California's Attorney General Rob Bonta is facing criticism for a recent alteration to the description of Proposition 39, a voter identification measure for the upcoming November election. Critics argue that this move is part of a pattern by partisan state attorneys general to change ballot measure language in ways that may confuse voters and benefit their party.
Bonta, a Democrat, revised the description of Proposition 39, which would require voters to present government-issued identification or the last four digits of an ID number when voting by mail. The measure's description was changed from "establishes additional voter identification and citizenship verification requirements" to "prohibits citizens from voting unless they present government-issued identification."
This latest action follows a history of similar controversies involving past California attorneys general, notably Xavier Becerra, now a gubernatorial candidate. Becerra faced multiple lawsuits over language revisions he made to ballot measures during his tenure.
Past Ballot Measure Controversies
In 2020, Proposition 22, a ballot initiative that classified app-based company drivers as independent contractors, saw its description altered by Becerra. The measure was described as "exempts app-based transportation and delivery companies from providing employee benefits," a phrasing that supporters of the measure argued aligned with labor groups opposing the initiative. The original title had been "changes employment classification rules for app-based transportation and delivery drivers."
Another instance occurred in 2018 with Proposition 6, a measure aimed at repealing the state's gas taxes. Becerra's description stated it "eliminates certain road repair and transportation funding," acknowledging the tax's use for such projects. Opponents of the gas tax claimed this phrasing, though factually correct about the funding source, swayed public opinion. Polling indicated support for repeal dropped from 50% to 39% after voters saw the ballot title.
Proposition 15 in 2020, which sought to tax commercial and industrial properties based on market value to increase school funding, was also subject to language changes. Becerra's description read: "Increases funding for public schools, community colleges, and local government services by changing tax assessment of commercial and industrial property." Business groups contended that this phrasing failed to clearly indicate it represented a tax increase.
More recently, the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association challenged Bonta's description for Proposition 5, a 2024 initiative concerning housing bonds. The measure aimed to lower the voting threshold for certain general obligation bonds from two-thirds to 55%. The association argued that Bonta's description, which stated the threshold would change to 55%, might mislead voters into believing the requirement increased from a simple majority. While a trial court initially sided with the association, an appellate court ruled in favor of Bonta, affirming the attorney general's discretion in crafting ballot measure descriptions.