Proposition 40 dominated much of the attention – and spending – on that part of California voters’ ballots this election cycle, but it was far from the only proposition to be researched and considered.
And the ballot measure that generated the most controversy – Proposition 39, which sought to require that IDs be presented when voting – was defeated, according to a late Tuesday night call by the Associated Press.
ALSO SEE:Proposition 40: Billionaires tax trails in early returns as union leader says they might try again in 2028
In all, voters were asked to weigh in on 14 propositions on topics ranging from environmental review to taxing billionaires.
We’ve got you covered elsewhere on Proposition 40 and the related 41 and 42, but here’s a look at how the early voting is going on the other nine:
Proposition 1
This measure would authorize the state to borrow $11.25 billion to build affordable housing for seniors, veterans, low- and middle-income families, essential workers and people with disabilities.
ALSO SEE:Prop. 1 California housing bond, Prop. 37 new-home loan measure lead in early returns
The price tag for the state would be $500 million to $600 million a year to repay the bond, according to the state’s voter guide.
Yes on Prop 1 had a healthy lead in early results.
Proposition 2
California’s Rainy Day Fund was approved in 2014, and this proposition would increase it by changing how the state builds reserves. Opponents said passage would lead to more spending, not saving, and they would prefer that taxpayers hold on to more money.
Yes on Prop 2 had a strong lead in early results.
Proposition 3
High earners faced an income tax increase starting in 2012, but that’s set to expire in 2031. Proposition 3 would make that increase permanent for people who earn more than $371,000 annually (adjusted each year for inflation).
Opponents insist that the increase always was intended to be temporary and should remain that way, but supporters say the increase is essential to fund schools and healthcare.
Yes on Prop 3 got out to a healthy early lead.
Proposition 4
California’s Legislature put this measure on the ballot in an attempt to allow state and local governments to allow public financing for candidates’ campaigns, something supporters point out is allowed in all other states in the U.S. The argument is that public funding could help limit the influence of special interests.
Opponents argued that the public could end up financially supporting the campaigns of candidates it never would support with votes.
No on Prop 4 had a narrow early lead.
Proposition 5
Californians have dealt with some high-profile recalls, especially concerning their governors. In those instances, they were asked to vote both on the recall and on the successor if the recall was successful.
Proposition 5 would split the process, requiring a subsequent election if a recall succeeds. Supporters argue that it would decrease the weaponization of the recall, but opponents say it would drive up costs by requiring a second election and, potentially, leave people without a representative.
No on Prop 5 held a narrow early lead.
Proposition 37
Like Proposition 1, this measure addresses housing, which many Californians consider the most pressing issue in the state. In this case, it would create a program for homebuyers that would allow them to make a 3% down payment rather than the 20% required to avoid private mortgage insurance.
Supporters argue that the costs would be covered by mortgage payments, not by any public funds. There was no argument against the measure submitted for the state’s voter guide.
Yes on Prop 37 got out to a strong early lead.
Proposition 38
Supporters want voters to authorize the state to borrow $8.4 billion to support immunology-focused research to help fight or prevent cancer, heart disease and Alzheimer’s. Half the fund would go to a University of California-affiliated nonprofit and half to research grants.
Opponents argue that borrowing is not the way to support research and fight the diseases since it would require a commitment to a lot of debt for the state.
Yes on Prop 38 was ahead by a significant margin in early returns.
Proposition 39
After Proposition 40, this measure drew the most attention as a political hot-button issue.
ALSO SEE:Proposition 39: California voter ID measure trails in preliminary returns
Supporters say it makes sense that citizens should have to show identification when voting or write the last four digits of their ID number on ballots dropped off or mailed. Only citizens are allowed to vote, they say, so they ask why this is an issue at all.
Opponents, however, argue that this is a form of voter suppression that goes along with other efforts from the Trump administration to keep people from casting their ballots. They say that a signature should be sufficient when voting.
No on Prop 39 had a large early lead, and the Associated Press called the race late Tuesday.
Proposition 43
A two-thirds vote is required for new taxes at the state level, and supporters want the same threshold for local governments to impose special taxes. They say the measure would close loopholes that hurt taxpayers.
ALSO SEE:California’s Prop. 43 to raise bar for local taxes trails in early returns
Opponents, however, say the ability to pass local taxes will hurt the ability to fund things like fire services, schools, affordable housing and hospitals.
No on Prop 43 narrowly led in early results.
Proposition 44
Supporters say there is a need for transparency and targeted spending for community clinics that are designated as federally qualified health centers. This measure would require that the clinics spend at least 90% of their revenue on healthcare services.
The measure’s opponents insist that passage would lead to the closure of many clinics and the loss of healthcare for millions in the state.
No on Prop 44 had a large early lead.
Proposition 45
Environmental reviews are a big part of building projects in California, and supporters want to tighten the windows for the reviews that they say impede the development the state needs. They insist that the measure would keep strong protections in place but cut out some of the hurdles.
ALSO SEE:Voters decide Prop 45, an overhaul one of California’s major environmental laws
The proposition’s opponents, led by environmental groups, are adamant that passage would jeopardize public health and the cleanliness of the state’s air and water in the name of money for corporations.
No on Prop 45 led early.
