Not in City of Santa Cruz? Click here to choose your customized guide.
The Courage California Voter Guide compiles the information that allows you to make informed decisions about the races on your ballot, based on your values. Vote in every race on your ballot! It's our right and our responsibility. Please share this guide with your friends and family.
Have questions about voting in Santa Cruz County? Find out how to vote in Santa Cruz County.
The President of the United States is the head of the Executive branch of the federal government, and the Commander-in-Chief for all branches of the armed forces. A president has the power to make diplomatic, executive, and judicial appointments, and can sign into law or veto legislation. Presidential administrations are responsible for both foreign and domestic policy priorities. Presidents are limited to serving two four-year terms in office.
As of October 12th, Democratic challenger Vice President Joe Biden is leading Republican incumbent President Donald Trump in the polls by an average national margin of 9.2% (as of 10/24/20). Ten days before Election Day in 2016, Secretary Hillary Clinton held an average 4.9% polling lead over Donald Trump. Vice President Biden’s campaign has raised $952 million (as of 10/14/20) and is not funded by fossil fuel money. While his platform commits to establishing meaningful campaign finance reform, his 2020 campaign has received donations from special interest, corporate PAC, and lobbyist organizations. President Donald Trump has raised $601 million (as of 10/14/20) and has not taken any fundraising pledges. President Trump is endorsed by the Fraternal Order of Police, Citizens United, Proud Boys, and a variety of law enforcement organizations.
Vice President Joseph R. Biden, Jr. is from Scranton, PA, and moved to Claymont, DE with his family when he was 10 years old. He has been a resident of Wilmington, DE, for most of his adult life. Vice President Biden came of age during the 1960s Civil Rights movement, which he cites as his inspiration for majoring in political science at the University of Delaware before earning his law degree at Syracuse University. His political career began in 1970 when he was elected to the New Castle County Council. Just two years later, at age 29, Vice President Biden ran for the Delaware Senate seat, and became one of the youngest people ever elected to the United States Senate. A few weeks after his election, his wife and infant daughter were killed in a car accident, and his two sons were badly injured. This personal tragedy shaped Vice President Biden’s public image as an empathetic leader and committed family man.
Vice President Biden spent 36 years representing Delaware in the Senate. He is often critiqued as being an unremarkable, status quo Democrat, and mid-career votes in favor of the Defense of Marriage Act, anti-drug legislation, and the Iraq War reaffirm that characterization. In 1991, Vice President Biden was the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee and presided over the Supreme Court confirmation hearings for Justice Clarence Thomas, who had been credibly accused of sexual harassment by a former colleague, Anita Hill. Vice President Biden’s mismanagement of the hearing resulted in a targeted and unfair character assassination of Anita Hill, and remains a reminder of his complicity in the patriarchal and racist systems on which American government is built.
Vice President Biden has also been directly accused of unwanted contact by several women over the course of his career. Most of the accusations came to light as part of the #MeToo movement, and related to invasions of personal space that included the touching of shoulders, caressing of hair, and close whispering. He has apologized publicly for this behavior, and stated an understanding of his responsibility to conform to more modern social norms in his interactions with women.
Vice President Biden launched two unsuccessful campaigns for President during his time in the Senate, in 1988 and 2008. After ending his 2008 campaign, he was chosen by President Barack Obama to join his ticket as Vice President, and they served together for two terms. As Vice President, he was responsible for managing the 2009 economic recovery, helping to expand health care through the Affordable Care Act, and acting as the administration’s liaison to the Senate. In 2015, his oldest son, Beau Biden, lost his battle with brain cancer at the age of 46. Since leaving office in 2016, Vice President Biden has dedicated substantial resources to cancer research.
Although he was rarely a trailblazer, Vice President Biden’s record does demonstrate a consistent liberal evolution on many issues throughout his career. After voting in favor of the Defense of Marriage Act in 1996, he was the first member of the Obama Administration to advocate for marriage equality in 2012. After presiding over the Anita Hill hearings in 1991, he was the architect of the Violence Against Women Act in 1994, and led the Obama Administration’s effort to reduce campus sexual assault through the It’s On Us campaign. After supporting the 1994 Crime Bill and aligning with the racist ‘tough on crime’ approach of that era, his current platform supports criminal justice reform, abolishing private prisons, and decriminalizing marijuana.
Vice President Biden has long been committed to building relationships with colleagues across the aisle, and bridging intra-party policy differences to establish compromise legislation for the American people. This commitment to civility resulted in Vice President Biden maintaining problematic working relationships with segregationist Senators James Eastland and Herman Talmadge during his time in the Senate. During the 2020 primary, Sen. Cory Booker and Sen. Kamala Harris, both Black candidates running for President, were outward in their critique of what they viewed as Vice President Biden’s defense of the reputations and decency of these segregationists. However, Vice President Biden has not apologized for his continued defense of collaborating with these segregationist colleagues, and maintains broad support in the Black community.
Vice President Biden’s commitment to compromise has extended to the left in recent months, and updates to his campaign platform are reflective of his interest in connecting with progressive voters. While he was a more moderate candidate in the larger 2020 field, he has been conscientious about including the popular perspectives of his progressive rivals, including Sen. Elizabeth Warren and Sen. Bernie Sanders, in his platform. He has recently issued proposals that include middle-class tax cuts, lowering Medicare eligibility to age 60, new benchmarks for greenhouse gas emission limits, free college tuition for families making less than $125,000 annually, and clean energy investments. While these proposals do not embrace the full scope of progressive ideals, they are an important indicator of his capacity for collaboration.
The Biden/Harris campaign is endorsed by many progressive groups in the country. While the Biden/Harris platform is the most progressive platform ever adopted by a major party ticket, we encourage progressive advocates to continue to hold their administration accountable, and work to encourage progressive legislation throughout the country. With consideration to their records in public service, we unequivocally recommend Joe Biden and Kamala Harris as the strongest choice for equitable and representative leadership in office.
The President of the United States is the head of the Executive branch of the federal government, and the Commander-in-Chief for all branches of the armed forces. A president has the power to make diplomatic, executive, and judicial appointments, and can sign into law or veto legislation. Presidential administrations are responsible for both foreign and domestic policy priorities. Presidents are limited to serving two four-year terms in office.
As of October 12th, Democratic challenger Vice President Joe Biden is leading Republican incumbent President Donald Trump in the polls by an average national margin of 9.2% (as of 10/24/20). Ten days before Election Day in 2016, Secretary Hillary Clinton held an average 4.9% polling lead over Donald Trump. Vice President Biden’s campaign has raised $952 million (as of 10/14/20) and is not funded by fossil fuel money. While his platform commits to establishing meaningful campaign finance reform, his 2020 campaign has received donations from special interest, corporate PAC, and lobbyist organizations. President Donald Trump has raised $601 million (as of 10/14/20) and has not taken any fundraising pledges. President Trump is endorsed by the Fraternal Order of Police, Citizens United, Proud Boys, and a variety of law enforcement organizations.
Vice President Joseph R. Biden, Jr. is from Scranton, PA, and moved to Claymont, DE with his family when he was 10 years old. He has been a resident of Wilmington, DE, for most of his adult life. Vice President Biden came of age during the 1960s Civil Rights movement, which he cites as his inspiration for majoring in political science at the University of Delaware before earning his law degree at Syracuse University. His political career began in 1970 when he was elected to the New Castle County Council. Just two years later, at age 29, Vice President Biden ran for the Delaware Senate seat, and became one of the youngest people ever elected to the United States Senate. A few weeks after his election, his wife and infant daughter were killed in a car accident, and his two sons were badly injured. This personal tragedy shaped Vice President Biden’s public image as an empathetic leader and committed family man.
Vice President Biden spent 36 years representing Delaware in the Senate. He is often critiqued as being an unremarkable, status quo Democrat, and mid-career votes in favor of the Defense of Marriage Act, anti-drug legislation, and the Iraq War reaffirm that characterization. In 1991, Vice President Biden was the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee and presided over the Supreme Court confirmation hearings for Justice Clarence Thomas, who had been credibly accused of sexual harassment by a former colleague, Anita Hill. Vice President Biden’s mismanagement of the hearing resulted in a targeted and unfair character assassination of Anita Hill, and remains a reminder of his complicity in the patriarchal and racist systems on which American government is built.
Vice President Biden has also been directly accused of unwanted contact by several women over the course of his career. Most of the accusations came to light as part of the #MeToo movement, and related to invasions of personal space that included the touching of shoulders, caressing of hair, and close whispering. He has apologized publicly for this behavior, and stated an understanding of his responsibility to conform to more modern social norms in his interactions with women.
Vice President Biden launched two unsuccessful campaigns for President during his time in the Senate, in 1988 and 2008. After ending his 2008 campaign, he was chosen by President Barack Obama to join his ticket as Vice President, and they served together for two terms. As Vice President, he was responsible for managing the 2009 economic recovery, helping to expand health care through the Affordable Care Act, and acting as the administration’s liaison to the Senate. In 2015, his oldest son, Beau Biden, lost his battle with brain cancer at the age of 46. Since leaving office in 2016, Vice President Biden has dedicated substantial resources to cancer research.
Although he was rarely a trailblazer, Vice President Biden’s record does demonstrate a consistent liberal evolution on many issues throughout his career. After voting in favor of the Defense of Marriage Act in 1996, he was the first member of the Obama Administration to advocate for marriage equality in 2012. After presiding over the Anita Hill hearings in 1991, he was the architect of the Violence Against Women Act in 1994, and led the Obama Administration’s effort to reduce campus sexual assault through the It’s On Us campaign. After supporting the 1994 Crime Bill and aligning with the racist ‘tough on crime’ approach of that era, his current platform supports criminal justice reform, abolishing private prisons, and decriminalizing marijuana.
Vice President Biden has long been committed to building relationships with colleagues across the aisle, and bridging intra-party policy differences to establish compromise legislation for the American people. This commitment to civility resulted in Vice President Biden maintaining problematic working relationships with segregationist Senators James Eastland and Herman Talmadge during his time in the Senate. During the 2020 primary, Sen. Cory Booker and Sen. Kamala Harris, both Black candidates running for President, were outward in their critique of what they viewed as Vice President Biden’s defense of the reputations and decency of these segregationists. However, Vice President Biden has not apologized for his continued defense of collaborating with these segregationist colleagues, and maintains broad support in the Black community.
Vice President Biden’s commitment to compromise has extended to the left in recent months, and updates to his campaign platform are reflective of his interest in connecting with progressive voters. While he was a more moderate candidate in the larger 2020 field, he has been conscientious about including the popular perspectives of his progressive rivals, including Sen. Elizabeth Warren and Sen. Bernie Sanders, in his platform. He has recently issued proposals that include middle-class tax cuts, lowering Medicare eligibility to age 60, new benchmarks for greenhouse gas emission limits, free college tuition for families making less than $125,000 annually, and clean energy investments. While these proposals do not embrace the full scope of progressive ideals, they are an important indicator of his capacity for collaboration.
The Biden/Harris campaign is endorsed by many progressive groups in the country. While the Biden/Harris platform is the most progressive platform ever adopted by a major party ticket, we encourage progressive advocates to continue to hold their administration accountable, and work to encourage progressive legislation throughout the country. With consideration to their records in public service, we unequivocally recommend Joe Biden and Kamala Harris as the strongest choice for equitable and representative leadership in office.
The Vice President is the second-highest office in the Executive branch of the federal government. The officeholder is the first in the line of succession to the presidency and holds legislative authority as the president of the Senate. In this role, the Vice President presides over Senate deliberations and can cast a tie-breaking vote in close decisions. A Vice Presidential candidate is selected directly by a Presidential nominee who has won the democratic primary process. Vice Presidential candidates are elected indirectly as a part of the Presidential ticket in the general election. A Vice President serves four year terms, and there is no term limit for this position.
As of October 12th, Democratic challenger Vice President Joe Biden is leading Republican incumbent President Donald Trump in the polls by an average national margin of 9.2% (as of 10/24/20). Ten days before Election Day in 2016, Secretary Hillary Clinton held an average 4.9% polling lead over Donald Trump. Vice President Biden’s campaign has raised $952 million (as of 10/14/20) and is not funded by fossil fuel money. While his platform commits to establishing meaningful campaign finance reform, his 2020 campaign has received donations from special interest, corporate PAC, and lobbyist organizations. President Donald Trump has raised $601 million (as of 10/14/20) and has not taken any fundraising pledges. President Trump is endorsed by the Fraternal Order of Police, Citizens United, Proud Boys, and a variety of law enforcement organizations.
Senator Kamala Harris grew up in Berkeley, CA, and now resides in Los Angeles. She is the daughter of a Jamiacan father and an Indian mother who both emigrated to the Bay Area in the 1960s, and established themselves as activists in the Civil Rights movement in Oakland. Sen. Harris’ interest in justice and equal rights was instilled at a young age when she participated in civil rights protests in Oakland alongside her activist parents, and was further shaped when she was included in the second class of students to be bussed as part of Berkley’s efforts toward school integration. She attended Howard University, one of America’s HBCU institutions, for undergraduate studies, and completed her law degree at the University of California, Hastings.
After working for the Alameda County District Attorney’s Office for 8 years, Sen. Harris transitioned to a role as a prosecutor in the San Francisco District Attorney’s office. Sen. Harris’ political career began in 2003 when she won her bid to become District Attorney of the City and County of San Francisco. She served two terms in San Francisco before being elected as the Attorney General for the state of California in 2010. She was the first woman and the first person of color to hold this seat. In representing the needs and interests of Californians in each of these roles, Sen. Harris’ record was both progressive for the time and complicated by her moderate approach to policing and criminal justice. She has been criticized for failing to institute comprehensive police accountability measures, for not establishing meaningful prison reform, and for taking a hands-off approach to cases related to police misconduct. However, her lenient approach to policing was often punctuated by decidedly progressive support for social justice issues, including the establishment of an education and workforce reentry program designed to diminish recidivism. Similarly, as Attorney General, she declined to defend Proposition 8, a proposition to make same-sex marriage illegal in California, in court and officiated the first wedding in the state when marriage equality was restored in 2013.
In 2016, Sen. Harris became the first woman of color elected to represent California in the United States Senate. Sen. Harris has sponsored legislation on climate and environmental protections, rental and housing protections, women’s health, and pandemic relief. She was also an original cosponsor of the progressive Green New Deal authored by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio Cortez and Sen. Ed Markey. Sen. Harris sits on four committees: Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, Budget, Judiciary, and Select Committee on Intelligence. She has been an outspoken opponent of the Trump Administration, and has deftly used her position on the Senate Judiciary Committee to question judicial nominees and interrogate the hypocrisy of her Republican colleagues.
Sen. Harris formally launched her campaign for President in January 2019 at an Oakland rally with an estimated attendance of 20,000 supporters. As a candidate, she pushed forward a platform that opposed Medicare for All, supported expansion of the Affordable Care Act, sought to expand tax benefits for middle and low-income families, supported citizenship for Dreamers, and favored a ban on assault weapons. She ended her campaign in December 2019, and was tapped to join Vice President Joe Biden’s ticket ahead of the Democratic National Convention in August 2020.
The Biden/Harris campaign is endorsed by many progressive groups in the country. While the Biden/Harris platform is the most progressive platform ever adopted by a major party ticket, we encourage progressive advocates to continue to hold their administration accountable, and work to encourage progressive legislation throughout the country. With consideration to their records in public service, we unequivocally recommend Joe Biden and Kamala Harris as the strongest choice for equitable and representative leadership in office.
The Vice President is the second-highest office in the Executive branch of the federal government. The officeholder is the first in the line of succession to the presidency and holds legislative authority as the president of the Senate. In this role, the Vice President presides over Senate deliberations and can cast a tie-breaking vote in close decisions. A Vice Presidential candidate is selected directly by a Presidential nominee who has won the democratic primary process. Vice Presidential candidates are elected indirectly as a part of the Presidential ticket in the general election. A Vice President serves four year terms, and there is no term limit for this position.
As of October 12th, Democratic challenger Vice President Joe Biden is leading Republican incumbent President Donald Trump in the polls by an average national margin of 9.2% (as of 10/24/20). Ten days before Election Day in 2016, Secretary Hillary Clinton held an average 4.9% polling lead over Donald Trump. Vice President Biden’s campaign has raised $952 million (as of 10/14/20) and is not funded by fossil fuel money. While his platform commits to establishing meaningful campaign finance reform, his 2020 campaign has received donations from special interest, corporate PAC, and lobbyist organizations. President Donald Trump has raised $601 million (as of 10/14/20) and has not taken any fundraising pledges. President Trump is endorsed by the Fraternal Order of Police, Citizens United, Proud Boys, and a variety of law enforcement organizations.
Senator Kamala Harris grew up in Berkeley, CA, and now resides in Los Angeles. She is the daughter of a Jamiacan father and an Indian mother who both emigrated to the Bay Area in the 1960s, and established themselves as activists in the Civil Rights movement in Oakland. Sen. Harris’ interest in justice and equal rights was instilled at a young age when she participated in civil rights protests in Oakland alongside her activist parents, and was further shaped when she was included in the second class of students to be bussed as part of Berkley’s efforts toward school integration. She attended Howard University, one of America’s HBCU institutions, for undergraduate studies, and completed her law degree at the University of California, Hastings.
After working for the Alameda County District Attorney’s Office for 8 years, Sen. Harris transitioned to a role as a prosecutor in the San Francisco District Attorney’s office. Sen. Harris’ political career began in 2003 when she won her bid to become District Attorney of the City and County of San Francisco. She served two terms in San Francisco before being elected as the Attorney General for the state of California in 2010. She was the first woman and the first person of color to hold this seat. In representing the needs and interests of Californians in each of these roles, Sen. Harris’ record was both progressive for the time and complicated by her moderate approach to policing and criminal justice. She has been criticized for failing to institute comprehensive police accountability measures, for not establishing meaningful prison reform, and for taking a hands-off approach to cases related to police misconduct. However, her lenient approach to policing was often punctuated by decidedly progressive support for social justice issues, including the establishment of an education and workforce reentry program designed to diminish recidivism. Similarly, as Attorney General, she declined to defend Proposition 8, a proposition to make same-sex marriage illegal in California, in court and officiated the first wedding in the state when marriage equality was restored in 2013.
In 2016, Sen. Harris became the first woman of color elected to represent California in the United States Senate. Sen. Harris has sponsored legislation on climate and environmental protections, rental and housing protections, women’s health, and pandemic relief. She was also an original cosponsor of the progressive Green New Deal authored by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio Cortez and Sen. Ed Markey. Sen. Harris sits on four committees: Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, Budget, Judiciary, and Select Committee on Intelligence. She has been an outspoken opponent of the Trump Administration, and has deftly used her position on the Senate Judiciary Committee to question judicial nominees and interrogate the hypocrisy of her Republican colleagues.
Sen. Harris formally launched her campaign for President in January 2019 at an Oakland rally with an estimated attendance of 20,000 supporters. As a candidate, she pushed forward a platform that opposed Medicare for All, supported expansion of the Affordable Care Act, sought to expand tax benefits for middle and low-income families, supported citizenship for Dreamers, and favored a ban on assault weapons. She ended her campaign in December 2019, and was tapped to join Vice President Joe Biden’s ticket ahead of the Democratic National Convention in August 2020.
The Biden/Harris campaign is endorsed by many progressive groups in the country. While the Biden/Harris platform is the most progressive platform ever adopted by a major party ticket, we encourage progressive advocates to continue to hold their administration accountable, and work to encourage progressive legislation throughout the country. With consideration to their records in public service, we unequivocally recommend Joe Biden and Kamala Harris as the strongest choice for equitable and representative leadership in office.
The United States is divided into 435 congressional districts, each with a population of about 710,000 individuals. Each district elects a representative to the House of Representatives for a two-year term. California has 53 congressional representatives. There is no term limit for this position.
California's 20th Congressional District includes Monterey and San Benito Counties, as well as parts of Santa Cruz and Santa Clara Counties. Democrats typically hold this district. The most recent election results show 70.4 percent of AD-20 voted for Clinton for president in 2016, and 70.2 percent of the district voted for Newsom for governor in 2018.
In the primary, Democrat incumbent Representative Panetta led Republican challenger Jeff Gorman by a margin of 45.9 percent. Neither campaign has pledged to refuse corporate PAC, fossil fuel, or police money. Panetta’s campaign has raised $1,349,218.44 and is funded by insurance companies, corporations, and agribusiness. Jeff Gorman’s campaign has raised $47,557.40 and is funded by retirees as well as construction and finance interests.
Rep. Panetta, a past intelligence officer with the United States Navy Reserve and district attorney for Monterey County, grew up on the central coast of California. According to campaign materials, Rep. Panetta is running for re-election to serve and give back to the community and country.
Rep. Panetta’s priorities for CA-20 this year have included protecting the environment, pushing for affordable housing, and advocating for immigration reform. He currently sits on three committees, including the Committee on Ways and Means. This year, Rep. Panetta has voted 100 percent of the time with Nancy Pelosi and 93 percent of the time with Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Significant legislation that Rep. Panetta has disagreed with Rep. Ocasio-Cortez on is the Defense Bill and Paid Leave for Federal Workers, which Rep. Panetta voted for but Rep. Ocasio-Cortez voted against. Rep. Panetta has co-sponsored four bills this year, including on expanding childcare and requiring Trump to seek congressional approval before engaging in military operations against Iran, all of which have successfully passed.
Rep. Panetta is endorsed by a strong majority of progressive groups in the district. According to our analysis, Rep. Panetta is the strongest choice for equitable and representative leadership in office.
The United States is divided into 435 congressional districts, each with a population of about 710,000 individuals.
The United States is divided into 435 congressional districts, each with a population of about 710,000 individuals. Each district elects a representative to the House of Representatives for a two-year term. California has 53 congressional representatives. There is no term limit for this position.
California's 20th Congressional District includes Monterey and San Benito Counties, as well as parts of Santa Cruz and Santa Clara Counties. Democrats typically hold this district. The most recent election results show 70.4 percent of AD-20 voted for Clinton for president in 2016, and 70.2 percent of the district voted for Newsom for governor in 2018.
In the primary, Democrat incumbent Representative Panetta led Republican challenger Jeff Gorman by a margin of 45.9 percent. Neither campaign has pledged to refuse corporate PAC, fossil fuel, or police money. Panetta’s campaign has raised $1,349,218.44 and is funded by insurance companies, corporations, and agribusiness. Jeff Gorman’s campaign has raised $47,557.40 and is funded by retirees as well as construction and finance interests.
Rep. Panetta, a past intelligence officer with the United States Navy Reserve and district attorney for Monterey County, grew up on the central coast of California. According to campaign materials, Rep. Panetta is running for re-election to serve and give back to the community and country.
Rep. Panetta’s priorities for CA-20 this year have included protecting the environment, pushing for affordable housing, and advocating for immigration reform. He currently sits on three committees, including the Committee on Ways and Means. This year, Rep. Panetta has voted 100 percent of the time with Nancy Pelosi and 93 percent of the time with Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Significant legislation that Rep. Panetta has disagreed with Rep. Ocasio-Cortez on is the Defense Bill and Paid Leave for Federal Workers, which Rep. Panetta voted for but Rep. Ocasio-Cortez voted against. Rep. Panetta has co-sponsored four bills this year, including on expanding childcare and requiring Trump to seek congressional approval before engaging in military operations against Iran, all of which have successfully passed.
Rep. Panetta is endorsed by a strong majority of progressive groups in the district. According to our analysis, Rep. Panetta is the strongest choice for equitable and representative leadership in office.
State Assembly Members form part of the California State Legislature, and work alongside the governor to establish laws and a state budget. They hold the power to pass bills that affect public policy, set state spending levels, raise and lower taxes, and uphold or override the governor’s vetoes. The California State Assembly has 80 districts. Each represents a population of at least 465,000 Californians. Representatives are elected to the Assembly for a two-year term. Every two years, all 80 seats are subject to election. Members elected before 2012 are restricted to three two-year terms (six years) in the Assembly. Those elected in or after 2012 are allowed to serve 12 years total across both the State Senate and Assembly. This term, Democrats currently hold a two-thirds supermajority of 61 seats in the California State Assembly, while Republicans hold 17 seats. One seat is held by an Independent, and one seat is currently vacant.
California's 29th Assembly District includes parts of Monterey, Santa Cruz, and Santa Clara Counties. Democrats typically hold this district. The most recent election results show 70 percent of AD-29 voted for Clinton for president in 2016, and 70.9 percent of the district voted for Newsom for governor in 2018.
In the primary, Democrat incumbent Representative Stone led Republican challenger Shomir Banerjee by a margin of 51.6 percent. Stone’s campaign has raised $163,718.50, has not pledged to refuse corporate PAC, fossil fuel, or police money, and has accepted funds from corporations and police groups. Individual donations comprise a large amount of Stone’s campaign finances. Banerjee’s campaign has raised $2,250.00 and has also not pledged to refuse corporate PAC, fossil fuel, or police money.
Mark Stone lives in Scotts Valley. He is the incumbent, having served in this position since 2012. According to campaign materials, he is running for re-election because he wants to continue to protect the most vulnerable Californians.
In the State Assembly, Rep. Stone has led reform in criminal justice, youth and education, LGBTQIA+ rights, and the environment. Last year, his bill to eliminate copayments for medical and dental visits for incarcerated people became law, as well as a bill that allowed more incarcerated people to qualify to earn parole credits. He also introduced a Student Borrower’s Bill of Rights, and the Coastal Adaptation, Access, and Resilience Program (CAARP), to fund climate-adaptation projects. He currently chairs the Judiciary Committee.
Rep. Stone’s priorities for AD-29 this year include child welfare, justice reform, and environmental protection. He currently sits on eight committees, and he chairs the Judiciary Committee. Rep. Stone has sponsored or cosponsored five bills supporting gun violence prevention legislation, consumer protection, and expanded medical leave this year. He scores a lifetime score of 100 out of 100 on Courage Score, our annual analysis of legislators’ progressive voting records. Based on our Courage Score analysis, Rep. Stone has supported the most progressive bills that made it to a vote.
Prior to election to the State Assembly, he served two terms on the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors.
Rep. Stone is endorsed by a strong majority of progressive groups in the district. According to our analysis, despite his lack of campaign finance pledges, Rep. Mark Stone is the strongest choice for equitable and representative leadership in office.
State Assembly Members form part of the California State Legislature, and work alongside the governor to establish laws and a state budget. They hold the power to pass bills that affect public policy, set state spending levels, raise and lower taxes, and uphold or override the governor’s vetoes. The California State Assembly has 80 districts. Each represents a population of at least 465,000 Californians. Representatives are elected to the Assembly for a two-year term. Every two years, all 80 seats are subject to election. Members elected before 2012 are restricted to three two-year terms (six years) in the Assembly. Those elected in or after 2012 are allowed to serve 12 years total across both the State Senate and Assembly. This term, Democrats currently hold a two-thirds supermajority of 61 seats in the California State Assembly, while Republicans hold 17 seats. One seat is held by an Independent, and one seat is currently vacant.
California's 29th Assembly District includes parts of Monterey, Santa Cruz, and Santa Clara Counties. Democrats typically hold this district. The most recent election results show 70 percent of AD-29 voted for Clinton for president in 2016, and 70.9 percent of the district voted for Newsom for governor in 2018.
In the primary, Democrat incumbent Representative Stone led Republican challenger Shomir Banerjee by a margin of 51.6 percent. Stone’s campaign has raised $163,718.50, has not pledged to refuse corporate PAC, fossil fuel, or police money, and has accepted funds from corporations and police groups. Individual donations comprise a large amount of Stone’s campaign finances. Banerjee’s campaign has raised $2,250.00 and has also not pledged to refuse corporate PAC, fossil fuel, or police money.
Mark Stone lives in Scotts Valley. He is the incumbent, having served in this position since 2012. According to campaign materials, he is running for re-election because he wants to continue to protect the most vulnerable Californians.
In the State Assembly, Rep. Stone has led reform in criminal justice, youth and education, LGBTQIA+ rights, and the environment. Last year, his bill to eliminate copayments for medical and dental visits for incarcerated people became law, as well as a bill that allowed more incarcerated people to qualify to earn parole credits. He also introduced a Student Borrower’s Bill of Rights, and the Coastal Adaptation, Access, and Resilience Program (CAARP), to fund climate-adaptation projects. He currently chairs the Judiciary Committee.
Rep. Stone’s priorities for AD-29 this year include child welfare, justice reform, and environmental protection. He currently sits on eight committees, and he chairs the Judiciary Committee. Rep. Stone has sponsored or cosponsored five bills supporting gun violence prevention legislation, consumer protection, and expanded medical leave this year. He scores a lifetime score of 100 out of 100 on Courage Score, our annual analysis of legislators’ progressive voting records. Based on our Courage Score analysis, Rep. Stone has supported the most progressive bills that made it to a vote.
Prior to election to the State Assembly, he served two terms on the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors.
Rep. Stone is endorsed by a strong majority of progressive groups in the district. According to our analysis, despite his lack of campaign finance pledges, Rep. Mark Stone is the strongest choice for equitable and representative leadership in office.
State Assembly Members form part of the California State Legislature, and work alongside the governor to establish laws and a state budget. They hold the power to pass bills that affect public policy, set state spending levels, raise and lower taxes, and uphold or override the governor’s vetoes. The California State Assembly has 80 districts. Each represents a population of at least 465,000 Californians. Representatives are elected to the Assembly for a two-year term. Every two years, all 80 seats are subject to election. Members elected before 2012 are restricted to three two-year terms (six years) in the Assembly. Those elected in or after 2012 are allowed to serve 12 years total across both the State Senate and Assembly. This term, Democrats currently hold a two-thirds supermajority of 61 seats in the California State Assembly, while Republicans hold 17 seats. One seat is held by an Independent, and one seat is currently vacant.
California's 29th Assembly District includes parts of Monterey, Santa Cruz, and Santa Clara Counties. Democrats typically hold this district. The most recent election results show 70 percent of AD-29 voted for Clinton for president in 2016, and 70.9 percent of the district voted for Newsom for governor in 2018.
In the primary, Democrat incumbent Representative Stone led Republican challenger Shomir Banerjee by a margin of 51.6 percent. Stone’s campaign has raised $163,718.50, has not pledged to refuse corporate PAC, fossil fuel, or police money, and has accepted funds from corporations and police groups. Individual donations comprise a large amount of Stone’s campaign finances. Banerjee’s campaign has raised $2,250.00 and has also not pledged to refuse corporate PAC, fossil fuel, or police money.
Mark Stone lives in Scotts Valley. He is the incumbent, having served in this position since 2012. According to campaign materials, he is running for re-election because he wants to continue to protect the most vulnerable Californians.
In the State Assembly, Rep. Stone has led reform in criminal justice, youth and education, LGBTQIA+ rights, and the environment. Last year, his bill to eliminate copayments for medical and dental visits for incarcerated people became law, as well as a bill that allowed more incarcerated people to qualify to earn parole credits. He also introduced a Student Borrower’s Bill of Rights, and the Coastal Adaptation, Access, and Resilience Program (CAARP), to fund climate-adaptation projects. He currently chairs the Judiciary Committee.
Rep. Stone’s priorities for AD-29 this year include child welfare, justice reform, and environmental protection. He currently sits on eight committees, and he chairs the Judiciary Committee. Rep. Stone has sponsored or cosponsored five bills supporting gun violence prevention legislation, consumer protection, and expanded medical leave this year. He scores a lifetime score of 100 out of 100 on Courage Score, our annual analysis of legislators’ progressive voting records. Based on our Courage Score analysis, Rep. Stone has supported the most progressive bills that made it to a vote.
Prior to election to the State Assembly, he served two terms on the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors.
Rep. Stone is endorsed by a strong majority of progressive groups in the district. According to our analysis, despite his lack of campaign finance pledges, Rep. Mark Stone is the strongest choice for equitable and representative leadership in office.
State senators represent and advocate for the needs of their district at the California State Capitol. They are responsible for creating legislation that addresses issues within their district, as well as voting and debating on preexisting laws. The California State Senate has 40 congressional districts. Each represents a population of about 930,000 Californians. Representatives are elected to the Senate for a four-year term. Every two years, half of the Senate's 40 seats are subject to election. Members elected before 2012 are restricted to two four-year terms (eight years) in the Senate. Those elected in or after 2012 are allowed to serve 12 years total across both the State Senate and Assembly. This term, Democrats currently hold a two-thirds supermajority of 29 seats in the California State Senate, while Republicans hold 11 seats.
California's 17th Senate District includes San Luis Obispo and Santa Cruz Counties, as well as parts of Monterey and Santa Clara Counties. Republicans held this district until the 2008 election, when Democratic incumbent Bill Monning won and flipped SD-17 from red to blue. The most recent election results show SD-17 voted for Hillary Clinton for president in 2016 and Gavin Newsom for governor in 2018.
In the primary, Democrat challenger John Laird led Republican challenger Vicki Nohrden by a margin of 12.9 percent. Laird’s campaign is funded by police, fossil fuels, and corporate PAC money. Nohrden’s campaign has not committed to any of the pledges, and $10,000 of the $63,493.05 raised is self-funded.
John Laird was raised in Vallejo and moved to Santa Cruz in the 1960s. He graduated with honors from UC Santa Cruz in 1972. Laird served as a councilmember on the Santa Cruz City Council and then as a two-term mayor. According to campaign materials, he is running for re-election because he wants to work to expand state efforts against climate change, guarantee universal health-care coverage, develop affordable housing, and protect the public education system.
Laird is a former city councilmember, mayor, member of the California State Assembly, and California Secretary for Natural Resources under Governor Jerry Brown. His other professional experiences include serving as executive director of the Santa Cruz AIDS Project and teaching state environmental policy at UC Santa Cruz. While serving as assemblymember for the 27th district, Laird authored 82 bills that were signed into law.
Laird is endorsed by a strong majority of local progressive groups, including California Democratic Party, California Legislative LGBT Caucus, California Teachers Association, and NARAL Pro-Choice California. He is also endorsed by California Association Highway Patrolmen, Peace Officers Research Association of CA, and Santa Cruz County Sheriff Jim Hart. However, the threat of Republican Nohrden’s potential policies greatly outweighs Laird’s few problematic endorsements and lack of campaign finance pledges. According to our analysis, Laird is the strongest choice for equitable and representative leadership in office.
State senators represent and advocate for the needs of their district at the California State Capitol.
State senators represent and advocate for the needs of their district at the California State Capitol. They are responsible for creating legislation that addresses issues within their district, as well as voting and debating on preexisting laws. The California State Senate has 40 congressional districts. Each represents a population of about 930,000 Californians. Representatives are elected to the Senate for a four-year term. Every two years, half of the Senate's 40 seats are subject to election. Members elected before 2012 are restricted to two four-year terms (eight years) in the Senate. Those elected in or after 2012 are allowed to serve 12 years total across both the State Senate and Assembly. This term, Democrats currently hold a two-thirds supermajority of 29 seats in the California State Senate, while Republicans hold 11 seats.
California's 17th Senate District includes San Luis Obispo and Santa Cruz Counties, as well as parts of Monterey and Santa Clara Counties. Republicans held this district until the 2008 election, when Democratic incumbent Bill Monning won and flipped SD-17 from red to blue. The most recent election results show SD-17 voted for Hillary Clinton for president in 2016 and Gavin Newsom for governor in 2018.
In the primary, Democrat challenger John Laird led Republican challenger Vicki Nohrden by a margin of 12.9 percent. Laird’s campaign is funded by police, fossil fuels, and corporate PAC money. Nohrden’s campaign has not committed to any of the pledges, and $10,000 of the $63,493.05 raised is self-funded.
John Laird was raised in Vallejo and moved to Santa Cruz in the 1960s. He graduated with honors from UC Santa Cruz in 1972. Laird served as a councilmember on the Santa Cruz City Council and then as a two-term mayor. According to campaign materials, he is running for re-election because he wants to work to expand state efforts against climate change, guarantee universal health-care coverage, develop affordable housing, and protect the public education system.
Laird is a former city councilmember, mayor, member of the California State Assembly, and California Secretary for Natural Resources under Governor Jerry Brown. His other professional experiences include serving as executive director of the Santa Cruz AIDS Project and teaching state environmental policy at UC Santa Cruz. While serving as assemblymember for the 27th district, Laird authored 82 bills that were signed into law.
Laird is endorsed by a strong majority of local progressive groups, including California Democratic Party, California Legislative LGBT Caucus, California Teachers Association, and NARAL Pro-Choice California. He is also endorsed by California Association Highway Patrolmen, Peace Officers Research Association of CA, and Santa Cruz County Sheriff Jim Hart. However, the threat of Republican Nohrden’s potential policies greatly outweighs Laird’s few problematic endorsements and lack of campaign finance pledges. According to our analysis, Laird is the strongest choice for equitable and representative leadership in office.
Proposition 14 asks voters to authorize a total of $5.5 billion in state general obligation bonds to continue the California stem cell agency that funds research, therapy, and grants to educational, nonprofit, and private entities for Alzheimer’s, Parkison’s, epilepsy, strokes, and other central nervous system and brain conditions and diseases. Prop 14 is an extension of Prop 71, which created the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (CIRM) in 2004. The CIRM ran out of the original Prop 71 funds in 2019 and has not been funding new projects since then.
Vote YES to continue the CIRM, a state agency that has distributed a significant source of funding to scientific research programs and enterprises across the state, both nonprofit and for-profit.
Vote NO to not authorize the sale of $5.5 billion in state bonds for the CIRM and eliminate a financially burdensome stem cell research program that no longer has significant impact on medical research.
Robert N. Klein II, a Silicon Valley real estate developer and the top donor for Prop 14, was also the chief author of Proposition 71, which authorized $3 billion in bonds to create and maintain the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine in 2004. There is no registered financial opposition.
There is no notable misinformation about Proposition 14.
Proposition 14 asks voters to authorize a total of $5.5 billion in state general obligation bonds to continue the California stem cell agency that funds research, therapy, and grants to educational, nonprofit, and private entities for Alzheimer’s, Parkison’s, epilepsy, strokes, and other central nervous system and brain conditions and diseases. Prop 14 is an extension of Prop 71, which created the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (CIRM) in 2004. The CIRM ran out of the original Prop 71 funds in 2019 and has not been funding new projects since then.
Vote YES to continue the CIRM, a state agency that has distributed a significant source of funding to scientific research programs and enterprises across the state, both nonprofit and for-profit.
Vote NO to not authorize the sale of $5.5 billion in state bonds for the CIRM and eliminate a financially burdensome stem cell research program that no longer has significant impact on medical research.
Robert N. Klein II, a Silicon Valley real estate developer and the top donor for Prop 14, was also the chief author of Proposition 71, which authorized $3 billion in bonds to create and maintain the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine in 2004. There is no registered financial opposition.
There is no notable misinformation about Proposition 14.
Proposition 15 asks California voters to raise an estimated $6.4 billion to $11.5 billion in funding for local schools and governments by increasing property taxes on commercial and industrial properties based on current market value instead of the price they were purchased for. Based on the most recent report by Blue Sky Consulting Group, 10% of the biggest corporate property owners will pay 92% of the funding and more than 75% of total revenues will come from properties that have not been reassessed since prior to 1990 -- just 2% of all commercial and industrial properties! Proposition 15 will maintain the existing commercial and industrial property tax at a 1% limit and will also maintain existing exemptions for small businesses, homeowners, agricultural lands, and renters.
Prop 15’s main opponents include realty and industrial property owners, while the California Teachers Association and SEIU California State Council are main supporters.
Proposition 15 asks California voters to raise an estimated $6.4 billion to $11.5 billion in funding for local schools and governments
Proposition 15 asks California voters to raise an estimated $6.4 billion to $11.5 billion in funding for local schools and governments by increasing property taxes on commercial and industrial properties based on current market value instead of the price they were purchased for. Based on the most recent report by Blue Sky Consulting Group, 10% of the biggest corporate property owners will pay 92% of the funding and more than 75% of total revenues will come from properties that have not been reassessed since prior to 1990 -- just 2% of all commercial and industrial properties! Proposition 15 will maintain the existing commercial and industrial property tax at a 1% limit and will also maintain existing exemptions for small businesses, homeowners, agricultural lands, and renters.
Prop 15’s main opponents include realty and industrial property owners, while the California Teachers Association and SEIU California State Council are main supporters.
Proposition 16 asks California voters to amend the Constitution of California to repeal Prop 209’s restrictions on local and state governments from considering race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in public employment, education, and contracting. If passed, Prop 16 will permit governments to consider those protected categories in order to promote inclusive hiring and admissions programs in California’s public universities, government, and public agencies.
Proposition 16 asks California voters to amend the Constitution of California to repeal Prop 209’s restrictions on local and state governments from considering race, sex, color,
Proposition 16 asks California voters to amend the Constitution of California to repeal Prop 209’s restrictions on local and state governments from considering race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in public employment, education, and contracting. If passed, Prop 16 will permit governments to consider those protected categories in order to promote inclusive hiring and admissions programs in California’s public universities, government, and public agencies.
Proposition 17 asks California voters to amend the Constitution of California to restore voting rights to persons who have been disqualified from voting while on parole. If passed, Prop 17 will restore voting rights to approximately 50,000 Californians currently on parole.
There are no contributions recorded for support or opposition to Prop 17.
Proposition 17 asks California voters to amend the Constitution of California to restore voting rights to persons who have been disqualified from voting while on parole.
Proposition 17 asks California voters to amend the Constitution of California to restore voting rights to persons who have been disqualified from voting while on parole. If passed, Prop 17 will restore voting rights to approximately 50,000 Californians currently on parole.
There are no contributions recorded for support or opposition to Prop 17.
Proposition 18 asks California voters to amend the Constitution of California to allow 17-year-olds to vote in the primary election if they will turn 18 by the following general election. At the age of 18, Californians are technically given the right to vote in all elections. However, those who are not 18 by the time of the primary are not able to have input on who would or would not appear on their ballot in the general election. A YES vote on Prop 18 solves this problem.
There are no recorded contributions in support of or opposition to Prop 18.
There is no prominent misinformation about Prop 18.
Proposition 18 asks California voters to amend the Constitution of California to allow 17-year-olds to vote in the primary election if they
Proposition 18 asks California voters to amend the Constitution of California to allow 17-year-olds to vote in the primary election if they will turn 18 by the following general election. At the age of 18, Californians are technically given the right to vote in all elections. However, those who are not 18 by the time of the primary are not able to have input on who would or would not appear on their ballot in the general election. A YES vote on Prop 18 solves this problem.
There are no recorded contributions in support of or opposition to Prop 18.
There is no prominent misinformation about Prop 18.
Proposition 19 asks voters to amend sections of 1978’s Proposition 13 to increase the number of times a property tax base can be transferred to three times for longtime homeowners. Prop 19 is almost exactly the same as Proposition 5, which was on the 2018 California ballot and overwhelmingly defeated by voters, with 60 percent having voted against the proposition. The main difference in the proposition this year is that Prop 19 includes an additional amendment to Prop 13 that narrows an existing inheritance property tax break and promises to distribute any revenue generated from that amendment toward fire protection agencies and schools.
Realtor associations have contributed $36,270,000 in support of Prop 19. There is no registered financial opposition.
There is no prominent misinformation about Proposition 19.
Proposition 19 asks voters to amend sections of 1978’s Proposition 13 to increase the number of times a property tax base can be transferred to three times for long
Proposition 19 asks voters to amend sections of 1978’s Proposition 13 to increase the number of times a property tax base can be transferred to three times for longtime homeowners. Prop 19 is almost exactly the same as Proposition 5, which was on the 2018 California ballot and overwhelmingly defeated by voters, with 60 percent having voted against the proposition. The main difference in the proposition this year is that Prop 19 includes an additional amendment to Prop 13 that narrows an existing inheritance property tax break and promises to distribute any revenue generated from that amendment toward fire protection agencies and schools.
Realtor associations have contributed $36,270,000 in support of Prop 19. There is no registered financial opposition.
There is no prominent misinformation about Proposition 19.
If passed, Prop 20 increases penalties for low-level offenses and would create a state database that collects DNA samples from persons convicted of specified misdemeanors for use in cold cases by repealing parts of Props 47 and 57. Prop 20 would expand the list of offenses that disqualify inmates from a parole program, consider an individual’s collective criminal history and not just their most recent offense, and impose stronger restrictions for a nonviolent offender’s parole program. Additionally, Prop 20 would reclassify theft between $250 and $950 as a felony.
If passed, Prop 20 increases penalties for low-level offenses and would create a state database that collects DNA samples from persons convicted of specified misdemeanors for us
If passed, Prop 20 increases penalties for low-level offenses and would create a state database that collects DNA samples from persons convicted of specified misdemeanors for use in cold cases by repealing parts of Props 47 and 57. Prop 20 would expand the list of offenses that disqualify inmates from a parole program, consider an individual’s collective criminal history and not just their most recent offense, and impose stronger restrictions for a nonviolent offender’s parole program. Additionally, Prop 20 would reclassify theft between $250 and $950 as a felony.
Proposition 21 asks voters to amend state law in order to allow (not require) local governments at the city and county levels to establish and regulate rent control on residential properties. This proposition would affect residential properties over 15 years old and exempts individuals who own up to two residential properties. Additionally, Prop 21 would allow rent in rent-controlled properties to increase up to 15 percent over a period of three years with the start of a new tenancy. Prop 21 is more or less the same proposition voters rejected in 2018.
California has the highest rate of homelessness in the nation, which can be attributed to the overwhelmingly high median rates for rent throughout the state forcing residents to pay 50 percent of their income just toward rent.
The Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act prohibits rent control on residential properties built after February 1, 1995. Since then, housing built in California has become accessible only to those who can afford uncontrolled rent increases, and low-income families have largely been shut out from newer housing developments.
According to a Stanford study, those who lived in rent-controlled properties when Costa-Hawkins passed ended up saving a cumulative total of $7 billion over 18 years, which confirms that rent control is an effective way to prevent displacement from the city.
Proposition 21 asks voters to amend state law in order to allow (not require) local governments at the city and county levels to establish and regulate rent control on residential p
Proposition 21 asks voters to amend state law in order to allow (not require) local governments at the city and county levels to establish and regulate rent control on residential properties. This proposition would affect residential properties over 15 years old and exempts individuals who own up to two residential properties. Additionally, Prop 21 would allow rent in rent-controlled properties to increase up to 15 percent over a period of three years with the start of a new tenancy. Prop 21 is more or less the same proposition voters rejected in 2018.
California has the highest rate of homelessness in the nation, which can be attributed to the overwhelmingly high median rates for rent throughout the state forcing residents to pay 50 percent of their income just toward rent.
The Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act prohibits rent control on residential properties built after February 1, 1995. Since then, housing built in California has become accessible only to those who can afford uncontrolled rent increases, and low-income families have largely been shut out from newer housing developments.
According to a Stanford study, those who lived in rent-controlled properties when Costa-Hawkins passed ended up saving a cumulative total of $7 billion over 18 years, which confirms that rent control is an effective way to prevent displacement from the city.
Proposition 22 asks voters to exempt companies like Lyft, Postmates, Uber, DoorDash, and others from a recently implemented state worker protection law, Assembly Bill 5 (AB5), so they can classify gig economy drivers from ride-share and delivery companies as independent contractors, not as employees. Additionally, Prop 22 would restrict local regulation of app-based drivers and would criminalize the impersonation of drivers.
By classifying workers as contractors and not employees, companies like Lyft, Uber, and DoorDash are exempted by state employment laws from ensuring basic protections to their workforce including minimum wage, overtime, unemployment insurance, and workers’ compensation.
Currently, rideshare and delivery workers are entitled under AB 5 to labor rights that every other employee in California receives, such as the right to organize, health insurance, and Social Security benefits. Prop 22 would take those rights away.
AB 5 also guarantees paid family leave, paid sick days, and unemployment insurance to those classified as gig employees. Proposition 22 asks voters to make gig-economy employees exempt from this law and replaces their rights with fewer benefits of much less value to their workers.
More than 2,000 drivers have filed claims against Uber and Lyft for over $630 million in damages, expenses, and lost wages. Prop 22 will codify Uber and Lyft’s abilities to systematically steal wages from drivers.
Uber and Lyft currently owe California $413 million in unemployment insurance contributions due to misclassifying drivers as independent contractors under AB 5. If Prop 22 passes, Uber and Lyft would get away with not paying what they owe.
"Prop 22 will guarantee 120% of minimum wage to all drivers." -- FALSE. The UC Berkeley Labor Center released a report that estimates Prop 22’s “pay guarantee” for their Uber and Lyft drivers would only end up being $5.64 per hour after accounting for all the expenses that drivers are responsible for themselves. At that rate, even if an individual worked 10 hour days, 7 days a week under Prop 22, they would be living below the California poverty line.
"Prop 22 will give health insurance to all drivers." -- FALSE. Under Prop 22, companies do not pay for health insurance, but instead provide a stipend to drivers. This stipend is valued at only 82% of the minimum coverage provided by state law, and is actually worth even less because workers would owe state and federal income taxes on the stipend. Prop 22 forces drivers to work more than 39 hours a week to qualify for the health stipend, so many workers would never even qualify for the stipend. For drivers who do qualify, Health Access California estimates that the health stipend would be just a couple hundred dollars—and could be just tens of dollars for younger workers—not enough for drivers to cover the purchase of their own health insurance.
If Prop 22 is passed, all future labor legislation surrounding Uber and Lyft would have to be approved by 7/8 of the total California State Legislature. Making this happen is virtually impossible considering Uber and Lyft have donated $2 million to the California Republican Party campaign committee. This is why Uber and Lyft are spending millions of dollars: to make their operations virtually untouchable in terms of regulation.
Proposition 22 asks voters to exempt companies like Lyft, Postmates, Uber, DoorDash, and others from a recently implemented state worker protection law, Assembly Bil
Proposition 22 asks voters to exempt companies like Lyft, Postmates, Uber, DoorDash, and others from a recently implemented state worker protection law, Assembly Bill 5 (AB5), so they can classify gig economy drivers from ride-share and delivery companies as independent contractors, not as employees. Additionally, Prop 22 would restrict local regulation of app-based drivers and would criminalize the impersonation of drivers.
By classifying workers as contractors and not employees, companies like Lyft, Uber, and DoorDash are exempted by state employment laws from ensuring basic protections to their workforce including minimum wage, overtime, unemployment insurance, and workers’ compensation.
Currently, rideshare and delivery workers are entitled under AB 5 to labor rights that every other employee in California receives, such as the right to organize, health insurance, and Social Security benefits. Prop 22 would take those rights away.
AB 5 also guarantees paid family leave, paid sick days, and unemployment insurance to those classified as gig employees. Proposition 22 asks voters to make gig-economy employees exempt from this law and replaces their rights with fewer benefits of much less value to their workers.
More than 2,000 drivers have filed claims against Uber and Lyft for over $630 million in damages, expenses, and lost wages. Prop 22 will codify Uber and Lyft’s abilities to systematically steal wages from drivers.
Uber and Lyft currently owe California $413 million in unemployment insurance contributions due to misclassifying drivers as independent contractors under AB 5. If Prop 22 passes, Uber and Lyft would get away with not paying what they owe.
"Prop 22 will guarantee 120% of minimum wage to all drivers." -- FALSE. The UC Berkeley Labor Center released a report that estimates Prop 22’s “pay guarantee” for their Uber and Lyft drivers would only end up being $5.64 per hour after accounting for all the expenses that drivers are responsible for themselves. At that rate, even if an individual worked 10 hour days, 7 days a week under Prop 22, they would be living below the California poverty line.
"Prop 22 will give health insurance to all drivers." -- FALSE. Under Prop 22, companies do not pay for health insurance, but instead provide a stipend to drivers. This stipend is valued at only 82% of the minimum coverage provided by state law, and is actually worth even less because workers would owe state and federal income taxes on the stipend. Prop 22 forces drivers to work more than 39 hours a week to qualify for the health stipend, so many workers would never even qualify for the stipend. For drivers who do qualify, Health Access California estimates that the health stipend would be just a couple hundred dollars—and could be just tens of dollars for younger workers—not enough for drivers to cover the purchase of their own health insurance.
If Prop 22 is passed, all future labor legislation surrounding Uber and Lyft would have to be approved by 7/8 of the total California State Legislature. Making this happen is virtually impossible considering Uber and Lyft have donated $2 million to the California Republican Party campaign committee. This is why Uber and Lyft are spending millions of dollars: to make their operations virtually untouchable in terms of regulation.
Prop 23 would add sections to the California Health and Safety Code about how dialysis facilities can operate, requiring a physician to be on-site at every dialysis clinic to oversee operations, and mandating that each chronic dialysis clinic submit quarterly reports on dialysis-related infections to the California Department of Health. The on-site physician would assume a non-caregiving role, as they would not be required to be specially trained in nephrology or interact with patients at all. Additionally, Prop 23 would prohibit discrimination against patients based on their coverage or care.
Prop 23 would add sections to the California Health and Safety Code about how dialysis facilities can operate, requiring a physician to be on-site at every di
Prop 23 would add sections to the California Health and Safety Code about how dialysis facilities can operate, requiring a physician to be on-site at every dialysis clinic to oversee operations, and mandating that each chronic dialysis clinic submit quarterly reports on dialysis-related infections to the California Department of Health. The on-site physician would assume a non-caregiving role, as they would not be required to be specially trained in nephrology or interact with patients at all. Additionally, Prop 23 would prohibit discrimination against patients based on their coverage or care.
Proposition 24 asks voters to amend the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018 (CCPA) to include pay-for-privacy schemes, which provide better services and internet connection to those who pay more in order to protect their personal information while providing suboptimal services for Californians who cannot or do not want to pay more. Additionally, Prop 24 caters to tech companies by allowing them to upload a California resident’s personal information as soon as that resident’s device, computer, or phone leaves the state’s borders, and permits tech companies to completely ignore a programmable universal electronic “do not sell my information” signal. Under current law, privacy follows a Californian wherever they go, and businesses must honor the electronic signal.
Proposition 24 asks voters to amend the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018 (CCPA) to include pay-for-privacy schemes, which provide better services and internet connection to those who pay more in order
Proposition 24 asks voters to amend the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018 (CCPA) to include pay-for-privacy schemes, which provide better services and internet connection to those who pay more in order to protect their personal information while providing suboptimal services for Californians who cannot or do not want to pay more. Additionally, Prop 24 caters to tech companies by allowing them to upload a California resident’s personal information as soon as that resident’s device, computer, or phone leaves the state’s borders, and permits tech companies to completely ignore a programmable universal electronic “do not sell my information” signal. Under current law, privacy follows a Californian wherever they go, and businesses must honor the electronic signal.
Vote YES on Prop 25 to eliminate the use of cash bail in pretrial incarceration.
Proposition 25 is a referendum, which asks voters to directly weigh in on whether to keep or reject SB 10, a bill originally passed in 2018. Voting YES on Prop 25 will keep SB 10 in place and eliminate the cash bail system of pretrial incarceration in California, which is directly responsible for the disproportionate incarceration of Californians who cannot afford bail. The bail bond industry is directly responsible for placing Prop 25 on the ballot and calling SB 10 into question.
There are three major components to grassroots groups' objections to Prop 25. Here we provide our assessment of these concerns and how they can be addressed in the future if Prop 25 passes.
The bail bond industry has invested heavily in a No on the Prop 25 campaign in an attempt to spread misinformation and save the industry.
Vote YES on Prop 25 to eliminate the use of cash bail in pretrial incarceration.
Vote YES on Prop 25 to eliminate the use of cash bail in pretrial incarceration.
Proposition 25 is a referendum, which asks voters to directly weigh in on whether to keep or reject SB 10, a bill originally passed in 2018. Voting YES on Prop 25 will keep SB 10 in place and eliminate the cash bail system of pretrial incarceration in California, which is directly responsible for the disproportionate incarceration of Californians who cannot afford bail. The bail bond industry is directly responsible for placing Prop 25 on the ballot and calling SB 10 into question.
There are three major components to grassroots groups' objections to Prop 25. Here we provide our assessment of these concerns and how they can be addressed in the future if Prop 25 passes.
The bail bond industry has invested heavily in a No on the Prop 25 campaign in an attempt to spread misinformation and save the industry.
In the March 3 primary election, Santa Cruz made history by successfully recalling two sitting members of the city council by a narrow margin for conduct that resulted in city investigations. There are currently nine candidates, all of whom are women, running for four seats. Of those seats, three are currently held by incumbents who are eligible for a second term, including Sandy Brown, who was elected to the Council in 2016. Brown formally entered the race for re-election in July 2020. As of September 2020, she had raised nearly $12,000, but had not publicly committed to refusing corporate PAC, police, or fossil fuel contributions.
Sandy Brown, a humanities professor, has lived in Santa Cruz for 30 years. According to campaign materials, Brown is running for re-election to continue to support local recovery with a government that is reflective of the community’s values.
Brown’s priorities for Santa Cruz this term include balancing the budget and guiding the COVID-19 recovery in an equitable way, establishing intentional affordable housing policies, enacting local climate protections, and reevaluating public safety. As a current member of the Santa Cruz City Council, Brown’s platform also highlights the importance of effecting change through good governance that prioritizes accountability and transparency for city employees.
Brown has been a professor at San Jose State University for many years and has taught humanities courses in several disciplines. She had an unsettled childhood, and her family moved often before she became independent at 15. By age 17, she had arrived in Santa Cruz, and credits her undergraduate professors at UC Santa Cruz with inspiring her interest in politics and organizing. Brown went on to earn her doctoral degree in geography from UC Berkeley, focusing much of her research on agricultural justice and labor organization in California and South America. As a Santa Cruz community member, she has been involved with a variety of local organizations and issues, including the Living Wage Advisory Committee and the Santa Cruz County Women’s Commission. She is a longtime supporter of environmental justice and labor protections, and also serves on the Agricultural Justice Project Advisory Board and the California Institute of Rural Studies Board.
Brown is endorsed by many progressive groups in the district, including Democratic Socialists of America Santa Cruz and Our Revolution. She has also served on the Citizens’ Police Advisory Board, and was the lone vote against eliminating the Santa Cruz Police Department’s Ranger program earlier this year. However, she has not been formally endorsed by the police department or affiliated organizations. According to our analysis, Sandy Brown is a strong choice for equitable and representative leadership in office.
In the March 3 primary election, Santa Cruz made history by successfully recalling two sitting members of the city council by a narrow margin for conduct that resulted in city investigations. There are currently nine candidates, all of whom are women, running for four seats. Of those seats, three are currently held by incumbents who are eligible for a second term, including Sandy Brown, who was elected to the Council in 2016. Brown formally entered the race for re-election in July 2020. As of September 2020, she had raised nearly $12,000, but had not publicly committed to refusing corporate PAC, police, or fossil fuel contributions.
Sandy Brown, a humanities professor, has lived in Santa Cruz for 30 years. According to campaign materials, Brown is running for re-election to continue to support local recovery with a government that is reflective of the community’s values.
Brown’s priorities for Santa Cruz this term include balancing the budget and guiding the COVID-19 recovery in an equitable way, establishing intentional affordable housing policies, enacting local climate protections, and reevaluating public safety. As a current member of the Santa Cruz City Council, Brown’s platform also highlights the importance of effecting change through good governance that prioritizes accountability and transparency for city employees.
Brown has been a professor at San Jose State University for many years and has taught humanities courses in several disciplines. She had an unsettled childhood, and her family moved often before she became independent at 15. By age 17, she had arrived in Santa Cruz, and credits her undergraduate professors at UC Santa Cruz with inspiring her interest in politics and organizing. Brown went on to earn her doctoral degree in geography from UC Berkeley, focusing much of her research on agricultural justice and labor organization in California and South America. As a Santa Cruz community member, she has been involved with a variety of local organizations and issues, including the Living Wage Advisory Committee and the Santa Cruz County Women’s Commission. She is a longtime supporter of environmental justice and labor protections, and also serves on the Agricultural Justice Project Advisory Board and the California Institute of Rural Studies Board.
Brown is endorsed by many progressive groups in the district, including Democratic Socialists of America Santa Cruz and Our Revolution. She has also served on the Citizens’ Police Advisory Board, and was the lone vote against eliminating the Santa Cruz Police Department’s Ranger program earlier this year. However, she has not been formally endorsed by the police department or affiliated organizations. According to our analysis, Sandy Brown is a strong choice for equitable and representative leadership in office.
In the March 3 primary election, Santa Cruz made history by successfully recalling two sitting members of the city council by a narrow margin for conduct that resulted in city investigations. During the primary, Maria Cadenas lost her bid for the open 17th District State Senate, where she earned only 21 percent of the vote. She entered the city council race in July 2020. Cadenas’s current campaign had not reported any fundraising receipts as of that time. She has not pledged to refuse police or fossil fuel money in her campaign, but she did pledge to decline corporate PAC funds during her March run for State Senate.
Maria Cadenas, executive director of Santa Cruz Community Ventures, was born in Mexico City and grew up in Southern California. According to campaign materials, Cadenas is running to use her experience in community development to fight for working families in the city.
Cadenas’s priorities for Santa Cruz this term include improving equity and transparency in government, economic development and recovery, and housing affordability and stability.
Cadenas has spent her career working for social justice. After finishing college, she was associate director of ACLU-Wisconsin, where she fought against anti-Muslim backlash in the months after the 9/11 attacks. She then served as executive director of the Cream City Foundation in Milwaukee for six years, where she advocated for LGBTQIA+ equality through research and targeted campaigns. Cadenas then returned to California, where she served as senior community involvement manager at Driscoll’s before transitioning to her role at Community Ventures. She is a longtime supporter of LGBTQIA+ rights, sustainability and agriculture, and social equity.
Cadenas is endorsed by a number of local officials, but has not yet announced any organizational endorsements. According to our analysis, Maria Cadenas is the strongest choice for equitable and representative leadership in office.
In the March 3 primary election, Santa Cruz made history by successfully recalling two sitting members of the city council by a narrow margin for conduct that resulted in city investigations. During the primary, Maria Cadenas lost her bid for the open 17th District State Senate, where she earned only 21 percent of the vote. She entered the city council race in July 2020. Cadenas’s current campaign had not reported any fundraising receipts as of that time. She has not pledged to refuse police or fossil fuel money in her campaign, but she did pledge to decline corporate PAC funds during her March run for State Senate.
Maria Cadenas, executive director of Santa Cruz Community Ventures, was born in Mexico City and grew up in Southern California. According to campaign materials, Cadenas is running to use her experience in community development to fight for working families in the city.
Cadenas’s priorities for Santa Cruz this term include improving equity and transparency in government, economic development and recovery, and housing affordability and stability.
Cadenas has spent her career working for social justice. After finishing college, she was associate director of ACLU-Wisconsin, where she fought against anti-Muslim backlash in the months after the 9/11 attacks. She then served as executive director of the Cream City Foundation in Milwaukee for six years, where she advocated for LGBTQIA+ equality through research and targeted campaigns. Cadenas then returned to California, where she served as senior community involvement manager at Driscoll’s before transitioning to her role at Community Ventures. She is a longtime supporter of LGBTQIA+ rights, sustainability and agriculture, and social equity.
Cadenas is endorsed by a number of local officials, but has not yet announced any organizational endorsements. According to our analysis, Maria Cadenas is the strongest choice for equitable and representative leadership in office.
In the March 3 primary election, Santa Cruz made history by successfully recalling two sitting members of the city council by a narrow margin for conduct that resulted in city investigations. There are currently nine candidates, all of whom are women, running for four seats. Of those seats, three are currently held by incumbents who are eligible for a second term. Challenger Kelsey Hill entered the race in August 2020. As of September 2020, she had raised nearly $12,000, but had not publicly committed to refusing corporate PAC, police, or fossil fuel contributions.
Kelsey Hill, a nonprofit program director and activist, grew up in southern California, and has lived in Santa Cruz since 2012. According to campaign materials, Hill is running for election to create a more equitable society that works for all residents regardless of their wealth or access.
Hill’s priorities for Santa Cruz this term include steering the economic recovery from COVID-19, affordable housing reform and providing meaningful housing resources, lowering carbon emissions and centering climate action, and pursuing updated racial-justice policies.
Hill moved to Santa Cruz when she began her undergraduate program at UC Santa Cruz in 2012. She was raised in a union family, and her family experienced housing insecurity during her adolescence as a result of the 2008 financial crisis. This experience was formative in the development of her activism, her belief in the importance of repairing our broken social systems, and her approach to transformative justice. Hill is a longtime supporter of climate action, and participated in the Standing Rock protests in North Dakota. She has also participated in local efforts to improve housing policy and establish a public bank in Santa Cruz.
Hill is endorsed by some progressive groups in the district, including Democratic Socialists of America Santa Cruz and Santa Cruz for Bernie. According to our analysis, Kelsey Hill is a strong choice for equitable and representative leadership in office.
In the March 3 primary election, Santa Cruz made history by successfully recalling two sitting members of the city council by a narrow margin for conduct that resulted in city investigations. There are currently nine candidates, all of whom are women, running for four seats. Of those seats, three are currently held by incumbents who are eligible for a second term. Challenger Kelsey Hill entered the race in August 2020. As of September 2020, she had raised nearly $12,000, but had not publicly committed to refusing corporate PAC, police, or fossil fuel contributions.
Kelsey Hill, a nonprofit program director and activist, grew up in southern California, and has lived in Santa Cruz since 2012. According to campaign materials, Hill is running for election to create a more equitable society that works for all residents regardless of their wealth or access.
Hill’s priorities for Santa Cruz this term include steering the economic recovery from COVID-19, affordable housing reform and providing meaningful housing resources, lowering carbon emissions and centering climate action, and pursuing updated racial-justice policies.
Hill moved to Santa Cruz when she began her undergraduate program at UC Santa Cruz in 2012. She was raised in a union family, and her family experienced housing insecurity during her adolescence as a result of the 2008 financial crisis. This experience was formative in the development of her activism, her belief in the importance of repairing our broken social systems, and her approach to transformative justice. Hill is a longtime supporter of climate action, and participated in the Standing Rock protests in North Dakota. She has also participated in local efforts to improve housing policy and establish a public bank in Santa Cruz.
Hill is endorsed by some progressive groups in the district, including Democratic Socialists of America Santa Cruz and Santa Cruz for Bernie. According to our analysis, Kelsey Hill is a strong choice for equitable and representative leadership in office.
In the March 3 primary election, Santa Cruz made history by successfully recalling two sitting members of the city council by a narrow margin for conduct that resulted in city investigations. There are currently nine candidates, all of whom are women, running for four seats. Of those seats, three are currently held by incumbents who are eligible for a second term. Challenger Kayla Kumar entered the race in July 2020. As of September 2020, she had raised over $30,000, but had not publicly committed to refusing corporate PAC, police, or fossil fuel contributions.
Kayla Kumar, a nonprofit development director, is from Freemont, CA, and grew up in Boise, Idaho. According to campaign materials, Kumar is running for election to leverage her unique understanding of community support to create a more just and equitable government for the constituents of Santa Cruz.
Kumar’s priorities for Santa Cruz this term include designing a robust local economic recovery from COVID-19, building a safety and justice system that responds to community needs, reforming affordable housing in the region, taking action on climate change, and establishing a compassionate response to homelessness.
Kumar moved to Santa Cruz in 2015, after completing an undergraduate degree at Saint Joseph’s University and spending time in both Boise and New Orleans. She cites an unstable adolescence for her involvement in politics, which was precipitated by her father returning to his native India, and her mother moving their family to Boise, Idaho. She experienced racism and homophobia in this community, and struggled when she and her siblings were sent to live with different families. She was eventually placed with a family that helped her get back on track, and her community began to invest in her success. This experience was the impetus for her work in youth development and her commitment to marginalized communities. In Santa Cruz, she has worked with Barrios Unidos on restorative justice practices for youth, and is now the development director for Food, What?, which supports youth through food and farming. She is a longtime supporter of youth-empowerment programs, and currently serves on the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Commission of Santa Cruz.
Kumar is endorsed by many progressive groups in the district, including Democratic Socialists of America Santa Cruz and Campaign for Sustainable Transportation. According to our analysis, Kayla Kumar is a strong choice for equitable and representative leadership in office.
In the March 3 primary election, Santa Cruz made history by successfully recalling two sitting members of the city council by a narrow margin for conduct that resulted in city investigations. There are currently nine candidates, all of whom are women, running for four seats. Of those seats, three are currently held by incumbents who are eligible for a second term. Challenger Kayla Kumar entered the race in July 2020. As of September 2020, she had raised over $30,000, but had not publicly committed to refusing corporate PAC, police, or fossil fuel contributions.
Kayla Kumar, a nonprofit development director, is from Freemont, CA, and grew up in Boise, Idaho. According to campaign materials, Kumar is running for election to leverage her unique understanding of community support to create a more just and equitable government for the constituents of Santa Cruz.
Kumar’s priorities for Santa Cruz this term include designing a robust local economic recovery from COVID-19, building a safety and justice system that responds to community needs, reforming affordable housing in the region, taking action on climate change, and establishing a compassionate response to homelessness.
Kumar moved to Santa Cruz in 2015, after completing an undergraduate degree at Saint Joseph’s University and spending time in both Boise and New Orleans. She cites an unstable adolescence for her involvement in politics, which was precipitated by her father returning to his native India, and her mother moving their family to Boise, Idaho. She experienced racism and homophobia in this community, and struggled when she and her siblings were sent to live with different families. She was eventually placed with a family that helped her get back on track, and her community began to invest in her success. This experience was the impetus for her work in youth development and her commitment to marginalized communities. In Santa Cruz, she has worked with Barrios Unidos on restorative justice practices for youth, and is now the development director for Food, What?, which supports youth through food and farming. She is a longtime supporter of youth-empowerment programs, and currently serves on the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Commission of Santa Cruz.
Kumar is endorsed by many progressive groups in the district, including Democratic Socialists of America Santa Cruz and Campaign for Sustainable Transportation. According to our analysis, Kayla Kumar is a strong choice for equitable and representative leadership in office.
Customizing the Progressive Voters Guide for your location...
Customizing the Progressive Voters Guide for your location...
The candidates we recommend for these four open seats have aligned visions for the city of Santa Cruz. Elect Sandy Brown, Maria Cadenas, Kelsey Hill, and Kayla Kumar to push Santa Cruz in the right direction.
About the Position
Incorporated cities in California are generally governed by a five-person city council, although Santa Cruz maintains six seats on its city council. A city council is responsible for establishing policy, passing local laws (called ordinances), voting on budget appropriations, and developing an overall vision for the city. City councilmembers in Santa Cruz are limited to two terms, or eight years in office total.
About the District
Santa Cruz is Santa Cruz County’s most populous city, with a population that is 62.6 percent white, and 21.1 percent Latinx, as of the 2010 Census. The Santa Cruz City Council oversees the needs of 59,946 people and manages an estimated budget of $336 million annually. Santa Cruz is managed by a council-manager structured government. Currently, Santa Cruz does not use district distinctions to select city councilmembers, with all candidates running for at-large seats.
Candidates’ names are listed in alphabetical order by last name. No hierarchical ranking is intended by the order in which their names and biographies appear.