Argument for
By Darrell Roberts, President, California Professional Firefighters; Jesse Gabriel, Chair, California State Assembly Budget Committee; Maria S. Salinas, CEO, Los Angeles Area Chamber of Commerce
Glittering Generalities
VOTE YES ON PROPOSITION 2 TO PROTECT SCHOOLS, HEALTHCARE, PUBLIC SAFETY AND CALIFORNIA'S FINANCIAL FUTURE.
Glittering Generalities · “PROTECT SCHOOLS, HEALTHCARE, PUBLIC SAFETY AND CALIFORNIA'S FINANCIAL FUTURE” — Vague, positive-sounding goals are attached to a vote without any specifics on how the measure achieves them.
California's Rainy Day Fund, established by voters in 2014, was built for exactly this moment: an economy that swung our state budget from a $100 billion surplus to a $50 billion deficit in just a few years.
Proposition 2 strengthens that fund, so schools, healthcare, and public safety don't pay the price for Sacramento's boom-and-bust budgeting. Voting YES on Proposition 2 will:
DOUBLE THE STATE'S RESERVE REQUIREMENT—from 10 to 20 percent of General Fund revenues—so California has a real cushion, not a token one, when the next downturn hits.
STOP SACRAMENTO POLITICIANS FROM OVERSPENDING—When tax revenues spike, this measure forces politicians to budget smarter by requiring the state to bank more of that windfall instead of committing it to new ongoing spending California can't sustain.
GUARANTEE EDUCATION FUNDING IS PROTECTED IN THE STATE CONSTITUTION, even as reserves grow.
INCREASE FINANCIAL SECURITY—As Washington moves to cut billions in health care and food assistance funding, this measure will ensure California is better prepared to absorb those losses without slashing the programs Californians depend on.
This is not a partisan idea. Republicans and Democrats in the state Legislature and Governor Gavin Newsom support Proposition 2.
California's own nonpartisan Legislative Analyst's Office has recommended that the state should be saving significantly more than current rules require. Proposition 2 follows that advice.
Please join the California Professional Firefighters, small business organizations, and former Health Secretary Xavier Becerra in supporting Proposition 2 because they see, firsthand, what happens when reserves run dry: healthcare clinics closed, schools defunded, essential services cut, and fire protection slashed.
Saving for a rainy day is what California families do. It's what California's state government should do too. Vote YES on Proposition 2—and make sure the next time the economy turns, California is ready.
Learn more at YesOnProp2.com.
From voterguide.sos.ca.gov, the official voter guide.
Argument against
By David Tangipa, Vice Chair, Assembly Budget Committee; Steven Choi, Vice Chair, Senate Elections and Constitutional Amendment Committee; Carl DeMaio, Chairman, Reform California
Loaded LanguageName CallingAppeal to FearCard StackingGlittering Generalities
Voting NO on Prop. 2 means more money in your pocket— and less wasteful spending!
PROP. 2 CREATES A SLUSH FUND FOR SACRAMENTO POLITICIANS
In 1978 California voters overwhelmingly voted to amend the state constitution to impose a spending limit on state politicians—and the politicians have hated that spending limit ever since. Prop. 2 allows the politicians to gut the voter-imposed spending limit. What the politicians dishonestly call a “rainy day fund” is actually a SLUSH FUND! Politicians can raid this new slush fund to feed their runaway spending habits.
Loaded Language · “the politicians have hated that spending limit ever since”, “gut the voter-imposed spending limit”, “dishonestly call”, “actually a SLUSH FUND!”, “raid this new slush fund”, “runaway spending habits” — Attributes emotional 'hatred' to politicians regarding the spending limit to provoke distrust.
Name Calling · “What the politicians dishonestly call a “rainy day fund”” — Labels the politicians as dishonest to discredit them.
PROP. 2 CANCELS YOUR TAX REBATE
California already has the highest taxes in the nation, but the state constitution requires that a tax rebate be provided to you when revenues exceed the spending limit. Prop. 2 creates loopholes and accounting gimmicks so politicians can eliminate any chance of you getting your tax rebate.
PROP. 2 ALLOWS FOR MORE WASTEFUL SPENDING
California’s state budget has grown by 76% since 2018—and the size of state government has mushroomed by 40% even after adjusting for inflation! Do you feel like you are getting 40% more services and benefits today than you did in 2018? Of course not! In fact, many core services to citizens have been gutted. We’re spending more, but getting less.
That’s because state politicians have diverted your tax dollars to boondoggle projects and no-bid contracts that reward their campaign contributors. Of the little money spent on important programs, too much of it is being lost because of fraud and wasteful spending. By eliminating the spending limit on politicians we will see even more wasteful spending.
Loaded Language · “boondoggle projects”, “diverted your tax dollars”, “fraud and wasteful spending” — Charged terms like 'boondoggle' and 'diverted your tax dollars' imply corruption rather than state facts.
Appeal to Fear · “we will see even more wasteful spending” — Warns of worsening waste if a limit is removed, implying a threatening consequence.
PROP. 2 MAKES OUR BUDGET MORE VOLATILE
When times are good, the state is supposed to set money aside so families and businesses are not hit with tax increases, cuts to essential services, or budget chaos during the next economic downturn. Sacramento doesn’t need a new tool to save money. It needs the discipline to follow the rules already in place and stop spending money it doesn’t have. Prop. 2 makes our budget more volatile— putting us at greater risk of a financial crisis.
PROP. 2 IS OPPOSED BY TRUSTED BUDGET WATCHDOGS
Take a look at who is supporting Prop. 2: politicians who have repeatedly mismanaged our budget and special interests that get government contracts! Within 24 hours of putting it on the ballot, the politicians backing Prop. 2 voted to suspend more than $5 billion in required deposits into the state’s budget reserve. In contrast, opponents of Prop. 2 are government accountability and transparency watchdogs—including the Reform California and the Transparency Foundation. Californians do not need another budget gimmick dressed up as reform. We need honest budgeting, reform of wasteful spending, and a real spending limit to hold politicians accountable.
Loaded Language · “repeatedly mismanaged our budget”, “special interests that get government contracts”, “another budget gimmick dressed up as reform” — Emotionally charged characterization of supporters as serial mismanagers and self-serving special interests.
Name Calling · “politicians who have repeatedly mismanaged our budget and special interests” — Discredits supporters through derogatory labels rather than addressing the proposal's merits.
Card Stacking · “opponents of Prop. 2 are government accountability and transparency watchdogs” — Presents supporters as bad and opponents solely as virtuous watchdogs, ignoring any complicating information.
Glittering Generalities · “honest budgeting”, “a real spending limit” — Uses vague positive terms like honest and real without specifics.
VOTE NO ON PROP. 2.
From voterguide.sos.ca.gov, the official voter guide.