California’s Kid-Critical Ballot Propositions (2026)
18 Tuesday Aug 2026
Written by redqueeninla in 2026 November General Election, AD55 Newsletter, CA, Children's health, Poverty, Public Health, Schools Facilities, Schools Funding, Trumpism
Tags
Ballot Propositions, Billionaire's Tax, California Propositions, elections, Millionaire's Tax, November 2026 General Election, Prop 3, Prop 40, Prop 41, Prop 42, Prop 43
Share it
This is one of a series examining the 14 ballot Propositions appearing on California’s November 2026 general election ballot. Prioritized first are those Propositions most critical for our most-vulnerable.
Proposition 3 and Proposition 43 ~ affecting
government’s ability to work for kids
Prop 40 (the “Billionaire’s Tax”), is essentially a ‘war bond’ to replenish the federal dollars skimmed from California’s federal tax appropriations (the HR 1 cuts), that would have gone toward the state’s social and welfare safety net. California counties alone are anticipated to be short $9.5 billion annually in new costs, with an estimated 1.8 – 3 million people tossed from Medi-Cal, Cal-Fresh and other such programs beyond. (For more on YES to Prop 40 (and its automatic trigger to NO on Prop 41/42), please see RQILA essay #1 in this series.)
Prop 40 seeks a one-time, temporary remedy to back fill lost monies for the disenfranchised of this specific, federally-centered crisis. Not a property tax, Prop 40 only taxes accumulated personal wealth above $1 billion.
Prop 3 (the “Millionaire’s Tax”), seeks to codify a long-time, structural remedy for insufficient taxes paid by California’s top 1.5%-earners, those individuals earning more than $371,000 annually.
Made permanent would be higher income tax rates first enacted fourteen years ago, following the Great Recession (2007-2009), in 2012. The tax was extended by voters in 2016 (at which time an increased sales tax was not extended), and leaves completely untouched the state’s bottom 98.5% of earners (~38.8 million people).
Looked at from another perspective, if allowed to expire (i.e., if Prop 3 does not pass), California’s top 1%-richest taxpayers would personally be enriched an estimated average of $59,000 apiece, while collectively depriving California schools and its children up to $15 billion annually.
Where Proposition 40 is (arguably) criticized as a one-time remedy that bypasses the state’s general fund, Proposition 3 is fully vested in California’s established, structural minimum distributions for K12 education, community college, county offices of education and state agencies providing direct K12 education services. Accordingly, the monies codified permanently by Proposition 3 are vital for all California’s children, and our state’s ability to provide services for their education, health and welfare.
As usual, it is the state’s most vulnerable who would be most affected, even while SUPPORTING this proposition would not alter the status quo one iota. Vote YES on Proposition 3.
Prop 43 (“curbs local tax choice”), also critically impairs the government’s ability to protect local funding for education and kids (or any other chosen purpose).
Currently, a local municipality may propose to tax its own citizens in order to, say, float a bond for schools facilities. That local initiative would be brought to the electorate via one of two routes: (i) local governing body (i.e., city council), or (ii) citizen’s petition. By state constitutional law, special taxes initiated via local governing body are harder to pass, requiring a 2/3 vote; via citizen’s petition, however, the people may choose to tax themselves by simple majority (>50%) vote.
Proposition 43 would always require the punishing minority-rule threshold of 66.7% vote, regardless of the initiative’s provenance. This effectively removes the option of taxation from most people’s own hands, even for a considered, common, good reason (e.g., to purchase updated schools facilities for your kids). Instead, it empowers a minority with twice the power to assert their opinion, since it takes half as many people (33%) to oppose that tax as to support it (67%).
Prop 43 is not only bad public policy, and bad for our children especially, it is anti-democratic. The people should be allowed to purchase (i.e., float a bond) what they collectively choose by majority rule, not minority imposition.
Proposition 43 is tyrannical, forcing the will of a mere 1/3 of the electorate upon the rest. Should a locality wish to tax itself for a common purpose, that should absolutely be the choice of its people, not the domineering prerogative of an ideological faction. Vote NO on Proposition 43 for the sake of your children, and your neighbor’s.
Summary of RQILA’s California Proposition picks – review the series, here and here.
