Argument for
By Robert Gutierrez, President, California Taxpayers Association; Robert Rivinius, President, Family Business Association of California; Julian Canete, President, California Hispanic Chambers of Commerce
Loaded Language
VOTE YES ON PROP. 43: THE LOCAL TAXPAYER PROTECTION ACT
California families are struggling with the highest income, sales, and gas taxes in the nation. Yet politicians and special interests keep pushing higher taxes that make our cost of living even more expensive.
We can’t afford to pay ANY MORE in new or higher taxes. PROP. 43 RESTORES PROPOSITION 13 TAXPAYER PROTECTIONS
Proposition 13 was designed to make it harder to raise taxes, but court decisions created loopholes that allow special interests to impose massive new tax increases by circumventing the taxpayer protections voters approved. Californians are paying billions in new or higher taxes they would not have to pay if it weren’t for these loopholes. Prop. 43 closes these loopholes and restores the two-thirds vote requirement to pass local special taxes.
PROP. 43 MAKES IT HARDER TO RAISE YOUR TAXES
Local governments have imposed over 2,000 new or higher taxes in the past decade, including higher sales, property and utility taxes—using the loopholes courts created in Prop. 13 to impose some of the most costly and damaging tax increases Californians face today.
These new and higher taxes make everything we buy or use more expensive, from food and gas to utilities and housing.
Prop. 43 guarantees voters the right to vote on all local taxes and restores the two-thirds vote for special local taxes.
PROP. 43 PROTECTS HOMEOWNERS FROM COSTLY NEW REAL ESTATE TAXES
California already has some of the highest housing costs in America, yet special interests are using court-created loopholes to add new taxes on the sale of homes, apartments and other real estate.
Loaded Language · “special interests are using court-created loopholes” — Charged terms like 'special interests' and 'court-created loopholes' frame the opponents' actions negatively without specifics.
Some cities now charge real estate transfer taxes as high as 6%. For California’s median-priced home of $900,000, that would cost a homeowner $54,000 simply for selling their house. Those costs steal homeowners’ equity, raise apartment rents, and make building new housing more expensive.
Prop. 43 makes it much harder for special interests to impose these costly taxes on homeowners, renters, and small businesses.
PROP. 43 STOPS THE BAIT-AND-SWITCH TAX TRICKS
Politicians and special interests promise new taxes will fund schools, roads, and public safety—only to divert the money elsewhere and frustrate the will of voters. Prop. 43 requires governments to spend tax revenue for the specific purpose voters approved and restores the broad voter support required before politicians and special interests impose earmarked tax measures.
If taxpayers are asked to pay more, they deserve the right to vote and the confidence their money will be spent as promised.
PROP. 43 PUTS VOTERS BACK IN CHARGE
Every election, politicians say they need just one more tax increase. Prop. 43 simply ensures TAXPAYERS are fully protected by the right to vote on taxes.
Vote YES on Prop. 43:
• Affirms the voters’ right to vote on all new or higher local taxes. • Restores the two-thirds vote requirement for local special taxes. • Protects Proposition 13 and closes court-created loopholes. • Makes it harder for special interests to raise taxes. • Protects homeowners, renters, and small businesses from new real estate taxes. • Strengthens accountability for how taxpayer dollars are spent.
From voterguide.sos.ca.gov, the official voter guide.
Argument against
By Darrell Roberts, President, California Professional Firefighters; Chris Harkins, Executive Director, Nurse Alliance of SEIU California; Adam Weinberger, President, California School Employees Association
Glittering GeneralitiesLoaded LanguageAppeal to Fear
PROPOSITION 43 LIMITS VOTERS’ ABILITY TO FUND ESSENTIAL LOCAL SERVICES.
Prop. 43 makes it harder for you to fund critical services like police and fire departments, fix and repair local roads, staff our local schools or backfill federal healthcare cuts. Prop. 43 undermines the voice of voters and the majority vote by letting just one-third of voters (33.4%) block local voter decisions—and it makes it easier for corporate special interests to avoid paying their fair share.
PROP. 43 MAKES IT HARDER TO FUND FIRE AND POLICE SERVICES.
Local police and firefighters can’t rely on Sacramento or Washington politicians. These services are funded at the local level. Prop. 43 wants to make it harder for local voters to direct new funding to services like police and fire. Without adequate funding, 911 response times are slower, fire stations sit understaffed, and families wait longer for help when every second counts. When a house fire breaks out—or a wildfire threatens our neighborhoods—that local funding is what protects us. Prop. 43 would let a small minority of voters block it. Even if 66% of voters say yes, Prop. 43 would prevent us from funding desperately needed local services.
PROP. 43 MAKES IT HARDER TO FIX ROADS, FUND SCHOOLS, AND PROTECT HEALTHCARE.
Across California, local voters have come together to repair crumbling roads and improve transportation, to fund their neighborhood schools, and to protect local hospitals and healthcare—especially as Washington cuts federal health funding. These are decisions communities make for themselves, by majority vote. Instead, Prop. 43 hands a small group of voters the power to veto those solutions, even when the majority supports them.
PROP. 43 EMPOWERS 33.4% OF VOTERS OVER THE WILL OF THE MAJORITY.
In America, we believe in one person, one vote—and the majority wins. Prop. 43 throws that out. It empowers just over one-third of voters to block what nearly 67% want. It puts the out-voted minority in charge—even if they are extremists. It makes their NO vote count twice as much as a YES vote.
Glittering Generalities · “In America, we believe in one person, one vote” — Invokes a noble-sounding national value as a rhetorical flourish to frame the argument.
Loaded Language · “even if they are extremists” — Uses the charged label 'extremists' to portray the minority negatively and provoke a reaction.
Appeal to Fear · “It puts the out-voted minority in charge—even if they are extremists” — Suggests a threatening minority of extremists could take control.
CORPORATE DONORS BENEFIT. NOT TAXPAYERS.
Under Prop. 43, corporate donors who spend big in elections will benefit most. Right now, voters can hold these corporations and developers accountable at the ballot box, and make them pay their fair share for local needs. Prop. 43 is designed to take that power away—to protect the powerful few, at everyone else’s expense.
Loaded Language · “protect the powerful few, at everyone else’s expense” — Emotionally charged framing of the measure as protecting 'the powerful few' at 'everyone else's expense'.
That’s why these organizations are asking you to vote NO on Prop. 43:
• California Professional Firefighters • Californians Against Waste • California Federation of Teachers • California School Employees Association • Communities for a Better Environment • AAPI Force • Non-Profit Housing Association of Northern California • Nurses Alliance of SEIU California • Sierra Business Council
Vote NO to protect your vote and majority rule. Keep the power where it belongs—with you and your neighbors.
Glittering Generalities · “protect your vote and majority rule”, “Keep the power where it belongs—with you and your neighbors” — Invokes vague positive ideals like 'your vote' and 'majority rule' as rhetorical flourish without specifics.
VOTE NO ON PROPOSITION 43.
www.NoProp43CA.com
From voterguide.sos.ca.gov, the official voter guide.