMediaOrganization",
"@id": "https://www.kqed.org/#organization",
"name": "KQED",
"logo": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"url": "https://www.kqed.org",
"sameAs": [
"https://www.facebook.com/KQED",
"https://twitter.com/KQED",
"https://www.instagram.com/kqed/",
"https://www.tiktok.com/@kqedofficial",
"https://www.linkedin.com/company/kqed",
"https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCeC0IOo7i1P_61zVUWbJ4nw"
]
}
}
},
"primaryCategory": {
"termId": 33520,
"slug": "podcast",
"name": "Podcast"
},
"source": "Prop Fest 2026",
"sourceUrl": "https://www.kqed.org/propfest",
"audioUrl": "https://www.podtrac.com/pts/redirect.mp3/traffic.megaphone.fm/KQINC5333631416.mp3",
"sticky": false,
"templateType": "standard",
"featuredImageType": "standard",
"excludeFromSiteSearch": "Include",
"articleAge": "0",
"path": "/news/12100623/proposition-5-would-change-the-state-recall-election-process",
"audioTrackLength": null,
"parsedContent": [
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>\n\u003ch2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Transcript\u003c/h2>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:00:00] You may remember that in 2021, California voters were asked whether or not to recall Governor Gavin Newsom from office.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price \u003c/strong>[00:00:08] But there was also a second question on the ballot. Who should replace him if he was recalled?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:00:15] Obviously, the recall failed, but if it was successful, Newsom would have technically been replaced by Republican Larry Elder, who won about 48% of the vote in that second question.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price \u003c/strong>[00:00:29] And that’s how the process works for state-wide recall elections right now.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:00:33] But proposition five could change that.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price \u003c/strong>[00:00:37] I’m Olivia Allen Price, host of Bay Curious.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:00:40] And I’m Ericka Cruz Guevara, host of The Bay.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price \u003c/strong>[00:00:43] Welcome to Prop Fest, a collaboration between The Bay and BayCurious. And we’re back again with another episode to help you get up to speed on all the statewide propositions on the ballot this November.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:00:54] Today, we’re breaking down proposition five. Here’s how it reads on your ballot.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Voiceover \u003c/strong>[00:01:00] Prop 5 – Changes recall election process for statewide officers\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:01:07] Here to break it down for us is KQED’s politics and government correspondent, Guy Marzorati. Hey Guy.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:01:14] Hey, how’s it going?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:01:15] Good. So this proposition that we’re talking about today pertains to recall reform. Before we dive in here, how exactly do recalls for people in statewide office currently work in California?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:01:31] Yeah, so the rules for recall in California are different for state office and local office. For local office, it’s probably somewhat of a familiar process for people. There’s a question on the ballot, should this person be removed from office? If they are removed, then how the next person gets chosen can result in a variety of ways. So if you remember the Oakland mayor recall, there was a special election after that. There was the district attorney recalls in Alameda and SF. The replacements there were appointed. State recalls work a little bit differently where voters are asked two questions on the ballot. One is, should this statewide official be removed? And then the second question is, if they are removed, who should replace them? And there’s a list of candidates that voters get to choose from. And what proposition five would do is eliminate that second question, that question about the successor.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:02:30] And as you just mentioned, and just to clarify for voters, Prop 5 specifically pertains to recalls for statewide office, right? Not local office. So what kinds of elected positions are we talking about here?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:02:45] That’s right, so this would only apply to statewide offices like governor, like attorney general and like state legislative offices, so assembly and Senate. And basically what it would do is make state recall elections more like local recall elections where there’s only one question on the ballot and it’s asking whether or not this elected official should be removed from office.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:03:06] And just for some background here, Guy, how often have recall campaigns been actually put before California voters in the past when it comes to these statewide offices? Like have sitting politicians actually even been recalled before?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:03:23] Yes. So since voters in California approved this recall process more than a hundred years ago, goes all the way back to 1911, there have been 11 recall elections against statewide officials. Of those six recalls have been successful. Five recall elections have been unsuccessful. The most famous successful recall election was in 2003, when Governor Gray Davis, a Democrat, was recalled by voters. And Republican Arnold Schwarzenegger won the successor election and became governor.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Voiceover \u003c/strong>[00:03:55] The recall campaign against Governor Gray-Davis is gathering steam with the launch of the\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Voiceover \u003c/strong>[00:03:59] Governor Gray Davis is hurting our state and our people. First question you’re asked, do you believe it should be recalled? Then the second question is, should it be recalled, who would you like to see replace it? And it’s an open primary, one ballot. And whoever gets the most vote, if a majority say yes on recall, immediately becomes the governor of California.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:04:23] And the proponents of this measure sort of point to that election as a reason to make these kind of changes that Prop 5 is proposing, right?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:04:36] Yeah, you know, I think supporters say it’s fundamentally unfair that someone can win a successor election on a recall ballot and not get a majority vote, which can happen if there’s a if there is a recall against a state official and a majority of voters elect to recall that official, the top replacement candidate doesn’t need to get a majority vote. They just need to finish first and suddenly they take that office. So supporters of Proposition 5 say… This is basically a loophole. This is a workaround where someone could potentially become governor of California without ever getting a majority vote.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:05:13] So I get that that second question won’t be there on the ballot if Prop 5 is passed, but let’s say that the person does get recalled. What happens next in this Prop 5 universe? Like are they outed immediately or who takes their place at least temporarily?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:05:32] If you’re recalling a state legislator, so a state senator or a state assembly member, what will happen is there could be a special election called after the fact, where a new state legislate is picked. In the case of statewide offices, like attorney general, like secretary of state, a new secretary of State, a new attorney general will be appointed. In the cases of the governor, basically the lieutenant governor would take over And then there would be. An election to replace or to pick the next governor. So if it happens early in the governor’s term, there would be a special election taking place at the next statewide election where our voters would get to choose and vote on a new governor. If it happens late in that governor’s turn, the lieutenant governor would simply just fill the seat until the regularly scheduled election for governor.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:06:24] We’ll have more with KQED’s Guy Marzorati right after this break. By the way, if you appreciate the work we’re doing here on PopFest, consider becoming a sustaining KQED member. We can’t do this work without you. Just go to donate.kqed.org slash podcasts. We’ll be right back.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:06:49] And let’s get into the politics of this a little bit, Guy. Who else is sort of pushing for Prop 5 to be passed?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:06:57] Yeah, so this is really turned into kind of a partisan divide on Proposition 5, where we see the California Democratic Party in support, almost entirely Democrats in the legislature voted to put this on the ballot. And one of the top supporters of Proposition five is Shirley Weber, who’s California the secretary of state, the top election official.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Shirley Weber \u003c/strong>[00:07:17] This was a way in which people could game the system, looking for a time when we had low voter turnout. Then we’d have all these folks on the ballot and then you’d pick somebody and they’d have 30% or 20% of whatever it was.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:07:27] She said her office started working on these potential reforms to introduce them after the unsuccessful recall of Newsom in 2021. And here’s Weber talking about their proposal at a state Senate hearing.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Shirley Weber \u003c/strong>[00:07:40] The whole election about, should this person be recalled? So that the discussion is on the merit of the recall itself, not on is there a better replacement, but should this be person be recall? Has there been enough?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:07:51] Proponents here are really arguing that the state should avoid what happened in the last two recall elections for governor. What we’ve seen in the past is, when there’s a recall facing someone like Gray Davis, or in 2021, we saw this, a recall-facing Gavin Newsom, there’s also this second campaign that plays out in parallel about, okay, well, who should the replacement candidate be? Who should the top replacement candidate? This would eliminate that second part, and supporters say, well yes, this will really allow the conversation and the debate to focus on whether or not this person facing a recall actually deserves to be removed from office.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:08:29] Who is opposed to this measure and why?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:08:31] The opposition has come from Republicans, California’s Republican Party, Republicans in the state legislature, who have really argued against making this change the state’s recall rules.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Carl DeMaio \u003c/strong>[00:08:43] This is insane. We should be able to continue the process for recalls where if someone is being recalled from office, we first vote on the ballot. And secondly, we say, if they’re recalled, here’s who we want to take over representation.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:08:57] Republican Assemblymember Carl DeMaio is running an effort to support and oppose a few different measures, including oppose Proposition 5. And the argument you really hear from opponents of Prop 5 is that the recall system is working as it is.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Carl DeMaio \u003c/strong>[00:09:12] Please don’t weaken the recall provision in the state constitution. It’s one of the only things we have to hold politicians accountable.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:09:19] There doesn’t need to be any changes to it. It has existed in the state for over 100 years. They say the idea of having a governor be removed by the will of the people, by the voters, only to have a lieutenant governor come in and take their place is not really the change that voters who are pushing a recall are looking for in the first place. We see in modern day in California, the governor and lieutenant governor are almost always Democratic. And so if there’s a recall election against the governor, voters are seeking change. Number one, having just the next Democrat in line take that office might not really reflect to the will of what brought the voters to a recall. And secondly, the lieutenant governor would then serve as governor without ever having been elected. So if the argument for Proposition 5 is that a successor could take office with less than 50% of the vote, well Under Prop 5, the lieutenant governor would take office and they didn’t get any of the vote for governor. So opponents of Prop 5 see this as real flaws with the measure.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:10:25] And is anyone throwing lots of money into Prop 5 on either side? And any sense guy of how likely this is to pass?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:10:36] You know, we haven’t seen any campaign spending with Proposition 5 on either side. In mid-September, the Public Policy Institute of California released polling on the statewide measures and it showed just 35% of voters supporting Proposition five with 59% opposed. In what really looks like another example of California voters appearing hesitant to make really any changes to the state system of direct democracy.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:11:02] Well, Guy, thank you so much, as always, for breaking this one down. Appreciate it.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:11:06] Of course, thanks for having me.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Your support makes KQED podcasts possible. You can show your love by going to \u003ca href=\"https://kqed.org/donate/podcasts\">https://kqed.org/donate/podcasts\u003c/a>\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>This story was reported by Guy Marzorati. Prop Fest is a collaboration between Bay Curious and The Bay. It’s made by Olivia Allen-Price, Katrina Schwartz, Christopher Beale, Anna Casalme, Ericka Cruz Guevarra, Alan Montecillo, Gabriela Glueck and Pauline Bartolone. Additional support from Jen Chien, Katie Sprenger, Maha Sanad, Ethan Toven-Lindsey and everyone on Team KQED.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cem>Some members of the KQED podcast team are represented by The Screen Actors Guild, American Federation of Television and Radio Artists, San Francisco-Northern California Local.\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n\u003c/div>\u003c/p>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
}
],
"link": "/news/12100623/proposition-5-would-change-the-state-recall-election-process",
"authors": [
"8654",
"227",
"11946",
"11879",
"11649"
],
"categories": [
"news_31795",
"news_33520",
"news_13"
],
"tags": [
"news_18426",
"news_33812",
"news_17968",
"news_28645",
"news_21509",
"news_22598"
],
"featImg": "news_11886518",
"label": "source_news_12100623"
}
},
"podcastsReducer": {
"isFetching": false,
"fetchFailed": false,
"hasFetched": false,
"podcasts": {}
},
"radioProgramsReducer": {
"isFetching": false,
"fetchFailed": false,
"hasFetched": false,
"radioPrograms": {}
},
"radioSearchSegmentsReducer": {},
"programsReducer": {
"all-things-considered": {
"id": "all-things-considered",
"title": "All Things Considered",
"info": "Every weekday, \u003cem>All Things Considered\u003c/em> hosts Robert Siegel, Audie Cornish, Ari Shapiro, and Kelly McEvers present the program's trademark mix of news, interviews, commentaries, reviews, and offbeat features. Michel Martin hosts on the weekends.",
"airtime": "MON-FRI 1pm-2pm, 4:30pm-6:30pm\u003cbr />SAT-SUN 5pm-6pm",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/All-Things-Considered-Podcast-Tile-360x360-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.npr.org/programs/all-things-considered/",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "npr"
},
"link": "/radio/program/all-things-considered"
},
"american-suburb-podcast": {
"id": "american-suburb-podcast",
"title": "American Suburb: The Podcast",
"tagline": "The flip side of gentrification, told through one town",
"info": "Gentrification is changing cities across America, forcing people from neighborhoods they have long called home. Call them the displaced. Now those priced out of the Bay Area are looking for a better life in an unlikely place. American Suburb follows this migration to one California town along the Delta, 45 miles from San Francisco. But is this once sleepy suburb ready for them?",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/American-Suburb-Podcast-Tile-703x703-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "/news/series/american-suburb-podcast",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "kqed",
"order": 19
},
"link": "/news/series/american-suburb-podcast/",
"subscribe": {
"npr": "https://rpb3r.app.goo.gl/RBrW",
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewPodcast?mt=2&id=1287748328",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/radio/American-Suburb-p1086805/",
"rss": "https://ww2.kqed.org/news/series/american-suburb-podcast/feed/podcast",
"google": "https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9mZWVkcy5tZWdhcGhvbmUuZm0vS1FJTkMzMDExODgxNjA5"
}
},
"baycurious": {
"id": "baycurious",
"title": "Bay Curious",
"tagline": "Exploring the Bay Area, one question at a time",
"info": "KQED’s new podcast, Bay Curious, gets to the bottom of the mysteries — both profound and peculiar — that give the Bay Area its unique identity. And we’ll do it with your help! You ask the questions. You decide what Bay Curious investigates. And you join us on the journey to find the answers.",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Bay-Curious-Podcast-Tile-703x703-1.jpg",
"imageAlt": "KQED Bay Curious",
"officialWebsiteLink": "/news/series/baycurious",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "kqed",
"order": 3
},
"link": "/podcasts/baycurious",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/bay-curious/id1172473406",
"npr": "https://www.npr.org/podcasts/500557090/bay-curious",
"rss": "https://ww2.kqed.org/news/category/bay-curious-podcast/feed/podcast",
"amazon": "https://music.amazon.com/podcasts/9a90d476-aa04-455d-9a4c-0871ed6216d4/bay-curious",
"stitcher": "https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/kqed/bay-curious",
"spotify": "https://open.spotify.com/show/6O76IdmhixfijmhTZLIJ8k"
}
},
"bbc-world-service": {
"id": "bbc-world-service",
"title": "BBC World Service",
"info": "The day's top stories from BBC News compiled twice daily in the week, once at weekends.",
"airtime": "MON-FRI 9pm-10pm, TUE-FRI 1am-2am",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/BBC-World-Service-Podcast-Tile-360x360-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/live:bbc_world_service",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "BBC World Service"
},
"link": "/radio/program/bbc-world-service",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/global-news-podcast/id135067274?mt=2",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/radio/BBC-World-Service-p455581/",
"rss": "https://podcasts.files.bbci.co.uk/p02nq0gn.rss"
}
},
"californiareport": {
"id": "californiareport",
"title": "The California Report",
"tagline": "California, day by day",
"info": "KQED’s statewide radio news program providing daily coverage of issues, trends and public policy decisions.",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/The-California-Report-Podcast-Tile-703x703-1.jpg",
"imageAlt": "KQED The California Report",
"officialWebsiteLink": "/californiareport",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "kqed",
"order": 8
},
"link": "/californiareport",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/kqeds-the-california-report/id79681292",
"amazon": "https://music.amazon.com/podcasts/26099305-72af-4542-9dde-ac1807fe36d5/kqed-s-the-california-report",
"npr": "https://www.npr.org/podcasts/432285393/the-california-report",
"stitcher": "https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/kqedfm-kqeds-the-california-report-podcast-8838",
"rss": "https://ww2.kqed.org/news/tag/tcram/feed/podcast"
}
},
"californiareportmagazine": {
"id": "californiareportmagazine",
"title": "The California Report Magazine",
"tagline": "Your state, your stories",
"info": "Every week, The California Report Magazine takes you on a road trip for the ears: to visit the places and meet the people who make California unique. The in-depth storytelling podcast from the California Report.",
"airtime": "FRI 4:30pm-5pm, 6:30pm-7pm, 11pm-11:30pm",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/The-California-Report-Magazine-Podcast-Tile-703x703-1.jpg",
"imageAlt": "KQED The California Report Magazine",
"officialWebsiteLink": "/californiareportmagazine",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "kqed",
"order": 10
},
"link": "/californiareportmagazine",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-california-report-magazine/id1314750545",
"google": "https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9mZWVkcy5tZWdhcGhvbmUuZm0vS1FJTkM3NjkwNjk1OTAz",
"npr": "https://www.npr.org/podcasts/564733126/the-california-report-magazine",
"stitcher": "https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/kqed/the-california-report-magazine",
"rss": "https://ww2.kqed.org/news/tag/tcrmag/feed/podcast"
}
},
"city-arts": {
"id": "city-arts",
"title": "City Arts & Lectures",
"info": "A one-hour radio program to hear celebrated writers, artists and thinkers address contemporary ideas and values, often discussing the creative process. Please note: tapes or transcripts are not available",
"imageSrc": "https://ww2.kqed.org/radio/wp-content/uploads/sites/50/2018/05/cityartsandlecture-300x300.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.cityarts.net/",
"airtime": "SUN 1pm-2pm, TUE 10pm, WED 1am",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "City Arts & Lectures"
},
"link": "https://www.cityarts.net",
"subscribe": {
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/radio/City-Arts-and-Lectures-p692/",
"rss": "https://www.cityarts.net/feed/"
}
},
"closealltabs": {
"id": "closealltabs",
"title": "Close All Tabs",
"tagline": "Your irreverent guide to the trends redefining our world",
"info": "Close All Tabs breaks down how digital culture shapes our world through thoughtful insights and irreverent humor.",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/CAT_2_Tile-scaled.jpg",
"imageAlt": "KQED Close All Tabs",
"officialWebsiteLink": "/podcasts/closealltabs",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "kqed",
"order": 1
},
"link": "/podcasts/closealltabs",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/close-all-tabs/id214663465",
"rss": "https://feeds.megaphone.fm/KQINC6993880386",
"amazon": "https://music.amazon.com/podcasts/92d9d4ac-67a3-4eed-b10a-fb45d45b1ef2/close-all-tabs",
"spotify": "https://open.spotify.com/show/6LAJFHnGK1pYXYzv6SIol6?si=deb0cae19813417c"
}
},
"code-switch-life-kit": {
"id": "code-switch-life-kit",
"title": "Code Switch / Life Kit",
"info": "\u003cem>Code Switch\u003c/em>, which listeners will hear in the first part of the hour, has fearless and much-needed conversations about race. Hosted by journalists of color, the show tackles the subject of race head-on, exploring how it impacts every part of society — from politics and pop culture to history, sports and more.\u003cbr />\u003cbr />\u003cem>Life Kit\u003c/em>, which will be in the second part of the hour, guides you through spaces and feelings no one prepares you for — from finances to mental health, from workplace microaggressions to imposter syndrome, from relationships to parenting. The show features experts with real world experience and shares their knowledge. Because everyone needs a little help being human.\u003cbr />\u003cbr />\u003ca href=\"https://www.npr.org/podcasts/510312/codeswitch\">\u003cem>Code Switch\u003c/em> offical site and podcast\u003c/a>\u003cbr />\u003ca href=\"https://www.npr.org/lifekit\">\u003cem>Life Kit\u003c/em> offical site and podcast\u003c/a>\u003cbr />",
"airtime": "SUN 9pm-10pm",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Code-Switch-Life-Kit-Podcast-Tile-360x360-1.jpg",
"meta": {
"site": "radio",
"source": "npr"
},
"link": "/radio/program/code-switch-life-kit",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://podcasts.apple.com/podcast/1112190608?mt=2&at=11l79Y&ct=nprdirectory",
"google": "https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cubnByLm9yZy9yc3MvcG9kY2FzdC5waHA_aWQ9NTEwMzEy",
"spotify": "https://open.spotify.com/show/3bExJ9JQpkwNhoHvaIIuyV",
"rss": "https://feeds.npr.org/510312/podcast.xml"
}
},
"commonwealth-club": {
"id": "commonwealth-club",
"title": "Commonwealth Club of California Podcast",
"info": "The Commonwealth Club of California is the nation's oldest and largest public affairs forum. As a non-partisan forum, The Club brings to the public airwaves diverse viewpoints on important topics. The Club's weekly radio broadcast - the oldest in the U.S., dating back to 1924 - is carried across the nation on public radio stations and is now podcasting. Our website archive features audio of our recent programs, as well as selected speeches from our long and distinguished history. This podcast feed is usually updated twice a week and is always un-edited.",
"airtime": "THU 10pm, FRI 1am",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Commonwealth-Club-Podcast-Tile-360x360-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.commonwealthclub.org/podcasts",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "Commonwealth Club of California"
},
"link": "/radio/program/commonwealth-club",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/commonwealth-club-of-california-podcast/id976334034?mt=2",
"google": "https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cDovL3d3dy5jb21tb253ZWFsdGhjbHViLm9yZy9hdWRpby9wb2RjYXN0L3dlZWtseS54bWw",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/radio/Commonwealth-Club-of-California-p1060/"
}
},
"forum": {
"id": "forum",
"title": "Forum",
"tagline": "The conversation starts here",
"info": "KQED’s live call-in program discussing local, state, national and international issues, as well as in-depth interviews.",
"airtime": "MON-FRI 9am-11am, 10pm-11pm",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Forum-Podcast-Tile-703x703-1.jpg",
"imageAlt": "KQED Forum with Mina Kim and Alexis Madrigal",
"officialWebsiteLink": "/forum",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "kqed",
"order": 9
},
"link": "/forum",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/kqeds-forum/id73329719",
"google": "https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9mZWVkcy5tZWdhcGhvbmUuZm0vS1FJTkM5NTU3MzgxNjMz",
"npr": "https://www.npr.org/podcasts/432307980/forum",
"stitcher": "https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/kqedfm-kqeds-forum-podcast",
"rss": "https://feeds.megaphone.fm/KQINC9557381633"
}
},
"freakonomics-radio": {
"id": "freakonomics-radio",
"title": "Freakonomics Radio",
"info": "Freakonomics Radio is a one-hour award-winning podcast and public-radio project hosted by Stephen Dubner, with co-author Steve Levitt as a regular guest. It is produced in partnership with WNYC.",
"imageSrc": "https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/05/freakonomicsRadio.png",
"officialWebsiteLink": "http://freakonomics.com/",
"airtime": "SUN 1am-2am, SAT 3pm-4pm",
"meta": {
"site": "radio",
"source": "WNYC"
},
"link": "/radio/program/freakonomics-radio",
"subscribe": {
"npr": "https://rpb3r.app.goo.gl/4s8b",
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/freakonomics-radio/id354668519",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/podcasts/WNYC-Podcasts/Freakonomics-Radio-p272293/",
"rss": "https://feeds.feedburner.com/freakonomicsradio"
}
},
"fresh-air": {
"id": "fresh-air",
"title": "Fresh Air",
"info": "Hosted by Terry Gross, \u003cem>Fresh Air from WHYY\u003c/em> is the Peabody Award-winning weekday magazine of contemporary arts and issues. One of public radio's most popular programs, Fresh Air features intimate conversations with today's biggest luminaries.",
"airtime": "MON-FRI 7pm-8pm",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Fresh-Air-Podcast-Tile-360x360-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.npr.org/programs/fresh-air/",
"meta": {
"site": "radio",
"source": "npr"
},
"link": "/radio/program/fresh-air",
"subscribe": {
"npr": "https://rpb3r.app.goo.gl/4s8b",
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewPodcast?s=143441&mt=2&id=214089682&at=11l79Y&ct=nprdirectory",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/radio/Fresh-Air-p17/",
"rss": "https://feeds.npr.org/381444908/podcast.xml"
}
},
"here-and-now": {
"id": "here-and-now",
"title": "Here & Now",
"info": "A live production of NPR and WBUR Boston, in collaboration with stations across the country, Here & Now reflects the fluid world of news as it's happening in the middle of the day, with timely, in-depth news, interviews and conversation. Hosted by Robin Young, Jeremy Hobson and Tonya Mosley.",
"airtime": "MON-THU 11am-12pm",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Here-And-Now-Podcast-Tile-360x360-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "http://www.wbur.org/hereandnow",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "npr"
},
"link": "/radio/program/here-and-now",
"subsdcribe": {
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewPodcast?mt=2&id=426698661",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/radio/Here--Now-p211/",
"rss": "https://feeds.npr.org/510051/podcast.xml"
}
},
"hidden-brain": {
"id": "hidden-brain",
"title": "Hidden Brain",
"info": "Shankar Vedantam uses science and storytelling to reveal the unconscious patterns that drive human behavior, shape our choices and direct our relationships.",
"imageSrc": "https://ww2.kqed.org/radio/wp-content/uploads/sites/50/2018/05/hiddenbrain.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.npr.org/series/423302056/hidden-brain",
"airtime": "SUN 7pm-8pm",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "NPR"
},
"link": "/radio/program/hidden-brain",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/hidden-brain/id1028908750?mt=2",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/podcasts/Science-Podcasts/Hidden-Brain-p787503/",
"rss": "https://feeds.npr.org/510308/podcast.xml"
}
},
"how-i-built-this": {
"id": "how-i-built-this",
"title": "How I Built This with Guy Raz",
"info": "Guy Raz dives into the stories behind some of the world's best known companies. How I Built This weaves a narrative journey about innovators, entrepreneurs and idealists—and the movements they built.",
"imageSrc": "https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/05/howIBuiltThis.png",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.npr.org/podcasts/510313/how-i-built-this",
"airtime": "SUN 7:30pm-8pm",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "npr"
},
"link": "/radio/program/how-i-built-this",
"subscribe": {
"npr": "https://rpb3r.app.goo.gl/3zxy",
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/how-i-built-this-with-guy-raz/id1150510297?mt=2",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/podcasts/Arts--Culture-Podcasts/How-I-Built-This-p910896/",
"rss": "https://feeds.npr.org/510313/podcast.xml"
}
},
"hyphenacion": {
"id": "hyphenacion",
"title": "Hyphenación",
"tagline": "Where conversation and cultura meet",
"info": "What kind of no sabo word is Hyphenación? For us, it’s about living within a hyphenation. Like being a third-gen Mexican-American from the Texas border now living that Bay Area Chicano life. Like Xorje! Each week we bring together a couple of hyphenated Latinos to talk all about personal life choices: family, careers, relationships, belonging … everything is on the table. ",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/Hyphenacion_FinalAssets_PodcastTile.png",
"imageAlt": "KQED Hyphenación",
"officialWebsiteLink": "/podcasts/hyphenacion",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "kqed",
"order": 15
},
"link": "/podcasts/hyphenacion",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/hyphenaci%C3%B3n/id1191591838",
"spotify": "https://open.spotify.com/show/2p3Fifq96nw9BPcmFdIq0o?si=39209f7b25774f38",
"youtube": "https://www.youtube.com/c/kqedarts",
"amazon": "https://music.amazon.com/podcasts/6c3dd23c-93fb-4aab-97ba-1725fa6315f1/hyphenaci%C3%B3n",
"rss": "https://feeds.megaphone.fm/KQINC2275451163"
}
},
"jerrybrown": {
"id": "jerrybrown",
"title": "The Political Mind of Jerry Brown",
"tagline": "Lessons from a lifetime in politics",
"info": "The Political Mind of Jerry Brown brings listeners the wisdom of the former Governor, Mayor, and presidential candidate. Scott Shafer interviewed Brown for more than 40 hours, covering the former governor's life and half-century in the political game – and Brown has some lessons he'd like to share. ",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/The-Political-Mind-of-Jerry-Brown-Podcast-Tile-703x703-1.jpg",
"imageAlt": "KQED The Political Mind of Jerry Brown",
"officialWebsiteLink": "/podcasts/jerrybrown",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "kqed",
"order": 18
},
"link": "/podcasts/jerrybrown",
"subscribe": {
"npr": "https://www.npr.org/podcasts/790253322/the-political-mind-of-jerry-brown",
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/id1492194549",
"rss": "https://ww2.kqed.org/news/series/jerrybrown/feed/podcast/",
"tuneIn": "http://tun.in/pjGcK",
"stitcher": "https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/kqed/the-political-mind-of-jerry-brown",
"spotify": "https://open.spotify.com/show/54C1dmuyFyKMFttY6X2j6r?si=K8SgRCoISNK6ZbjpXrX5-w",
"amazon": "https://music.amazon.com/podcasts/44420f75-3b0e-4301-ab3b-16da6b09e543/the-political-mind-of-jerry-brown"
}
},
"latino-usa": {
"id": "latino-usa",
"title": "Latino USA",
"airtime": "MON 1am-2am, SUN 6pm-7pm",
"info": "Latino USA, the radio journal of news and culture, is the only national, English-language radio program produced from a Latino perspective.",
"imageSrc": "https://ww2.kqed.org/radio/wp-content/uploads/sites/50/2018/04/latinoUsa.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "http://latinousa.org/",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "npr"
},
"link": "/radio/program/latino-usa",
"subscribe": {
"npr": "https://rpb3r.app.goo.gl/xtTd",
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewPodcast?s=143441&mt=2&id=79681317&at=11l79Y&ct=nprdirectory",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/radio/Latino-USA-p621/",
"rss": "https://feeds.npr.org/510016/podcast.xml"
}
},
"marketplace": {
"id": "marketplace",
"title": "Marketplace",
"info": "Our flagship program, helmed by Kai Ryssdal, examines what the day in money delivered, through stories, conversations, newsworthy numbers and more. Updated Monday through Friday at about 3:30 p.m. PT.",
"airtime": "MON-FRI 4pm-4:30pm, MON-WED 6:30pm-7pm",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Marketplace-Podcast-Tile-360x360-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.marketplace.org/",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "American Public Media"
},
"link": "/radio/program/marketplace",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewPodcast?s=143441&mt=2&id=201853034&at=11l79Y&ct=nprdirectory",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/radio/APM-Marketplace-p88/",
"rss": "https://feeds.publicradio.org/public_feeds/marketplace-pm/rss/rss"
}
},
"masters-of-scale": {
"id": "masters-of-scale",
"title": "Masters of Scale",
"info": "Masters of Scale is an original podcast in which LinkedIn co-founder and Greylock Partner Reid Hoffman sets out to describe and prove theories that explain how great entrepreneurs take their companies from zero to a gazillion in ingenious fashion.",
"airtime": "Every other Wednesday June 12 through October 16 at 8pm (repeats Thursdays at 2am)",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Masters-of-Scale-Podcast-Tile-360x360-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://mastersofscale.com/",
"meta": {
"site": "radio",
"source": "WaitWhat"
},
"link": "/radio/program/masters-of-scale",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "http://mastersofscale.app.link/",
"rss": "https://rss.art19.com/masters-of-scale"
}
},
"mindshift": {
"id": "mindshift",
"title": "MindShift",
"tagline": "A podcast about the future of learning and how we raise our kids",
"info": "The MindShift podcast explores the innovations in education that are shaping how kids learn. Hosts Ki Sung and Katrina Schwartz introduce listeners to educators, researchers, parents and students who are developing effective ways to improve how kids learn. We cover topics like how fed-up administrators are developing surprising tactics to deal with classroom disruptions; how listening to podcasts are helping kids develop reading skills; the consequences of overparenting; and why interdisciplinary learning can engage students on all ends of the traditional achievement spectrum. This podcast is part of the MindShift education site, a division of KQED News. KQED is an NPR/PBS member station based in San Francisco. You can also visit the MindShift website for episodes and supplemental blog posts or tweet us \u003ca href=\"https://twitter.com/MindShiftKQED\">@MindShiftKQED\u003c/a> or visit us at \u003ca href=\"/mindshift\">MindShift.KQED.org\u003c/a>",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Mindshift-Podcast-Tile-703x703-1.jpg",
"imageAlt": "KQED MindShift: How We Will Learn",
"officialWebsiteLink": "/mindshift/",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "kqed",
"order": 12
},
"link": "/podcasts/mindshift",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/mindshift-podcast/id1078765985",
"google": "https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9mZWVkcy5tZWdhcGhvbmUuZm0vS1FJTkM1NzY0NjAwNDI5",
"npr": "https://www.npr.org/podcasts/464615685/mind-shift-podcast",
"stitcher": "https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/kqed/stories-teachers-share",
"spotify": "https://open.spotify.com/show/0MxSpNYZKNprFLCl7eEtyx"
}
},
"morning-edition": {
"id": "morning-edition",
"title": "Morning Edition",
"info": "\u003cem>Morning Edition\u003c/em> takes listeners around the country and the world with multi-faceted stories and commentaries every weekday. Hosts Steve Inskeep, David Greene and Rachel Martin bring you the latest breaking news and features to prepare you for the day.",
"airtime": "MON-FRI 3am-9am",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Morning-Edition-Podcast-Tile-360x360-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.npr.org/programs/morning-edition/",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "npr"
},
"link": "/radio/program/morning-edition"
},
"onourwatch": {
"id": "onourwatch",
"title": "On Our Watch",
"tagline": "Deeply-reported investigative journalism",
"info": "For decades, the process for how police police themselves has been inconsistent – if not opaque. In some states, like California, these proceedings were completely hidden. After a new police transparency law unsealed scores of internal affairs files, our reporters set out to examine these cases and the shadow world of police discipline. On Our Watch brings listeners into the rooms where officers are questioned and witnesses are interrogated to find out who this system is really protecting. Is it the officers, or the public they've sworn to serve?",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/On-Our-Watch-Podcast-Tile-703x703-1.jpg",
"imageAlt": "On Our Watch from NPR and KQED",
"officialWebsiteLink": "/podcasts/onourwatch",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "kqed",
"order": 11
},
"link": "/podcasts/onourwatch",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://podcasts.apple.com/podcast/id1567098962",
"google": "https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9mZWVkcy5ucHIub3JnLzUxMDM2MC9wb2RjYXN0LnhtbD9zYz1nb29nbGVwb2RjYXN0cw",
"npr": "https://rpb3r.app.goo.gl/onourwatch",
"spotify": "https://open.spotify.com/show/0OLWoyizopu6tY1XiuX70x",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/radio/On-Our-Watch-p1436229/",
"stitcher": "https://www.stitcher.com/show/on-our-watch",
"rss": "https://feeds.npr.org/510360/podcast.xml"
}
},
"on-the-media": {
"id": "on-the-media",
"title": "On The Media",
"info": "Our weekly podcast explores how the media 'sausage' is made, casts an incisive eye on fluctuations in the marketplace of ideas, and examines threats to the freedom of information and expression in America and abroad. For one hour a week, the show tries to lift the veil from the process of \"making media,\" especially news media, because it's through that lens that we see the world and the world sees us",
"airtime": "SUN 2pm-3pm, MON 12am-1am",
"imageSrc": "https://ww2.kqed.org/radio/wp-content/uploads/sites/50/2018/04/onTheMedia.png",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.wnycstudios.org/shows/otm",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "wnyc"
},
"link": "/radio/program/on-the-media",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/on-the-media/id73330715?mt=2",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/radio/On-the-Media-p69/",
"rss": "http://feeds.wnyc.org/onthemedia"
}
},
"pbs-newshour": {
"id": "pbs-newshour",
"title": "PBS NewsHour",
"info": "Analysis, background reports and updates from the PBS NewsHour putting today's news in context.",
"airtime": "MON-FRI 3pm-4pm",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/PBS-News-Hour-Podcast-Tile-360x360-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.pbs.org/newshour/",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "pbs"
},
"link": "/radio/program/pbs-newshour",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/pbs-newshour-full-show/id394432287?mt=2",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/radio/PBS-NewsHour---Full-Show-p425698/",
"rss": "https://www.pbs.org/newshour/feeds/rss/podcasts/show"
}
},
"perspectives": {
"id": "perspectives",
"title": "Perspectives",
"tagline": "KQED's series of daily listener commentaries since 1991",
"info": "KQED's series of daily listener commentaries since 1991.",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/Perspectives_Tile_Final.jpg",
"imageAlt": "KQED Perspectives",
"officialWebsiteLink": "/perspectives/",
"meta": {
"site": "radio",
"source": "kqed",
"order": 14
},
"link": "/perspectives",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/id73801135",
"npr": "https://www.npr.org/podcasts/432309616/perspectives",
"rss": "https://ww2.kqed.org/perspectives/category/perspectives/feed/",
"google": "https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly93dzIua3FlZC5vcmcvcGVyc3BlY3RpdmVzL2NhdGVnb3J5L3BlcnNwZWN0aXZlcy9mZWVkLw"
}
},
"planet-money": {
"id": "planet-money",
"title": "Planet Money",
"info": "The economy explained. Imagine you could call up a friend and say, Meet me at the bar and tell me what's going on with the economy. Now imagine that's actually a fun evening.",
"airtime": "SUN 3pm-4pm",
"imageSrc": "https://ww2.kqed.org/radio/wp-content/uploads/sites/50/2018/04/planetmoney.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.npr.org/sections/money/",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "npr"
},
"link": "/radio/program/planet-money",
"subscribe": {
"npr": "https://rpb3r.app.goo.gl/M4f5",
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/planet-money/id290783428?mt=2",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/podcasts/Business--Economics-Podcasts/Planet-Money-p164680/",
"rss": "https://feeds.npr.org/510289/podcast.xml"
}
},
"politicalbreakdown": {
"id": "politicalbreakdown",
"title": "Political Breakdown",
"tagline": "Politics from a personal perspective",
"info": "Political Breakdown is a new series that explores the political intersection of California and the nation. Each week hosts Scott Shafer and Marisa Lagos are joined with a new special guest to unpack politics -- with personality — and offer an insider’s glimpse at how politics happens.",
"airtime": "THU 6:30pm-7pm",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Political-Breakdown-2024-Podcast-Tile-703x703-1.jpg",
"imageAlt": "KQED Political Breakdown",
"officialWebsiteLink": "/podcasts/politicalbreakdown",
"meta": {
"site": "radio",
"source": "kqed",
"order": 5
},
"link": "/podcasts/politicalbreakdown",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/political-breakdown/id1327641087",
"amazon": "https://music.amazon.com/podcasts/e0c2d153-ad36-4c8d-901d-f1da6a724824/political-breakdown",
"npr": "https://www.npr.org/podcasts/572155894/political-breakdown",
"stitcher": "https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/kqed/political-breakdown",
"spotify": "https://open.spotify.com/show/07RVyIjIdk2WDuVehvBMoN",
"rss": "https://ww2.kqed.org/news/tag/political-breakdown/feed/podcast"
}
},
"possible": {
"id": "possible",
"title": "Possible",
"info": "Possible is hosted by entrepreneur Reid Hoffman and writer Aria Finger. Together in Possible, Hoffman and Finger lead enlightening discussions about building a brighter collective future. The show features interviews with visionary guests like Trevor Noah, Sam Altman and Janette Sadik-Khan. Possible paints an optimistic portrait of the world we can create through science, policy, business, art and our shared humanity. It asks: What if everything goes right for once? How can we get there? Each episode also includes a short fiction story generated by advanced AI GPT-4, serving as a thought-provoking springboard to speculate how humanity could leverage technology for good.",
"airtime": "SUN 2pm",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Possible-Podcast-Tile-360x360-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.possible.fm/",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "Possible"
},
"link": "/radio/program/possible",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/possible/id1677184070",
"spotify": "https://open.spotify.com/show/730YpdUSNlMyPQwNnyjp4k"
}
},
"pri-the-world": {
"id": "pri-the-world",
"title": "PRI's The World: Latest Edition",
"info": "Each weekday, host Marco Werman and his team of producers bring you the world's most interesting stories in an hour of radio that reminds us just how small our planet really is.",
"airtime": "MON-FRI 2pm-3pm",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/The-World-Podcast-Tile-360x360-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.pri.org/programs/the-world",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "PRI"
},
"link": "/radio/program/pri-the-world",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/pris-the-world-latest-edition/id278196007?mt=2",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/podcasts/News--Politics-Podcasts/PRIs-The-World-p24/",
"rss": "http://feeds.feedburner.com/pri/theworld"
}
},
"radiolab": {
"id": "radiolab",
"title": "Radiolab",
"info": "A two-time Peabody Award-winner, Radiolab is an investigation told through sounds and stories, and centered around one big idea. In the Radiolab world, information sounds like music and science and culture collide. Hosted by Jad Abumrad and Robert Krulwich, the show is designed for listeners who demand skepticism, but appreciate wonder. WNYC Studios is the producer of other leading podcasts including Freakonomics Radio, Death, Sex & Money, On the Media and many more.",
"airtime": "SUN 12am-1am, SAT 2pm-3pm",
"imageSrc": "https://ww2.kqed.org/radio/wp-content/uploads/sites/50/2018/04/radiolab1400.png",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.wnycstudios.org/shows/radiolab/",
"meta": {
"site": "science",
"source": "WNYC"
},
"link": "/radio/program/radiolab",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/radiolab/id152249110?mt=2",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/radio/RadioLab-p68032/",
"rss": "https://feeds.wnyc.org/radiolab"
}
},
"reveal": {
"id": "reveal",
"title": "Reveal",
"info": "Created by The Center for Investigative Reporting and PRX, Reveal is public radios first one-hour weekly radio show and podcast dedicated to investigative reporting. Credible, fact based and without a partisan agenda, Reveal combines the power and artistry of driveway moment storytelling with data-rich reporting on critically important issues. The result is stories that inform and inspire, arming our listeners with information to right injustices, hold the powerful accountable and improve lives.Reveal is hosted by Al Letson and showcases the award-winning work of CIR and newsrooms large and small across the nation. In a radio and podcast market crowded with choices, Reveal focuses on important and often surprising stories that illuminate the world for our listeners.",
"airtime": "SAT 4pm-5pm",
"imageSrc": "https://ww2.kqed.org/radio/wp-content/uploads/sites/50/2018/04/reveal300px.png",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.revealnews.org/episodes/",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "npr"
},
"link": "/radio/program/reveal",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/reveal/id886009669",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/radio/Reveal-p679597/",
"rss": "http://feeds.revealradio.org/revealpodcast"
}
},
"rightnowish": {
"id": "rightnowish",
"title": "Rightnowish",
"tagline": "Art is where you find it",
"info": "Rightnowish digs into life in the Bay Area right now… ish. Journalist Pendarvis Harshaw takes us to galleries painted on the sides of liquor stores in West Oakland. We'll dance in warehouses in the Bayview, make smoothies with kids in South Berkeley, and listen to classical music in a 1984 Cutlass Supreme in Richmond. Every week, Pen talks to movers and shakers about how the Bay Area shapes what they create, and how they shape the place we call home.",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Rightnowish-Podcast-Tile-500x500-1.jpg",
"imageAlt": "KQED Rightnowish with Pendarvis Harshaw",
"officialWebsiteLink": "/podcasts/rightnowish",
"meta": {
"site": "arts",
"source": "kqed",
"order": 16
},
"link": "/podcasts/rightnowish",
"subscribe": {
"npr": "https://www.npr.org/podcasts/721590300/rightnowish",
"rss": "https://ww2.kqed.org/arts/programs/rightnowish/feed/podcast",
"apple": "https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/rightnowish/id1482187648",
"stitcher": "https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/kqed/rightnowish",
"google": "https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9mZWVkcy5tZWdhcGhvbmUuZm0vS1FJTkMxMjU5MTY3NDc4",
"spotify": "https://open.spotify.com/show/7kEJuafTzTVan7B78ttz1I"
}
},
"science-friday": {
"id": "science-friday",
"title": "Science Friday",
"info": "Science Friday is a weekly science talk show, broadcast live over public radio stations nationwide. Each week, the show focuses on science topics that are in the news and tries to bring an educated, balanced discussion to bear on the scientific issues at hand. Panels of expert guests join host Ira Flatow, a veteran science journalist, to discuss science and to take questions from listeners during the call-in portion of the program.",
"airtime": "FRI 11am-1pm",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Science-Friday-Podcast-Tile-360x360-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.wnycstudios.org/shows/science-friday",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "npr"
},
"link": "/radio/program/science-friday",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewPodcast?s=143441&mt=2&id=73329284&at=11l79Y&ct=nprdirectory",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/radio/Science-Friday-p394/",
"rss": "http://feeds.wnyc.org/science-friday"
}
},
"snap-judgment": {
"id": "snap-judgment",
"title": "Snap Judgment",
"tagline": "Real stories with killer beats",
"info": "The Snap Judgment radio show and podcast mixes real stories with killer beats to produce cinematic, dramatic radio. Snap's musical brand of storytelling dares listeners to see the world through the eyes of another. This is storytelling... with a BEAT!! Snap first aired on public radio stations nationwide in July 2010. Today, Snap Judgment airs on over 450 public radio stations and is brought to the airwaves by KQED & PRX.",
"airtime": "SAT 1pm-2pm, 9pm-10pm",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/Snap-Judgment-Podcast-Tile-703x703-1.jpg",
"imageAlt": "KQED Snap Judgment",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://snapjudgment.org",
"meta": {
"site": "arts",
"source": "kqed",
"order": 4
},
"link": "https://snapjudgment.org",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/snap-judgment/id283657561",
"npr": "https://www.npr.org/podcasts/449018144/snap-judgment",
"stitcher": "https://www.pandora.com/podcast/snap-judgment/PC:241?source=stitcher-sunset",
"spotify": "https://open.spotify.com/show/3Cct7ZWmxHNAtLgBTqjC5v",
"rss": "https://snap.feed.snapjudgment.org/"
}
},
"soldout": {
"id": "soldout",
"title": "SOLD OUT: Rethinking Housing in America",
"tagline": "A new future for housing",
"info": "Sold Out: Rethinking Housing in America",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Sold-Out-Podcast-Tile-703x703-1.jpg",
"imageAlt": "KQED Sold Out: Rethinking Housing in America",
"officialWebsiteLink": "/podcasts/soldout",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "kqed",
"order": 13
},
"link": "/podcasts/soldout",
"subscribe": {
"npr": "https://www.npr.org/podcasts/911586047/s-o-l-d-o-u-t-a-new-future-for-housing",
"apple": "https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/introducing-sold-out-rethinking-housing-in-america/id1531354937",
"rss": "https://feeds.megaphone.fm/soldout",
"spotify": "https://open.spotify.com/show/38dTBSk2ISFoPiyYNoKn1X",
"stitcher": "https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/kqed/sold-out-rethinking-housing-in-america",
"tunein": "https://tunein.com/radio/SOLD-OUT-Rethinking-Housing-in-America-p1365871/"
}
},
"spooked": {
"id": "spooked",
"title": "Spooked",
"tagline": "True-life supernatural stories",
"info": "",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/Spooked-Podcast-Tile-703x703-1.jpg",
"imageAlt": "KQED Spooked",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://spookedpodcast.org/",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "kqed",
"order": 7
},
"link": "https://spookedpodcast.org/",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/spooked/id1279361017",
"npr": "https://www.npr.org/podcasts/549547848/snap-judgment-presents-spooked",
"spotify": "https://open.spotify.com/show/76571Rfl3m7PLJQZKQIGCT",
"rss": "https://feeds.simplecast.com/TBotaapn"
}
},
"tech-nation": {
"id": "tech-nation",
"title": "Tech Nation Radio Podcast",
"info": "Tech Nation is a weekly public radio program, hosted by Dr. Moira Gunn. Founded in 1993, it has grown from a simple interview show to a multi-faceted production, featuring conversations with noted technology and science leaders, and a weekly science and technology-related commentary.",
"airtime": "FRI 10pm",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Tech-Nation-Radio-Podcast-Tile-360x360-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "http://technation.podomatic.com/",
"meta": {
"site": "science",
"source": "Tech Nation Media"
},
"link": "/radio/program/tech-nation",
"subscribe": {
"rss": "https://technation.podomatic.com/rss2.xml"
}
},
"ted-radio-hour": {
"id": "ted-radio-hour",
"title": "TED Radio Hour",
"info": "The TED Radio Hour is a journey through fascinating ideas, astonishing inventions, fresh approaches to old problems, and new ways to think and create.",
"airtime": "SUN 3pm-4pm, SAT 10pm-11pm",
"imageSrc": "https://ww2.kqed.org/radio/wp-content/uploads/sites/50/2018/04/tedRadioHour.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.npr.org/programs/ted-radio-hour/?showDate=2018-06-22",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "npr"
},
"link": "/radio/program/ted-radio-hour",
"subscribe": {
"npr": "https://rpb3r.app.goo.gl/8vsS",
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewPodcast?s=143441&mt=2&id=523121474&at=11l79Y&ct=nprdirectory",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/radio/TED-Radio-Hour-p418021/",
"rss": "https://feeds.npr.org/510298/podcast.xml"
}
},
"thebay": {
"id": "thebay",
"title": "The Bay",
"tagline": "Local news to keep you rooted",
"info": "Host Devin Katayama walks you through the biggest story of the day with reporters and newsmakers.",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/The-Bay-Podcast-Tile-703x703-1.jpg",
"imageAlt": "KQED The Bay",
"officialWebsiteLink": "/podcasts/thebay",
"meta": {
"site": "radio",
"source": "kqed",
"order": 2
},
"link": "/podcasts/thebay",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-bay/id1350043452",
"amazon": "https://music.amazon.com/podcasts/d800ea4c-7a2c-42f2-b861-edaf78a5db0b/the-bay",
"npr": "https://www.npr.org/podcasts/586725995/the-bay",
"stitcher": "https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/kqed/the-bay",
"spotify": "https://open.spotify.com/show/4BIKBKIujizLHlIlBNaAqQ",
"rss": "https://feeds.megaphone.fm/KQINC8259786327"
}
},
"thelatest": {
"id": "thelatest",
"title": "The Latest",
"tagline": "Trusted local news in real time",
"info": "",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/The-Latest-2025-Podcast-Tile-703x703-1.jpg",
"imageAlt": "KQED The Latest",
"officialWebsiteLink": "/thelatest",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "kqed",
"order": 6
},
"link": "/thelatest",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-latest-from-kqed/id1197721799",
"npr": "https://www.npr.org/podcasts/1257949365/the-latest-from-k-q-e-d",
"spotify": "https://open.spotify.com/show/5KIIXMgM9GTi5AepwOYvIZ?si=bd3053fec7244dba",
"rss": "https://feeds.megaphone.fm/KQINC9137121918"
}
},
"theleap": {
"id": "theleap",
"title": "The Leap",
"tagline": "What if you closed your eyes, and jumped?",
"info": "Stories about people making dramatic, risky changes, told by award-winning public radio reporter Judy Campbell.",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/The-Leap-Podcast-Tile-703x703-1.jpg",
"imageAlt": "KQED The Leap",
"officialWebsiteLink": "/podcasts/theleap",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "kqed",
"order": 17
},
"link": "/podcasts/theleap",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-leap/id1046668171",
"npr": "https://www.npr.org/podcasts/447248267/the-leap",
"stitcher": "https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/kqed/the-leap",
"spotify": "https://open.spotify.com/show/3sSlVHHzU0ytLwuGs1SD1U",
"rss": "https://ww2.kqed.org/news/programs/the-leap/feed/podcast"
}
},
"the-moth-radio-hour": {
"id": "the-moth-radio-hour",
"title": "The Moth Radio Hour",
"info": "Since its launch in 1997, The Moth has presented thousands of true stories, told live and without notes, to standing-room-only crowds worldwide. Moth storytellers stand alone, under a spotlight, with only a microphone and a roomful of strangers. The storyteller and the audience embark on a high-wire act of shared experience which is both terrifying and exhilarating. Since 2008, The Moth podcast has featured many of our favorite stories told live on Moth stages around the country. For information on all of our programs and live events, visit themoth.org.",
"airtime": "SAT 8pm-9pm and SUN 11am-12pm",
"imageSrc": "https://ww2.kqed.org/radio/wp-content/uploads/sites/50/2018/04/theMoth.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://themoth.org/",
"meta": {
"site": "arts",
"source": "prx"
},
"link": "/radio/program/the-moth-radio-hour",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/the-moth-podcast/id275699983?mt=2",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/radio/The-Moth-p273888/",
"rss": "http://feeds.themoth.org/themothpodcast"
}
},
"the-new-yorker-radio-hour": {
"id": "the-new-yorker-radio-hour",
"title": "The New Yorker Radio Hour",
"info": "The New Yorker Radio Hour is a weekly program presented by the magazine's editor, David Remnick, and produced by WNYC Studios and The New Yorker. Each episode features a diverse mix of interviews, profiles, storytelling, and an occasional burst of humor inspired by the magazine, and shaped by its writers, artists, and editors. This isn't a radio version of a magazine, but something all its own, reflecting the rich possibilities of audio storytelling and conversation. Theme music for the show was composed and performed by Merrill Garbus of tUnE-YArDs.",
"airtime": "SAT 10am-11am",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/The-New-Yorker-Podcast-Tile-360x360-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.wnycstudios.org/shows/tnyradiohour",
"meta": {
"site": "arts",
"source": "WNYC"
},
"link": "/radio/program/the-new-yorker-radio-hour",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/id1050430296",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/podcasts/WNYC-Podcasts/New-Yorker-Radio-Hour-p803804/",
"rss": "https://feeds.feedburner.com/newyorkerradiohour"
}
},
"the-sam-sanders-show": {
"id": "the-sam-sanders-show",
"title": "The Sam Sanders Show",
"info": "One of public radio's most dynamic voices, Sam Sanders helped launch The NPR Politics Podcast and hosted NPR's hit show It's Been A Minute. Now, the award-winning host returns with something brand new, The Sam Sanders Show. Every week, Sam Sanders and friends dig into the culture that shapes our lives: what's driving the biggest trends, how artists really think, and even the memes you can't stop scrolling past. Sam is beloved for his way of unpacking the world and bringing you up close to fresh currents and engaging conversations. The Sam Sanders Show is smart, funny and always a good time.",
"airtime": "FRI 12-1pm AND SAT 11am-12pm",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/The-Sam-Sanders-Show-Podcast-Tile-400x400-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.kcrw.com/shows/the-sam-sanders-show/latest",
"meta": {
"site": "arts",
"source": "KCRW"
},
"link": "https://www.kcrw.com/shows/the-sam-sanders-show/latest",
"subscribe": {
"rss": "https://feed.cdnstream1.com/zjb/feed/download/ac/28/59/ac28594c-e1d0-4231-8728-61865cdc80e8.xml"
}
},
"the-splendid-table": {
"id": "the-splendid-table",
"title": "The Splendid Table",
"info": "\u003cem>The Splendid Table\u003c/em> hosts our nation's conversations about cooking, sustainability and food culture.",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/The-Splendid-Table-Podcast-Tile-360x360-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.splendidtable.org/",
"airtime": "SUN 10-11 pm",
"meta": {
"site": "radio",
"source": "npr"
},
"link": "/radio/program/the-splendid-table"
},
"this-american-life": {
"id": "this-american-life",
"title": "This American Life",
"info": "This American Life is a weekly public radio show, heard by 2.2 million people on more than 500 stations. Another 2.5 million people download the weekly podcast. It is hosted by Ira Glass, produced in collaboration with Chicago Public Media, delivered to stations by PRX The Public Radio Exchange, and has won all of the major broadcasting awards.",
"airtime": "SAT 12pm-1pm, 7pm-8pm",
"imageSrc": "https://ww2.kqed.org/radio/wp-content/uploads/sites/50/2018/04/thisAmericanLife.png",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.thisamericanlife.org/",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "wbez"
},
"link": "/radio/program/this-american-life",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewPodcast?s=143441&mt=2&id=201671138&at=11l79Y&ct=nprdirectory",
"rss": "https://www.thisamericanlife.org/podcast/rss.xml"
}
},
"tinydeskradio": {
"id": "tinydeskradio",
"title": "Tiny Desk Radio",
"info": "We're bringing the best of Tiny Desk to the airwaves, only on public radio.",
"airtime": "SUN 8pm and SAT 9pm",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/300x300-For-Member-Station-Logo-Tiny-Desk-Radio-@2x.png",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.npr.org/series/g-s1-52030/tiny-desk-radio",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "npr"
},
"link": "/radio/program/tinydeskradio",
"subscribe": {
"rss": "https://feeds.npr.org/g-s1-52030/rss.xml"
}
},
"wait-wait-dont-tell-me": {
"id": "wait-wait-dont-tell-me",
"title": "Wait Wait... Don't Tell Me!",
"info": "Peter Sagal and Bill Kurtis host the weekly NPR News quiz show alongside some of the best and brightest news and entertainment personalities.",
"airtime": "SUN 10am-11am, SAT 11am-12pm, SAT 6pm-7pm",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Wait-Wait-Podcast-Tile-300x300-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.npr.org/programs/wait-wait-dont-tell-me/",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "npr"
},
"link": "/radio/program/wait-wait-dont-tell-me",
"subscribe": {
"npr": "https://rpb3r.app.goo.gl/Xogv",
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewPodcast?s=143441&mt=2&id=121493804&at=11l79Y&ct=nprdirectory",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/radio/Wait-Wait-Dont-Tell-Me-p46/",
"rss": "https://feeds.npr.org/344098539/podcast.xml"
}
},
"weekend-edition-saturday": {
"id": "weekend-edition-saturday",
"title": "Weekend Edition Saturday",
"info": "Weekend Edition Saturday wraps up the week's news and offers a mix of analysis and features on a wide range of topics, including arts, sports, entertainment, and human interest stories. The two-hour program is hosted by NPR's Peabody Award-winning Scott Simon.",
"airtime": "SAT 5am-10am",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Weekend-Edition-Podcast-Tile-360x360-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.npr.org/programs/weekend-edition-saturday/",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "npr"
},
"link": "/radio/program/weekend-edition-saturday"
},
"weekend-edition-sunday": {
"id": "weekend-edition-sunday",
"title": "Weekend Edition Sunday",
"info": "Weekend Edition Sunday features interviews with newsmakers, artists, scientists, politicians, musicians, writers, theologians and historians. The program has covered news events from Nelson Mandela's 1990 release from a South African prison to the capture of Saddam Hussein.",
"airtime": "SUN 5am-10am",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Weekend-Edition-Podcast-Tile-360x360-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.npr.org/programs/weekend-edition-sunday/",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "npr"
},
"link": "/radio/program/weekend-edition-sunday"
}
},
"racesReducer": {},
"racesGenElectionReducer": {},
"racesGenElection2026Reducer": {},
"racesGenElection2026PresidentialReducer": {},
"radioSchedulesReducer": {},
"listsReducer": {
"posts/?tag=bay-curious-prop-fest,prop-fest&queryId=106f3a9a435": {
"isFetching": false,
"latestQuery": {
"from": 0,
"size": 10
},
"vitalsOnly": false,
"totalRequested": 10,
"isLoading": false,
"isLoadingMore": true,
"total": {
"value": 57,
"relation": "eq"
},
"items": [
"news_12102167",
"news_12102004",
"news_12102140",
"news_12101418",
"news_12101275",
"news_12100660",
"news_12101928",
"news_12102150",
"news_12101434",
"news_12100623"
],
"complete": true
}
},
"recallGuideReducer": {
"intros": {},
"policy": {},
"candidates": {}
},
"savedArticleReducer": {
"articles": [],
"status": {}
},
"newslettersReducer": {
"isFetching": false,
"fetchFailed": false,
"hasFetched": false,
"newsletters": {},
"isSubscribing": false,
"isUnsubscribing": false,
"subscribedNewsletters": {}
},
"termsReducer": {
"about": {
"name": "About",
"type": "terms",
"id": "about",
"slug": "about",
"link": "/about",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"arts": {
"name": "Arts & Culture",
"grouping": [
"arts",
"pop",
"trulyca"
],
"description": "KQED Arts provides daily in-depth coverage of the Bay Area's music, art, film, performing arts, literature and arts news, as well as cultural commentary and criticism.",
"type": "terms",
"id": "arts",
"slug": "arts",
"link": "/arts",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"artschool": {
"name": "Art School",
"parent": "arts",
"type": "terms",
"id": "artschool",
"slug": "artschool",
"link": "/artschool",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"bayareabites": {
"name": "KQED food",
"grouping": [
"food",
"bayareabites",
"checkplease"
],
"parent": "food",
"type": "terms",
"id": "bayareabites",
"slug": "bayareabites",
"link": "/food",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"bayareahiphop": {
"name": "Bay Area Hiphop",
"type": "terms",
"id": "bayareahiphop",
"slug": "bayareahiphop",
"link": "/bayareahiphop",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"campaign21": {
"name": "Campaign 21",
"type": "terms",
"id": "campaign21",
"slug": "campaign21",
"link": "/campaign21",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"careers": {
"name": "Careers",
"type": "terms",
"id": "careers",
"slug": "careers",
"link": "/careers",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"checkplease": {
"name": "KQED food",
"grouping": [
"food",
"bayareabites",
"checkplease"
],
"parent": "food",
"type": "terms",
"id": "checkplease",
"slug": "checkplease",
"link": "/food",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"education": {
"name": "Education",
"grouping": [
"education"
],
"type": "terms",
"id": "education",
"slug": "education",
"link": "/education",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"elections": {
"name": "Elections",
"type": "terms",
"id": "elections",
"slug": "elections",
"link": "/elections",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"events": {
"name": "Events",
"type": "terms",
"id": "events",
"slug": "events",
"link": "/events",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"event": {
"name": "Event",
"alias": "events",
"type": "terms",
"id": "event",
"slug": "event",
"link": "/event",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"filmschoolshorts": {
"name": "Film School Shorts",
"type": "terms",
"id": "filmschoolshorts",
"slug": "filmschoolshorts",
"link": "/filmschoolshorts",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"food": {
"name": "KQED food",
"grouping": [
"food",
"bayareabites",
"checkplease"
],
"type": "terms",
"id": "food",
"slug": "food",
"link": "/food",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"forum": {
"name": "Forum",
"relatedContentQuery": "posts/forum?",
"parent": "news",
"type": "terms",
"id": "forum",
"slug": "forum",
"link": "/forum",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"futureofyou": {
"name": "Future of You",
"grouping": [
"science",
"futureofyou"
],
"parent": "science",
"type": "terms",
"id": "futureofyou",
"slug": "futureofyou",
"link": "/futureofyou",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"jpepinheart": {
"name": "KQED food",
"relatedContentQuery": "posts/food,bayareabites,checkplease",
"parent": "food",
"type": "terms",
"id": "jpepinheart",
"slug": "jpepinheart",
"link": "/food",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"liveblog": {
"name": "Live Blog",
"type": "terms",
"id": "liveblog",
"slug": "liveblog",
"link": "/liveblog",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"livetv": {
"name": "Live TV",
"parent": "tv",
"type": "terms",
"id": "livetv",
"slug": "livetv",
"link": "/livetv",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"lowdown": {
"name": "The Lowdown",
"relatedContentQuery": "posts/lowdown?",
"parent": "news",
"type": "terms",
"id": "lowdown",
"slug": "lowdown",
"link": "/lowdown",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"mindshift": {
"name": "Mindshift",
"parent": "news",
"description": "MindShift explores the future of education by highlighting the innovative – and sometimes counterintuitive – ways educators and parents are helping all children succeed.",
"type": "terms",
"id": "mindshift",
"slug": "mindshift",
"link": "/mindshift",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"news": {
"name": "News",
"grouping": [
"news",
"forum"
],
"type": "terms",
"id": "news",
"slug": "news",
"link": "/news",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"newsletters": {
"name": "newsletters",
"type": "terms",
"id": "newsletters",
"slug": "newsletters",
"link": "/newsletters",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"perspectives": {
"name": "Perspectives",
"parent": "radio",
"type": "terms",
"id": "perspectives",
"slug": "perspectives",
"link": "/perspectives",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"podcasts": {
"name": "Podcasts",
"type": "terms",
"id": "podcasts",
"slug": "podcasts",
"link": "/podcasts",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"pop": {
"name": "Pop",
"parent": "arts",
"type": "terms",
"id": "pop",
"slug": "pop",
"link": "/pop",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"pressroom": {
"name": "Pressroom",
"type": "terms",
"id": "pressroom",
"slug": "pressroom",
"link": "/pressroom",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"quest": {
"name": "Quest",
"parent": "science",
"type": "terms",
"id": "quest",
"slug": "quest",
"link": "/quest",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"radio": {
"name": "Radio",
"grouping": [
"forum",
"perspectives"
],
"description": "Listen to KQED Public Radio – home of Forum and The California Report – on 88.5 FM in San Francisco, 89.3 FM in Sacramento, 88.3 FM in Santa Rosa and 88.1 FM in Martinez.",
"type": "terms",
"id": "radio",
"slug": "radio",
"link": "/radio",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"root": {
"name": "KQED",
"image": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"imageWidth": 1200,
"imageHeight": 630,
"headData": {
"title": "KQED | News, Radio, Podcasts, TV | Public Media for Northern California",
"description": "KQED provides public radio, television, and independent reporting on issues that matter to the Bay Area. We’re the NPR and PBS member station for Northern California."
},
"type": "terms",
"id": "root",
"slug": "root",
"link": "/root",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"science": {
"name": "Science",
"grouping": [
"science",
"futureofyou"
],
"description": "KQED Science brings you award-winning science and environment coverage from the Bay Area and beyond.",
"type": "terms",
"id": "science",
"slug": "science",
"link": "/science",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"stateofhealth": {
"name": "State of Health",
"parent": "science",
"type": "terms",
"id": "stateofhealth",
"slug": "stateofhealth",
"link": "/stateofhealth",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"support": {
"name": "Support",
"type": "terms",
"id": "support",
"slug": "support",
"link": "/support",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"thedolist": {
"name": "The Do List",
"parent": "arts",
"type": "terms",
"id": "thedolist",
"slug": "thedolist",
"link": "/thedolist",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"trulyca": {
"name": "Truly CA",
"grouping": [
"arts",
"pop",
"trulyca"
],
"parent": "arts",
"type": "terms",
"id": "trulyca",
"slug": "trulyca",
"link": "/trulyca",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"tv": {
"name": "TV",
"type": "terms",
"id": "tv",
"slug": "tv",
"link": "/tv",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"voterguide": {
"name": "Voter Guide",
"parent": "elections",
"alias": "elections",
"type": "terms",
"id": "voterguide",
"slug": "voterguide",
"link": "/voterguide",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"guiaelectoral": {
"name": "Guia Electoral",
"parent": "elections",
"alias": "elections",
"type": "terms",
"id": "guiaelectoral",
"slug": "guiaelectoral",
"link": "/guiaelectoral",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"source_news_12102167": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "source_news_12102167",
"meta": {
"override": true
},
"name": "Prop Fest 2026",
"link": "https://www.kqed.org/propfest",
"isLoading": false
},
"source_news_12102004": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "source_news_12102004",
"meta": {
"override": true
},
"name": "Prop Fest 2026",
"link": "https://www.kqed.org/propfest",
"isLoading": false
},
"source_news_12102140": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "source_news_12102140",
"meta": {
"override": true
},
"name": "Prop Fest 2026",
"link": "https://www.kqed.org/propfest",
"isLoading": false
},
"source_news_12101418": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "source_news_12101418",
"meta": {
"override": true
},
"name": "Prop Fest 2026",
"link": "http://kqed.org/propfest",
"isLoading": false
},
"source_news_12101275": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "source_news_12101275",
"meta": {
"override": true
},
"name": "Prop Fest 2026",
"link": "http://kqed.org/propfest",
"isLoading": false
},
"source_news_12100660": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "source_news_12100660",
"meta": {
"override": true
},
"name": "Prop Fest 2026",
"link": "http://kqed.org/propfest",
"isLoading": false
},
"source_news_12101928": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "source_news_12101928",
"meta": {
"override": true
},
"name": "Prop Fest 2026",
"link": "http://kqed.org/propfest",
"isLoading": false
},
"source_news_12102150": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "source_news_12102150",
"meta": {
"override": true
},
"name": "Prop Fest 2026",
"link": "https://www.kqed.org/propfest",
"isLoading": false
},
"source_news_12101434": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "source_news_12101434",
"meta": {
"override": true
},
"name": "Prop Fest 2026",
"link": "http://kqed.org/propfest",
"isLoading": false
},
"source_news_12100623": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "source_news_12100623",
"meta": {
"override": true
},
"name": "Prop Fest 2026",
"link": "https://www.kqed.org/propfest",
"isLoading": false
},
"news_33523": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_33523",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "33523",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "Bay Curious",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "program",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "Bay Curious Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 33540,
"slug": "bay-curious",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/program/bay-curious"
},
"news_34552": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_34552",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "34552",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"name": "baycurious",
"slug": "baycurious",
"taxonomy": "program",
"description": null,
"featImg": null,
"headData": {
"title": "baycurious | KQED News",
"description": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogDescription": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"twDescription": null,
"twImgId": null
},
"ttid": 34569,
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/program/baycurious"
},
"news_17986": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_17986",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "17986",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2016/11/BayCuriousLogoFinal01-e1493662037229.png",
"name": "Bay Curious",
"description": "\u003ch2>A podcast exploring the Bay Area one question at a time\u003c/h2>\r\n\r\n\u003caside>\r\n\u003cdiv style=\"width: 100%; padding-right: 20px;\">\r\n\r\nKQED’s \u003cstrong>Bay Curious\u003c/strong> gets to the bottom of the mysteries — both profound and peculiar — that give the Bay Area its unique identity. And we’ll do it with your help! You ask the questions. You decide what Bay Curious investigates. And you join us on the journey to find the answers.\r\n\u003cbr />\r\n\u003cspan class=\"alignleft\">\u003ca href=\"https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/id1172473406\">\u003cimg width=\"75px\" src=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2016/11/DownloadOniTunes_100x100.png\">\u003c/a> \u003ca href=\"https://goo.gl/app/playmusic?ibi=com.google.PlayMusic&isi=691797987&ius=googleplaymusic&link=https://play.google.com/music/m/Ipi2mc5aqfen4nr2daayiziiyuy?t%3DBay_Curious\">\u003cimg width=\"75px\" src=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2016/11/Google_Play_100x100.png\">\u003c/a>\u003c/span>\u003c/div>\r\n\u003c/aside> \r\n\u003ch2>What's your question?\u003c/h2>\r\n\u003cdiv id=\"huxq6\" class=\"curiosity-module\" data-pym-src=\"//modules.wearehearken.com/kqed/curiosity_modules/133\">\u003c/div>\r\n\u003cscript src=\"//assets.wearehearken.com/production/thirdparty/p.m.js\">\u003c/script>\r\n\u003ch2>Bay Curious monthly newsletter\u003c/h2>\r\nWe're launching it soon! \u003ca href=\"https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSdEtzbyNbSQkRHCCAkKhoGiAl3Bd0zWxhk0ZseJ1KH_o_ZDjQ/viewform\" target=\"_blank\">Sign up\u003c/a> so you don't miss it when it drops.\r\n",
"taxonomy": "series",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": "A podcast exploring the Bay Area one question at a time KQED’s Bay Curious gets to the bottom of the mysteries — both profound and peculiar — that give the Bay Area its unique identity. And we’ll do it with your help! You ask the questions. You decide what Bay Curious investigates. And you join us on the journey to find the answers. What's your question? Bay Curious monthly newsletter We're launching it soon! Sign up so you don't miss it when it drops.",
"title": "Bay Curious Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 18020,
"slug": "baycurious",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/series/baycurious"
},
"news_19906": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_19906",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "19906",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "Environment",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "category",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "Environment Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 19923,
"slug": "environment",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/category/environment"
},
"news_6266": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_6266",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "6266",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "Housing",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "category",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "Housing Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 6290,
"slug": "housing",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/category/housing"
},
"news_8": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_8",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "8",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "News",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "category",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "News Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 8,
"slug": "news",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/category/news"
},
"news_33520": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_33520",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "33520",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "Podcast",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "category",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "Podcast Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 33537,
"slug": "podcast",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/category/podcast"
},
"news_4248": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_4248",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "4248",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "ceqa",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "ceqa Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 4267,
"slug": "ceqa",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/ceqa"
},
"news_20023": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_20023",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "20023",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "environment",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "environment Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 20040,
"slug": "environment",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/environment"
},
"news_1775": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_1775",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "1775",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "housing",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "housing Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 1790,
"slug": "housing",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/housing"
},
"news_28645": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_28645",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "28645",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "prop fest",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "prop fest Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 28662,
"slug": "prop-fest",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/prop-fest"
},
"news_22598": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_22598",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "22598",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "The Bay",
"description": "\u003cimg class=\"alignnone size-medium wp-image-11638190\" src=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/02/TheBay_1200x6301.png\" alt=\"\" />\r\n\u003cbr/>\r\n\r\nEvery good story starts local. So that’s where we start. \u003ci>The Bay\u003c/i> is storytelling for daily news. KQED host Devin Katayama talks with reporters to help us make sense of what’s happening in the Bay Area. One story. One conversation. One idea.\r\n\r\n\u003cstrong>Subscribe to The Bay:\u003c/strong>\r\n\r\n\u003ca href=\"https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/the-bay/id1350043452?mt=2\">\u003cimg src=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/01/Listen_on_Apple_Podcasts_sRGB_US-e1515635079510.png\" />\u003c/a>",
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": "Every good story starts local. So that’s where we start. The Bay is storytelling for daily news. KQED host Devin Katayama talks with reporters to help us make sense of what’s happening in the Bay Area. One story. One conversation. One idea. Subscribe to The Bay:",
"title": "The Bay Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 22615,
"slug": "the-bay",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/the-bay"
},
"news_457": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_457",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "457",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "Health",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "category",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "Health Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 16998,
"slug": "health",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/category/health"
},
"news_35118": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_35118",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "35118",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"name": "health care",
"slug": "health-care",
"taxonomy": "tag",
"description": null,
"featImg": null,
"headData": {
"title": "health care | KQED News",
"description": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogDescription": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"twDescription": null,
"twImgId": null
},
"ttid": 35135,
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/health-care"
},
"news_33812": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_33812",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "33812",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "Interests",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "Interests Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 33829,
"slug": "interests",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/interests"
},
"news_1758": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_1758",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "1758",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "Economy",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "category",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": "Full coverage of the economy",
"title": "Economy Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 2648,
"slug": "economy",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/category/economy"
},
"news_13": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_13",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "13",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"name": "Politics",
"slug": "politics",
"taxonomy": "category",
"description": null,
"featImg": null,
"headData": {
"title": "Politics | KQED News",
"description": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogDescription": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"twDescription": null,
"twImgId": null
},
"ttid": 13,
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/category/politics"
},
"news_423": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_423",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "423",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "taxes",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "taxes Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 432,
"slug": "taxes",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/taxes"
},
"news_28779": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_28779",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "28779",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "The Bay",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "program",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": "The Bay is a daily news and culture program from KQED that covers the latest headlines, trends, and stories that matter to the Bay Area.",
"title": "The Bay Area Archives | KQED",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 28796,
"slug": "the-bay",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/program/the-bay"
},
"news_31795": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_31795",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "31795",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "California",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "category",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "California Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 31812,
"slug": "california",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/category/california"
},
"news_33738": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_33738",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "33738",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "California",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "interest",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "California Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 33755,
"slug": "california",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/interest/california"
},
"news_33734": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_33734",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "33734",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "Local Politics",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "interest",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "Local Politics Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 33751,
"slug": "local-politics",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/interest/local-politics"
},
"news_37055": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_37055",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "37055",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"name": "billionaire tax",
"slug": "billionaire-tax",
"taxonomy": "tag",
"description": null,
"featImg": null,
"headData": {
"title": "billionaire tax | KQED News",
"description": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogDescription": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"twDescription": null,
"twImgId": null
},
"ttid": 37072,
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/billionaire-tax"
},
"news_37131": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_37131",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "37131",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"name": "research",
"slug": "research",
"taxonomy": "tag",
"description": null,
"featImg": null,
"headData": {
"title": "research | KQED News",
"description": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogDescription": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"twDescription": null,
"twImgId": null
},
"ttid": 37148,
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/research"
},
"news_18426": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_18426",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "18426",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "Bay Curious",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "Bay Curious Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 18460,
"slug": "bay-curious",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/bay-curious"
},
"news_17968": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_17968",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "17968",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"name": "Politics",
"slug": "politics",
"taxonomy": "tag",
"description": null,
"featImg": null,
"headData": {
"title": "Politics | KQED News",
"description": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogDescription": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"twDescription": null,
"twImgId": null
},
"ttid": 18002,
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/politics"
},
"news_21509": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_21509",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "21509",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "recall",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "recall Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 21526,
"slug": "recall",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/recall"
}
},
"userPermissionsReducer": {
"wpLoggedIn": false
},
"eventsReducer": {},
"fssReducer": {},
"tvDailyScheduleReducer": {},
"tvWeeklyScheduleReducer": {},
"tvPrimetimeScheduleReducer": {},
"tvMonthlyScheduleReducer": {},
"userAccountReducer": {
"user": {
"email": null,
"emailStatus": "EMAIL_UNVALIDATED",
"loggedStatus": "LOGGED_OUT",
"loggingChecked": false,
"articles": [],
"firstName": null,
"lastName": null,
"phoneNumber": null,
"fetchingMembership": false,
"membershipError": false,
"memberships": [
{
"id": null,
"startDate": null,
"firstName": null,
"lastName": null,
"familyNumber": null,
"memberNumber": null,
"memberSince": null,
"expirationDate": null,
"pfsEligible": false,
"isSustaining": false,
"membershipLevel": "Prospect",
"membershipStatus": "Non Member",
"lastGiftDate": null,
"renewalDate": null,
"lastDonationAmount": null
}
]
},
"authModal": {
"isOpen": false,
"view": "LANDING_VIEW"
},
"error": null
},
"youthMediaReducer": {},
"checkPleaseReducer": {
"filterData": {
"region": {
"key": "Restaurant Region",
"filters": [
"Any Region"
]
},
"cuisine": {
"key": "Restaurant Cuisine",
"filters": [
"Any Cuisine"
]
}
},
"restaurantDataById": {},
"restaurantIdsSorted": [],
"error": null
},
"userAgentReducer": {
"userAgent": "Mozilla/5.0 AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko; compatible; ClaudeBot/1.0; +claudebot@anthropic.com)",
"isBot": true
},
"requestOutcomesReducer": {
"notFound": []
},
"navPromosReducer": {
"isFetching": false,
"fetchFailed": false,
"hasFetched": true,
"promos": {
"news": {
"name": "2026 Voter Guide",
"link": "/voterguide",
"imageURL": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/10/Nav-News-Nov2026ElectionCoverage@2x-7bd4aad4.png",
"description": "Get informed in minutes with our Voter Guide for California’s November 3 election."
},
"podcasts-radio": {},
"video-tv": {},
"events": {},
"support": {}
}
}
}