Two significant ballot measures in California, Proposition 39 requiring voter identification and Proposition 40, a tax on billionaires, are facing unexpected challenges in upcoming elections, according to recent polling data. Both propositions, described as potentially straightforward choices for voters, are currently trailing in voter support.
Proposition 40, often referred to as the "billionaire tax," is leading with 48% of likely voters in its favor, but this is short of a majority, with 41% opposed. Proposition 39, which aims to implement a voter ID requirement, is losing, with 51% of voters opposing it and only 42% supporting it.
This outcome for Proposition 39 is particularly concerning given that polls consistently show a general public belief, across party lines including Democrats and minority groups, that voters should be required to present identification. The article suggests that the ballot language, particularly the title and description for Proposition 39, may be contributing to its poor performance. California Attorney General Rob Bonta reportedly altered the initiative's title from its original "Establishes Additional Voter Identification and Citizenship Verification Requirements" to "Prohibits Citizens from Voting Unless They Present Government-Issued Identification." This revised wording, critics argue, is misleading and could instill fear among voters by suggesting a prohibition on voting rather than a measure to prevent non-citizens from participating.
The intent of Proposition 39, as clarified, is to prevent non-citizens from voting. Meanwhile, Proposition 40, which proposes a 5% wealth tax on billionaires, appears to be benefiting from a long-standing public narrative that wealthy individuals do not pay their "fair share." Voters may also be swayed by the proposition's description as a "one-time tax," a claim the author disputes, noting that such taxes rarely remain temporary.
An example of a "temporary" tax becoming permanent is Proposition 3, which would make a tax initially enacted in 2012 on the wealthy a permanent fixture. Its title, "Provides Permanent Funding for Schools and Health Care," places the tax aspect at the end. The article posits that it would be a detrimental outcome if California voters approved Proposition 40 while rejecting Proposition 39, leading to the potential seizure of wealth from citizens and simultaneously making it more difficult for them to influence such outcomes via the ballot box. The author urges individuals from all political affiliations to set aside partisan politics and support what is described as common sense and the right course of action for the state's future.