California 2026 Propositions: what they do, who's paying, and whyCA props: what, why and who's paying
$732.6M raised so far for and against these 14 measures, as of October 27, 2026. About half of it is the billionaire-tax fight (Props 40, 41 and 42).1 Largest funder: "Building a Better California", a PAC funded by billionaires and formed to fight Prop 40. It's also paying for Props 41 and 42, which could cancel Prop 40 if they pass.2,3
Each party's official position on every measure, side by side.
| Measure | Dems | GOP | Cost / income (approx.)4 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 Housing Bond | YES | Neutral | −$500M/yr |
| 2 Rainy Day Fund | YES | NO | $0 |
| 3 High-Income TaxLook closer | YES | NO | +$10B/yr |
| 4 Public Campaign Funding | YES | NO | −$1M/yr |
| 5 Recall Reform | YES | NO | Unknown |
| 37 Homebuyer LoansLook closer | YES | Neutral | $0 |
| 38 Research BondLook closer | YES | YES | −$500M/yr |
| 39 Voter IDLook closer | NO | YES | −$100M/yr |
| 40 Billionaire TaxLook closer | YES | NO | +$10B once |
| 41 Audits of New TaxesLook closer | NO | YES | Unknown |
| 42 Asset Tax BanLook closer | NO | YES | Less income later |
| 43 Local Tax ThresholdLook closer | NO | YES | Less local income |
| 44 Clinic Spending RuleLook closer | NO | NO | −$10M/yr (fees) |
| 45 Faster CEQA ReviewLook closer | NO | YES | −$100M/yr |
Each party's official positions as of October 7, 2026: CA Democratic Party positions (PDF) · CA Republican Party positions. 5,6,7 Cost / income to the state budget, from the Legislative Analyst's official estimates. All numbers are approximate. Where the state gives a range spanning two orders of magnitude (say, tens to hundreds of millions), we show the low end of the higher one: red = money out, green = money in.4 This site doesn't endorse either party or any position. Look closer marks measures with over $10M behind them or a High special interest score.1
A typical California household earns about $99,000 a year. About 44% rent. Almost none earn over $371,000 or are billionaires.8,9
None of these 14 measures raises your taxes. Two add state debt of about $40 a year per household. The rest change rules, or affect you only in specific situations.
Why are some from the Legislature? 5 of these passed in Sacramento, but the California Constitution requires voters to approve changes to the constitution (Article XVIII), state borrowing (Article XVI), and undoing past voter-approved measures (Article II). The other 9 got here through paid petition drives.
Below, see who is trying to persuade you, or grab the one-page cheat sheet.
Per-household cost = the state's estimated yearly bond payment ÷ 13.5 million households.8
If you'd rather make up your own mind, here's everything we have: who's paying, what they get, how each measure got on the ballot, and the full details, with every number sourced. Start with a few questions, or scroll on.
Seeing "Building a Better California" at the end of ads? It's a PAC funded mainly by billionaires, and the biggest spender on this ballot: $350.1M across Props 1, 37, 40, 41, 42 and 45.1,2 Who's behind it →
Nothing is saved. No cookies, no tracking, no accounts. Your answers stay on your device and disappear when you close the tab. Skip any question you like. This is a side project by a regular Californian trying to figure out how to vote, with no connection to any campaign.
Answer any question above and your results appear here. Skip anything you like.
Passed in Sacramento, but the California Constitution requires your vote for constitution changes (Art. XVIII, §§ 1, 4), state borrowing (Art. XVI, § 1), undoing past voter measures (Art. II, § 10(c)).
Signature drives cost millions. Who paid:
If you're unsure: a NO vote keeps current law. A YES on a citizen initiative is hard to undo, because the Legislature can't change it without another statewide vote. Check which side the big money is on.25
Look closer = over $10M spent, or a High special interest score on either side. Big money means big stakes for someone, so these deserve your time. It says nothing about whether to vote yes or no.
For each measure: who paid to put it on the ballot, what your vote does, who it helps, who pays, and who is funding each side. No ads, no endorsements from us.
Largest single funder: Building a Better California, $350.1M across 6 measures (Props 1, 37, 40, 41, 42, 45).
14 measures. 9 got there through paid petition drives. 5 were passed by the Legislature and are on the ballot because the law requires voter approval. Percentages are of the $516.2M that top donors gave to YES campaigns. Figures as of October 27, 2026. Source: FPPC top-contributor lists.
One-page cheat sheet, made to print or keep next to your ballot.
Special interest score, for each side's money: one point for each check. One funder dominates: a single funder paid more than half that side's money (calculated from FPPC data). Funders profit: the main funders or their members gain financially if their side wins. Narrow benefit: the gains go mainly to one industry, organization or small group rather than the general public. Outside money: more than half that side's money came from outside California. The middle two are judgment calls; the reason for each is shown so you can decide for yourself. A high score doesn't mean a measure is bad, and a low score doesn't mean it's good. It tells you who is behind it.
YES = Borrow $11.25B for affordable and veterans' housing10
Top donors include developers who could get the money1
YES = Raise the cap on state reserves from 10% to 20%11
YES = Make the 2012 tax on incomes over ~$371K permanent12
Teachers' unions put up nearly all the money1
YES = Allow public funding of campaigns13
YES = Pick a recall replacement in a later election, not on the same ballot14
YES = State loans for buyers of NEWLY BUILT homes only, 3% down15
Only about 36,500 new homes sold in 2025. California has about 7.6 million owner-occupied homes. About 7 in 8 buyers buy existing homes and can't use it.9,42,43
YES = Borrow $8.4B for immunology research16
The main funder co-founded and chairs the institute that gets $4.2B45
YES = Require ID to vote in person, and an ID number on mail ballots17
57% of the YES money is from one Wisconsin donor, who gave $4M to a co-organizer of the Jan. 6, 2021 rally1,52
YES = One-time 5% tax on wealth over $1B18
99% of the NO money comes from a billionaire-funded PAC, plus billionaire Chris Larsen and his company1
YES = Audit new taxes; cancel new taxes exempt from the spending cap19
Written by Prop 40's opponents to cancel it3
YES = Ban state taxes on owning assets such as stocks20
If it gets more votes than Prop 40, Prop 40 is cancelled3
YES = Citizen-proposed local taxes need two-thirds of the vote, not a majority21
Commercial landlords and business groups fund the YES side1
YES = Clinics must spend 90% of revenue on care or pay penalties22
Clinics allege in court that the union offered to drop it in exchange for new union members (unproven)58
YES = Deadlines for environmental reviews and lawsuits24
Utilities, homebuilders and an oil producer fund the YES side1
Money is from top donors reported to the FPPC.1 Bars are to scale across all measures. Tap a measure's title for its full details.
Why it's on your ballot The Legislature passed it, but the law requires voters to approve it. State borrowing through bonds requires voter approval.10 The rule: Cal. Constitution, Art. XVI, § 1. State debt over $300,000 needs a two-thirds vote of the Legislature and a majority of voters.27
History Voters approved housing bonds in 2018 ($4B, Prop 1) and March 2024 ($6.4B for mental health housing, Prop 1).33,34
Cost to taxpayers $500 million to $600 million a year from the state budget for about 25 years to repay the bonds.10
Authorizes $11.25 billion in state bonds for rental housing, veterans' mortgages and down payment assistance.10
The state estimates the money would fund about 40,000 rental units and help about 40,000 households buy homes. Repaying the bonds would cost the state $500 million to $600 million a year for about 25 years.10
No committee has raised $1M or more. That is the state's threshold for reporting top donors.
Why it's on your ballot The Legislature passed it, but the law requires voters to approve it. It changes the state constitution, which only voters can do.11 The rule: Cal. Constitution, Art. XVIII, §§ 1, 4. Amendments the Legislature proposes must be approved by a majority of voters.26
History Voters created the current rainy day fund rules in 2014 (Prop 2).35
Cost to taxpayers No new taxes. More money would be set aside in good years instead of being spent.11
Raises the limit on the state's rainy day reserve from 10% to 20% of general fund tax revenue, and allows tax revenue to be used to pay down California's $20 billion federal unemployment insurance debt.11
The state could save more money in good years to spend in bad ones. Money put into reserves is not available for current programs.11
No committee has raised $1M or more. That is the state's threshold for reporting top donors.
No committee has raised $1M or more. That is the state's threshold for reporting top donors.
Who paid to put it on the ballot California Teachers Association, through a petition drive.
History Only voters can extend it. It's in the state constitution: voters approved it in 2012 (Prop 30) and extended it in 2016 (Prop 55).36
Cost to taxpayers No new tax. It keeps $5 billion to $15 billion a year in state revenue that would otherwise end after 2031.12
Makes permanent a tax on high-income earners that is set to expire in 2031. Rates run from 10.3% to 12.3% on individual income above about $371,000.12
About 89% of the money goes to K–12 schools and 11% to community colleges, with any excess going to public health care. If it fails, the tax expires in 2031 as scheduled.12
No committee has raised $1M or more. That is the state's threshold for reporting top donors.
Why it's on your ballot The Legislature passed it, but the law requires voters to approve it. It repeals a ban voters passed in 1988 (Prop 73). The Legislature can't undo a voter-approved measure on its own.13 The rule: Cal. Constitution, Art. II, § 10(c). The Legislature can change a voter-passed initiative only with voter approval, unless the initiative allows it.25
History Voters banned public campaign funding in 1988 (Prop 73). Since then, only charter cities such as San Francisco have been allowed to create programs.37,38
Cost to taxpayers A few hundred thousand dollars a year for state oversight. Any actual program would be created and paid for separately, later.13
Allows state and local governments to create public funds for candidates' campaigns, reversing a 1988 ban.13
Today only a handful of charter cities, including San Francisco and Berkeley, publicly fund candidates. This would let the state and any city or county set up a program. It does not create one by itself.13
No committee has raised $1M or more. That is the state's threshold for reporting top donors.
No committee has raised $1M or more. That is the state's threshold for reporting top donors.
Why it's on your ballot The Legislature passed it, but the law requires voters to approve it. It changes the state constitution, which only voters can do.14 The rule: Cal. Constitution, Art. XVIII, §§ 1, 4. Amendments the Legislature proposes must be approved by a majority of voters.26
History In 2003, Gov. Gray Davis was recalled and replaced on the same ballot by Arnold Schwarzenegger. A 2021 attempt to recall Gov. Newsom failed.39,40
Cost to taxpayers Unknown. Each recall could save or cost millions of dollars, depending on the office.14
Ends the single recall ballot that asks both whether to remove an official and who should replace them. A replacement would be chosen in a later election, and the recalled official could run in it.14
If a governor were recalled, the lieutenant governor would serve until the new election. Under current rules, a replacement can win with a small plurality on the same ballot.14
No committee has raised $1M or more. That is the state's threshold for reporting top donors.
No committee has raised $1M or more. That is the state's threshold for reporting top donors.
Who paid to put it on the ballot Realtors, with carpenters' unions, through a petition drive.
History No related bill found. The state already runs smaller down payment programs, such as CalHFA's Dream for All. This would add a separate, larger one.41
Cost to taxpayers The official state analysis finds no direct state or local cost.15
Authorizes $25 billion in bonds for the state Housing Finance Agency to fund loans covering up to 17% of the price of a newly built home, for buyers earning up to twice the area median income.15
The loans would cover up to 17% of the price of a newly built home under about $1.5 million. Buyers must live in the home and meet income limits.15
No committee has raised $1M or more. That is the state's threshold for reporting top donors.
Who paid to put it on the ballot Gary Michelson, a billionaire surgeon and inventor, through a petition drive.
History No bill. It went straight to the ballot by petition, like 2004's $3B stem-cell research bond (Prop 71).44
Cost to taxpayers $500 million to $600 million a year from the state budget for about 20 years. Some or all of it could be offset if the research makes money.16
Authorizes $8.4 billion in state bonds for immunology and immunotherapy research. Half would go to a single UC-affiliated nonprofit research institute, and half to selected public universities and nonprofits.16
Drugs developed with the money would have to be sold to Californians at a 20% discount, and 10% of drug revenue would go back to the state. Taxpayers would repay the bonds with interest.16
Name on its ads: "Yes on 38: Californians for Life-Saving Immunology Research and Cures, sponsored by the Michelson Center for Public Policy." 93% of this side's money is from Gary Michelson.1
No committee has raised $1M or more. That is the state's threshold for reporting top donors.
Who paid to put it on the ballot Richard Uihlein and Reform California, through a petition drive.
History A Republican voter ID bill (AB 25) was voted down in committee in April 2025, and its backers, including Carl DeMaio, then launched this petition. Huntington Beach voters approved local voter ID in 2024; a state appeals court struck it down in 2025.46,47
Cost to taxpayers Tens of millions to low hundreds of millions of dollars a year for counties to carry out.17
Requires government-issued ID to vote in person, requires mail voters to provide the last four digits of an ID number, and requires election officials to verify that all registered voters are U.S. citizens.17
Under current law, people must swear they are U.S. citizens, under penalty of perjury, to register to vote, and mail ballot signatures are checked against voter records. This measure adds ID requirements on top of those rules. It is a constitutional amendment, so changing it later would require another statewide vote.17,67
Evidence Proven fraud is rare. The conservative Heritage Foundation's database held 10 cases of in-person voter impersonation, the only fraud an ID at the polls can stop (a 2017 count by the Brennan Center, which opposes strict ID laws), and fewer than 100 noncitizen voting cases nationwide since the 1980s. California doesn't track how many noncitizens are removed from its voter rolls. When Texas began requiring an ID number on mail ballots in 2022, 1 in 8 mail ballots in its first election were rejected, mostly for a missing number.48,49,50,51
Who paid to put it on the ballot SEIU-UHW, a healthcare workers' union, through a petition drive.
History Wealth tax bills died in committee in 2020, 2021, 2022 and 2024. Gov. Newsom said he would veto one.53,54
Cost to taxpayers A one-time increase of tens of billions of dollars, spread over several years. The state estimates income tax revenue could later drop by up to $1 billion a year if some billionaires leave.18
Imposes a one-time 5% tax on the net worth of roughly 200 Californians worth more than $1 billion. Supporters project about $100 billion over five years for health care, food assistance and education.18
Props 41 and 42 were put on the same ballot by opponents of this measure. If Prop 42 gets more yes votes than Prop 40, it cancels Prop 40 even if both pass.18
Name on its ads: "Yes on 40 - Billionaire Tax Now – No on 41 & 42, Sponsored by Service Employees International Union - United Healthcare Workers West." 98% of this side's money is from SEIU-United Healthcare Workers West.1
Name on its ads: "No on Prop 40 - Doctors, Teachers, Small Businesses, Working Families and Public Safety Against the Reckless Wealth Tax Experiment." 92% of this side's money is from Building a Better California.1
Who paid to put it on the ballot Building a Better California, a PAC fighting Prop 40, through a petition drive.
History No bill. Written by Prop 40's opponents to counter it.3
Cost to taxpayers Unknown. It depends on what future taxes voters and the Legislature pass.19
Requires the state auditor to review any proposed special tax before voters decide on it, and counts new voter-approved special taxes toward the state spending limit.19
Counting new taxes toward the spending limit could trigger automatic refunds, reducing money for other state programs. It was put on the ballot by the same group fighting Prop 40.19
Name on its ads: "Yes on 41 - Californians for Transparency and Accountability, a Coalition of Small Businesses, Taxpayers, Good Government Advocates, Accountants and Auditing Experts." Over 99% of this side's money is from Building a Better California.1
No money has been raised just for this side. The Yes on 40 committee also campaigns against this measure, so the same money is listed for both. The site's grand total counts it once.
Who paid to put it on the ballot Building a Better California, a PAC fighting Prop 40, through a petition drive.
History No bill. Written by Prop 40's opponents to counter it.3
Cost to taxpayers State tax revenue may not grow as much in the future.20
Bans new state taxes on owning personal property, such as investment accounts and business stakes, and bans retroactive taxes passed after January 1, 2026.20
If Prop 42 gets more yes votes than Prop 40, it cancels Prop 40 even if both pass. This is a constitutional amendment.20
Name on its ads: "Yes on 42 - Protect Retirement & Life Savings, a Coalition of Retirees, Blue-Collar Workers, Seniors, Veterans, Small Businesses & Taxpayers." Over 99% of this side's money is from Building a Better California.1
No money has been raised just for this side. The Yes on 40 committee also campaigns against this measure, so the same money is listed for both. The site's grand total counts it once.
Why it's on your ballot The Legislature passed it, but the law requires voters to approve it. It changes the state constitution, which only voters can do. Lawmakers wrote it in a deal with the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, which agreed to pull its stricter anti-tax initiative from the ballot.21 The rule: Cal. Constitution, Art. XVIII, §§ 1, 4. Amendments the Legislature proposes must be approved by a majority of voters.26
History Prop 13 (1978) made special taxes need a two-thirds vote. But recent court decisions have let special taxes proposed by voters pass with a simple majority. This measure would end that.32,55
Cost to taxpayers Local tax revenue may not grow as much in the future.21
Raises the vote needed to pass a citizen-proposed local special tax from a simple majority to two-thirds, starting January 1, 2027.21
Special taxes proposed by local governments already need two-thirds. Under current court rulings, citizen-proposed ones need only a majority. This would apply the two-thirds rule to both.21
Who paid to put it on the ballot SEIU-UHW, a healthcare workers' union, through a petition drive. After a similar bill failed in the Legislature.
History A similar bill backed by the same union failed in the Legislature. The union then took it to the ballot. Its three dialysis-clinic measures (2018, 2020, 2022) all failed.56,57
Cost to taxpayers State costs in the low tens of millions of dollars a year, covered by fees.22
Requires nonprofit community clinics that serve low-income patients to spend at least 90% of their revenue on patient care, with financial penalties for those that don't.22
The Legislative Analyst's Office says most clinics do not currently meet the 90% threshold. The fight is between a healthcare workers' union and the clinics themselves.22
Name on its ads: "Californians for Responsible Healthcare, Sponsored by Service Employees International Union - United Healthcare Workers West." All of this side's money is from SEIU-United Healthcare Workers West.1
Who paid to put it on the ballot California Chamber of Commerce, through a petition drive.
History In June 2025, the Legislature and Gov. Newsom passed a narrower CEQA reform (AB 130 and SB 131), mostly for housing. Prop 45 goes further.59
Cost to taxpayers Likely high tens of millions of dollars a year at first for state and local governments, possibly over $100 million, partly covered by fees. Long-term effects are uncertain.24
Sets a 365-day deadline for environmental review of projects designated as essential, including housing, infrastructure, schools, broadband and wildfire prevention, and requires courts to rule on related lawsuits within 270 days.24
This would be one of the largest changes to the California Environmental Quality Act in decades. Environmental groups and many building trades unions oppose it. Business, homebuilders, utilities and hospitals support it.24
The groups behind this year's measures: what they are and who funds them. Underlined names anywhere on this page link here. Use your browser's back button to return.
A PAC formed in February 2026 by Sergey Brin, Eric Schmidt and other billionaires to fight the Prop 40 billionaire tax. An officer of the committee is the chief legal officer of Brin's family office.
Funded by Billionaires. Sergey Brin ($102M), John Doerr ($30M), Eric Schmidt ($27M) and others, including Michael Moritz. It has given about $350M to ballot measure campaigns.1,2
A conservative political committee founded in 2003 by Carl DeMaio, now a Republican state Assembly member. It led the 2018 gas tax repeal effort and the 2021 attempt to recall Gov. Newsom, and it is the lead proponent of Prop 39 (voter ID).
Funded by Mostly small donors ($5.8M+ from 2023 to 2025). Its Prop 39 campaign is funded mainly by Richard Uihlein.1,73
CEO of Uline, a shipping supply company based in Wisconsin, and a major national donor to conservative causes. He doesn't live in California. He gave $4M to Tea Party Patriots, a co-organizer of the Jan. 6, 2021 rally, and his foundation funds groups that promoted claims the 2020 election was stolen.
Funded by His own money. $17M to Prop 39, about 57% of the YES side.1,52
A California union of healthcare workers led by Dave Regan. It is sponsoring Props 40 and 44. It also sponsored dialysis-clinic measures in 2018, 2020 and 2022, all rejected by voters. Clinics have sued it in federal court over Prop 44; the allegations are unproven.
Funded by Member dues. It is the only major funder of Yes on 40 and Yes on 44.74
California's largest teachers' union. It sponsored Prop 3 and opposes Prop 40.
Funded by Member dues. It gave $60M to Prop 3, and the National Education Association gave $7.5M.1,75
An anti-tax group named for Howard Jarvis, co-author of 1978's Prop 13. Lawmakers wrote Prop 43 in a deal with this group to keep its stricter measure off the ballot.
Funded by Members and donors. The Prop 43 campaign is funded mainly by the California Business Roundtable and commercial landlords.76
A Sacramento lobbying group for California's largest employers. It is the top funder of Yes on 43 and a funder of No on 40.
Funded by Member companies and wealthy donors. Peter Thiel gave it $3M in late 2025 to fight the billionaire tax.1,77
The state's largest business lobbying group. It sponsored Prop 45 (faster environmental review).
Funded by Member businesses. The Prop 45 campaign is also funded by homebuilders, utilities and Building a Better California.78
The trade group for California real estate agents. It sponsored Prop 37 (homebuyer loans) and funds Yes on 45.
Funded by Member dues. With the National Association of Realtors, it put about $20M into Prop 37.1,79
A billionaire spine surgeon and inventor, and the sponsor of Prop 38. He co-founded and chairs the California Institute for Immunology and Immunotherapy, which would get about $4.2B, and has given it at least $120M.
Funded by His own money: about $66M to Prop 38, directly and through his Michelson Center.1,45
A tax policy and lobbying group founded in 1926. Its members are mostly businesses. It opposes Props 3 and 4 and supports Prop 43.
Funded by Member companies.80
The trade group for community health clinics that serve low-income patients. It leads the No on 44 campaign and has sued SEIU-UHW.
Funded by Member clinics. AltaMed alone gave $6.1M against Prop 44.1,81
The homebuilders' trade group. Members include Lennar, KB Home and D.R. Horton. It is a major funder of Yes on 45.
Funded by Homebuilding companies.82
A nonpartisan, member-based voter education group founded in 1920. It doesn't endorse candidates, only ballot measures.
Funded by Members and small donations.83
A nonpartisan government reform group, part of national Common Cause. It focuses on voting rights and money in politics.
Funded by Members and donations.84
A Santa Clarita nonprofit led by Linda Paine that has sued the state and county registrars over election procedures. It opposes Prop 5.
Funded by Donations.85
The trade group for personal injury and trial lawyers. It fought Uber's ballot measure, then made a deal with Uber in June 2026.
Funded by Member law firms.86
Who put it on the ballot, what they spent, what they got. Every dollar figure comes from the sources listed in each row; figures we couldn't confirm are marked "not verified."
Based on 9 propositions tracked on this site. Verify any figure at the CA Secretary of State.
Official ballot title: Home Protection for Seniors, Severely Disabled, Families, and Victims of Wildfire or Natural Disasters Act
Let seniors, disabled homeowners and disaster victims keep their low property tax base when they move, and narrowed the exemption that let children inherit a parent's home without a tax reassessment.
| Side | Funder | Amount |
|---|---|---|
| YES | California Association of Realtors | $40.4M |
| YES | National Association of Realtors | $4.9M |
| YES | All other supporters | $1.7M |
| NO | Opponents (all donors) | $45K |
What they got: Real estate groups supplied 96% of the YES money: $40.4M from the California Association of Realtors and $4.9M from the National Association of Realtors. Realtors earn commissions on home sales, which the measure encourages. Opponents raised about $45,000.
Official ballot title: App-Based Drivers as Contractors and Labor Policies Initiative
Kept app-based ride and delivery drivers as independent contractors, exempting Uber, Lyft, DoorDash, Instacart and Postmates from the state's AB 5 employee rules. The most expensive ballot measure in California history.
| Side | Funder | Amount |
|---|---|---|
| YES | Uber, Lyft, DoorDash, Instacart and Postmates (combined) | $205M |
| NO | Labor groups and other opponents | $19M |
What they got: The companies kept drivers as contractors: no overtime or unemployment insurance, but a minimum earnings guarantee for time on a trip and accident insurance. Opponents, mostly labor groups, raised about $19M.
Official ballot title: Control, Regulate and Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act
Legalized recreational marijuana for adults 21 and over, taxed and regulated with a licensed commercial market.
| Side | Funder | Amount |
|---|---|---|
| YES | All other supporters | $15.9M |
| YES | Sean Parker and affiliates | $8.8M |
| NO | Opponents (all donors) | $1.6M |
What they got: Sean Parker, Facebook's first president, and his affiliates gave $8.8M of the $24.7M YES side. Opponents spent $1.6M.
Official ballot title: Mandatory Labeling of Genetically Engineered Food
Would have required labels on food made with genetically modified ingredients. Failed with 48.6% after opponents, led by Monsanto, DuPont and PepsiCo, outspent supporters about 5 to 1 ($46M to $9.2M).
| Side | Funder | Amount |
|---|---|---|
| NO | All other opponents | $16.2M |
| NO | Monsanto | $8.1M |
| NO | BASF, Bayer, Dow and Syngenta ($2M each) | $8M |
| NO | DuPont | $5.4M |
| YES | All other supporters | $5.2M |
| NO | PepsiCo | $2.6M |
| NO | Grocery Manufacturers Association | $2.0M |
| NO | Kraft Foods | $2.0M |
| NO | Coca-Cola | $1.7M |
| YES | Mercola Health Resources | $1.2M |
| YES | Kent Whealy | $1M |
| YES | Dr. Bronner's Magic Soaps | $621K |
| YES | Nature's Path Foods | $611K |
| YES | Organic Consumers Fund | $606K |
What they got: The opposing food and agriculture companies kept GMO labels off California food. A national labeling law came later, from Congress.
Official ballot title: Eliminates Right of Same-Sex Couples to Marry
Added to the California Constitution: 'Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.' Passed in 2008. Federal courts struck it down, and same-sex marriage resumed in 2013. The Legislature had passed same-sex marriage bills in 2005 and 2007; both were vetoed.
| Side | Funder | Amount |
|---|---|---|
| NO | No on 8 campaign (all donors) | $44.1M |
| YES | Members of the LDS (Mormon) Church — Church leaders urged members to donate; over $20M, much of it from outside California | $20M |
| YES | All other supporters | $17.6M |
| YES | Knights of Columbus | $1.4M |
What they got: Both sides raised record sums: $39.0M for and $44.1M against, a national record for a social-policy measure at the time. Members of the LDS (Mormon) Church gave over $20M after church leaders urged them to donate.
Official ballot title: Compassionate Use Act of 1996
Legalized marijuana for medical use with a doctor's recommendation, the first state to do so. Federal law still treated marijuana as illegal.
| Side | Funder | Amount |
|---|---|---|
| YES | George Soros | $500K |
| YES | Peter Lewis (Progressive Insurance) | $500K |
| YES | George Zimmer (Men's Wearhouse) | $500K |
| YES | Laurence Rockefeller | $50K |
What they got: Three wealthy donors, George Soros, Peter Lewis (Progressive Insurance) and George Zimmer (Men's Wearhouse), gave $500,000 each, most of the money.
Official ballot title: Proposition 187 — Illegal Aliens Ineligible for Public Benefits
Would have barred undocumented immigrants from public schools, health care and other services. Passed with 59%, but a federal court blocked it and it was never enforced; the state dropped its appeal in 1999.
| Side | Funder | Amount |
|---|---|---|
| NO | Opponents, including the state SEIU council, the Catholic Archbishop of Los Angeles and the California Teachers Association | $1.6M |
| YES | Save Our State committee | under $800K (outspent 2 to 1) |
What they got: Opponents outspent supporters more than two to one and still lost. Gov. Pete Wilson made the measure a centerpiece of his re-election campaign, which he won.
"Not verified" means we couldn't confirm a figure from a reliable source, so we don't show one. This measure is left out of the "biggest spender" count above.
Official ballot title: Insurance Rate Reduction and Reform Act
Required insurance companies to roll back rates 20% and get state approval before raising them. Passed with 51% despite heavy insurance-industry spending against it and on rival measures.
| Side | Funder | Amount |
|---|---|---|
| YES | Prop 103 campaign (small donations from a door-to-door canvass) | $6.4M |
| NO | Insurance industry, against 103 and for rival measures | most of about $95M spent on 1988's insurance measures |
What they got: Consumer advocates got rate regulation, funded by about $6.4M in small donations. The insurance industry backed a rival no-fault measure (Prop 104), which failed. About $95M was spent on the 1988 insurance measures, then a record. Courts upheld Prop 103.
"Not verified" means we couldn't confirm a figure from a reliable source, so we don't show one. This measure is left out of the "biggest spender" count above.
Official ballot title: People's Initiative to Limit Property Taxation
Capped property taxes at 1% of a property's assessed value, set assessments at 1975 values, and limited yearly increases to 2% until a property is sold. Still in effect today.
| Side | Funder | Amount |
|---|---|---|
| YES | Howard Jarvis and Paul Gann's campaign | not verified |
| NO | Opponents | not verified |
What they got: Property taxes are based on purchase price, so long-held homes and business properties pay far less than identical properties bought recently. Howard Jarvis had long led the Apartment Association of Los Angeles County.
"Not verified" means we couldn't confirm a figure from a reliable source, so we don't show one. This measure is left out of the "biggest spender" count above.
Would have capped contingency fees in personal injury cases and limited medical cost recovery in all California car crashes, not just those involving Uber.
It never reached the ballot. In June 2026, Uber and the Consumer Attorneys of California made a deal in Sacramento that Gov. Newsom signed into law. It caps some medical damages in crash cases and requires stricter background checks for ride-share drivers. Both sides dropped their measures.
Every small number on this page links here. Where a source is a Wikipedia article, it is labeled with the original reporting it cites when we could identify it. The special interest checks marked "our judgment" are explained with their reasons, not sourced as facts.