A measure backed by the California Teachers Association would extend Prop. 30’s higher tax rates on the wealthiest Californians until 2030, with an estimated $7.5 billion each year going to public schools and community colleges.

 

Another measure, this one by the California Hospital Association and the Service Employees International Union-United Healthcare Workers West, makes those higher tax rates permanent and sends half the annual estimated $10 billion to public schools, colleges and universities, 40 percent to Medi-Cal for low-income health care and 10 percent for early childhood development programs. It also imposes a new, higher tax rate on those who make more than $1 million annually. …

 

[Negotiators] for the teachers group and the hospital association have been talking about a third option, which would extend Prop. 30’s higher tax rates and split the money between schools and health programs. That measure is awaiting approval from the state Attorney General’s Office, and a decision about whether to aim that initiative for the ballot won’t be made until later this month. …

 

“We’d prefer one measure, especially on a crowded ballot,” said Gale Kaufman, a political consultant working on the teachers’ measure. “My instincts say less is better always, but it’s difficult to have any hard and fast rules.”

The focus isn’t just on income tax ballot measures, though they have gotten the most early attention. The Chronicle notes that the Making Poverty History initiative “would add a surcharge to the tax bill for land and buildings with an assessed value of $3 million or more. The $6 billion raised annually would go toward programs to reduce poverty in the state, including prenatal services, expanded child care, tax credits and job training grants.”

Steyer follows Schwarzenegger strategy

Tom Steyer, the billionaire environmentalist who is exploring a 2018 run for governor, also is looking to make a political name for himself with a ballot measure, as Arnold Schwarzenegger did in 2002 with Proposition 49, a successful ballot measure funding after-school programs, a year before the recall election that ousted Gov. Gray Davis.

Steyer is behind the Save Lives California campaign, which would use a $2-a-pack tax on cigarettes to shore up state Medi-Cal funding and to pay for health-promotion and anti-smoking programs.

A previous ballot measure that successfully raised cigarette taxes was also sponsored by a non-politician believed to be interested in running for governor. Championed by Hollywood producer-director-actor Rob Reiner, Proposition 10 added a 50-cent levy on a pack of cigarettes, with proceeds used mostly to fund early childhood education programs.

But Reiner, unlike Schwarzenegger, never ran for state office.

Denise Cross / flickr

A tenfold increase in the initiative filing fee was supposed to reduce the number of long-shot proposals in circulation.

“The updated filing fee set by this bill will deter frivolous submissions,” Assemblyman Evan Low, author the new initiative fee increase, said in a September press release. “We live in California, the cradle of direct democracy, but we also need a threshold for reasonableness. And this bill will do just that.”

It’s had the opposite effect, as dozens of proponents of unconventional ideas rush to file their initiatives before the end of the year.

Among this year’s unconventional proposals: a 1,000 percent tax on political advertisements, a 5-cent tax on bottled water, a statewide ban on shellfish and a plan for California to declare independence from the United States.

“For the privilege of influencing public elections and political issues, a sales tax of 1,000% (one thousand percent) is hereby imposed upon Political Advertisements,” a statewide ballot measure, proposed  by Terrance Lynn of Portola Valley, states. “The proceeds of which shall solely benefit California public education.”

And if the courts try to strike down the measure, Lynn’s prepared for that, too. “If a Federal District Court or Supreme Court of the United States find this tax to be too high, then this law shall immediately ratchet down to the highest acceptable level and remain in place,” the measure states.

10x Filing Fee Hike

On January 1, the cost of proposing a statewide ballot measure for circulation will increase from $200 to $2,000. The new law, authored by Democratic Assemblymen Evan Low of Campbell and Richard Bloom of Santa Monica, was intended to reduce the number of proposals given a ballot title and summary.

“This significant fee increase could greatly reduce the number of initiative proposals submitted for title and summary, and thus reduce the AG’s workload in this area, in addition to that of the Legislative Analyst’s Office and the Department of Finance, which jointly prepare a fiscal estimate of proposed initiatives,” states the state Assembly’s legislative analysis of AB1100 published in July.

Yet, the fee hike itself has likely spurred more frivolous measures. Often times, the text, title and summary are enough to generate free publicity for an idea, including outrageous and blatantly unconstitutional measures.

Subhendu Das of West Hills wants to see California lawmakers adopt a secret ballot for legislative business. Joe Decker believes the state should make “the sale or consumption of shellfish a serious felony punishable by a $666,000 fine per occurrence and/or prison sentence of up to six years, six months, and six days.”

Citing Aristotle’s philosophy of human association, Louis Marinelli of San Diego wants California to declare its independence from the United States.

“Do you agree that California should acquire the exclusive power to make its laws, levy its taxes and establish its own relations abroad — in other words, sovereignty — and at the same time to maintain with United States an economic, political, and military partnership?” he proposes in the “California Nationhood” initiative.

If that idea fails to gain support, he’s also asking California residents to impose a 5-cent tax on bottled water

Fee Hike to Deter Frivolous Submissions

Since 1943, any Californian with $200 has been able to obtain the necessary paperwork to begin collecting signatures to put their proposal on the ballot. The reasonable filing fee has allowed average citizens and grassroots organizations to shape the political debate.

From 2009 to 2013, the state Attorney General’s Office has drafted titles and summaries for 315 measures. Just 27 ultimately qualified for the ballot.

Low’s office noted that, as of August 2015, 58 proposals had been submitted for the 2016 November ballot. By December 14, that figure had doubled. The California State Attorney General’s Office has received 118 requests for a ballot title and summary — double the average number of initiatives from the previous decade.

State legislative analysts say that the number of initiative petitions have been gradually increasing. Over the last half century, proponents filed the following number of initiatives:

• 47 from 1960 to 1969
• 180 from 1970 to 1979
• 282 from 1980 to 1989
• 391 from 1990 to 1999
• 647 from 2000 to 2009
• 240 from 2010 to April 21, 2015

Proponents of the new higher filing fee say that it will help offset the cost to taxpayers. The AG’s office estimates that it takes 56 hours of staff time to prepare each ballot measure, at a cost of $8,000. Under the new state law, proponents get their money back only if the measure qualifies for the ballot.

Some state political observers say the filing fee hike undermines citizen engagement in the process.

“The initiative game in California is entirely for the rich and powerful,” argues columnist Joe Mathews, who also serves as a board member of Democracy International. “What we need are alternative ways to get measures on the ballot that are based on the quality of the idea and on public support.”

The proposed initiative, submitted to the state on Friday, would limit compensation packages for executives, administrators and managers at nonprofit hospitals, hospital groups and affiliated medical entities to no more than $450,000 per year. That’s what the U.S. president gets.

 

This looks like a measure SEIU-United Healthcare Workers West dropped 18 months ago when it signed a partnership agreement with the California Hospital Association to settle differences and work on a joint campaign to fix Medi-Cal.

 

That deal also halted SEIU initiatives to regulate hospital prices and the level of charity care nonprofit hospitals provide. In exchange, the union appeared to get better access to hospitals for organizing purposes. Both partners agreed to a code of conduct about labor management relations.

 

Union spokesman Steve Trossman said the partnership agreement and labor management agreement remain in place. He said the union had not decided whether to also revive ballot measures on charity care and pricing.

Tactic ‘does nothing’ to increase hospital access

The filing of the initiative language with the Secretary of State’s Office isn’t necessarily a sign this is a serious proposal, but it’s certainly a serious message going into 2016 that the SEIU will continue to fight its battles through all available avenues. It triggered a sharp reaction from California Hospital Association CEO C. Duane Dauner and CTA Vice President for External Affairs Jan Emerson-Shea:

[The] decision by SEIU-UHW (UHW) to file a harmful ballot measure that will negatively impact the operations of hospitals throughout California is an abuse of the state’s initiative process and violates a May 5, 2014 agreement negotiated between the California Hospital Association (CHA) and UHW. Artificially imposing a cap on compensation will result in a loss of qualified executives and undermine the ability of hospitals to meet the challenges ahead.

 

Since signing the May 5, 2014 agreement, CHA has worked with UHW to address a myriad of issues facing California’s health care delivery system, most specifically the need to improve access to care for low-income children, seniors and the disabled. These efforts have raised the awareness among state lawmakers, stakeholders and the public about the importance of creating a stable source of funding for the Medi-Cal program, which provides coverage to more than 12 million Californians. While progress is being made, much work remains to be done.

 

This is the third time UHW has attempted to use the initiative process to further its organizing agenda. As was the case in 2011-12 and 2013-14, the measure filed today does nothing to fix Medi-Cal or increase access to hospital services.

State SEIU branch also pushing another ballot measure

The SEIU’s California branch has 700,000 members in California and has worked to raise its profile in recent years. Earlier this month, it announced plans to sponsor another 2016 ballot measure that also may be more of a leverage play to goad business interests to cooperate with the Legislature on raising the minimum wage than a serious effort. This is from the East Bay Express:

A coalition of low-wage workers and the Service Employees International Union of California filed a ballot proposition yesterday with the California Attorney General that would raise the statewide minimum wage to $15 by 2020, and adjust it upward each year thereafter at the rate of inflation. It would also mandate that employers provide workers with a minimum of six paid sick days per year.

 

Backers of the initiative said they will begin gathering signatures to put it on the ballot starting in January 2016. If they succeed in gathering the 365,880 necessary signatures, voters could decide on the proposal in the November 2016 presidential election.

This ballot measure is more generous than a rival ballot proposal to raise the minimum wage sponsored by one of the SEIU’s largest member unions, the United Healthcare Workers West. The Sacramento Bee reported earlier this month that the state SEIU may end up working with the hospital union on one measure to avoid confusing voters and wasting union dollars by launching two separate efforts.