UCGPC Voter Guide for Midterm Elections 2022
The analysis provided in this year's voter guide was done by an intercampus UCGPC legislative committee led by our legislative affairs director, Yaritza Gonzalez, a UCLA Policy Grad Student. Committee members include the UCGPC council member and UC Davis GSA external vice president, Himali Thakur, as well as two legislative directors at UC Davis' GSA, Sara Abou-Adas and Richard Tran. As part of the democratic process at UCGPC, ex officio council members voted to endorse proposition positions that will be beneficial and reflective of UC graduate student interests.
We at UCGPC hope that our legislative team's analysis helps educate the grad student community about these ballot propositions.
Prop 1: Abortion
Prop 1 provides a state constitutional right to reproductive freedom, including the right to an abortion.
Analysis:
The CA constitution would be changed to expressly include existing rights to reproductive freedom, such as the right to choose whether or not to have an abortion and use contraceptives. The state currently can only restrict abortions when needed to meet certain state interests such as public health and safety.
Vote Recommendation: Yes
By: Sara Abou-Adas, UC Davis GSA Legislative Director & Yaritza Gonzalez, UCGPC Legislative Affairs Director
Prop 26: Sport Betting at American Indian gaming casinos
Prop 26 legalizes sports betting at American Indian gaming casinos and licensed racetracks in California.
Analysis:
Illegal sports betting will transition to regulated settings. Nearly 80 tribes endorsed Prop 26 because it will protect tribal self-sufficiency.
Vote Recommendation: Yes
By: Himali Thakur, UCGPC Council Member & UC Davis GSA External Vice President
Prop 27: Online Gambling
Prop 27 legalized mobile sports betting and dedicates revenue to the CA Solutions to Homelessness and Mental Health Support Account & the Tribal Economic Development Account.
Analysis:
Even though taxes for Prop 27 are supposed to advance homeless programs, write-offs will enable companies to avoid this taxation. It will not create jobs within CA. It encroaches on tribal sovereignty.
Vote Recommendation: No
By: Himali Thakur, UCGPC Council Member & UC Davis GSA External Vice President
Prop 28: Education
Prop 28 requires funding for K-12 art and music education
Analysis:
Prop 28 is being endorsed so that the arts economy of California, which is a booming industry, can have encouragement at the K-12 education level. There is no significant effect on the state budget.
Vote Recommendation: Yes
By: Himali Thakur, UCGPC Council Member & UC Davis GSA External Vice President
Prop 29: Healthcare
Prop 29 enacts staffing requirements, reporting requirements, ownership disclosure, and closing requirements for chronic dialysis clinics
Analysis:
This proposition has ben up before multiple times with the slight revisions (Prop 23) requiring a licensed physician to attend a dialysis clinic. After emailing with UCLA and talking to people in healthcare, this is a way to extort money out of vulnerable communities. The dialysis procedure is a simple (relative to other acting duties of a health care professional) to do and doesn't need a dedicated a professional to stay. In a sense, it is wasted time for the professional for other duties and is a way of putting costs to the taxpayer.
Vote Recommendation: No
By: Richard Tran, UC Davis GSA Legislative Director
Prop 30: Taxes and Transportation
Prop 30 increases the tax on personal income above $2 million by 1.75% and dedicates revenue to zero-emission vehicle projects and wildfire prevention programs
There are immediate concerns that the taxes going towards "zero emission vehicles" will not go towards the right zero emission vehicles. While electric cars are a start, they are more efficient ways of traveling such as e-bikes or e-scooters. There is no specification on how it will go towards micro-mobility options. They are also pressing concerns that taxi services (such as Lyft) are subsidizing electric vehicle costs to the voter. Lyft has already spent an exorbitant amount of funding (45 million) to support the initiative. It is good that it benefits fire surpression, but I'm not a backer for how that implementation towards just EV funding. Students are not directly affected (since the taxes are implemented to the rich), but there's also no clear mode of action of how it can benefit us from an environmental standpoint.
https://lao.ca.gov/BallotAnalysis/Proposition?number=30&year=2022
After reading the link before me, the addition of this spending might limit other spending (such as education) to make room for uncertain spending measures, while it says EV and wildfire, it remains unclear how this can benefit the state or anything climate related.
Vote Recommendation: Yes from the intercampus council
Analysis by: Richard Tran, UC Davis GSA Legislative Director