Riverside County
Not in Riverside County? Find your state's guide.
July 1st in San Diego
Ballot Drop Boxes
RETURN BALLOTS BY TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 3RD
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 Riverside County? Find out how to vote in Riverside County.
Federal
Elect Vice President Joseph Biden as President of the United States to get America back on track.
About the Position
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.
About the Race
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.
About the Candidate
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.
Last updated: 2023-04-05
Elect Vice President Joseph Biden as President of the United States to get America back on track.
About the Position
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.
About the Race
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.
About the Candidate
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.
Last updated: 2023-04-05
Elect Vice President Joseph Biden as President of the United States to get America back on track.
About the Position
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.
About the Race
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.
About the Candidate
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.
Last updated: 2023-04-05
Elect Senator Kamala Harris as Vice President of the United States to get America back on track.
About the Position
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.
About the Race
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.
About the Candidate
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.
Last updated: 2023-04-05
Elect Senator Kamala Harris as Vice President of the United States to get America back on track.
About the Position
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.
About the Race
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.
About the Candidate
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.
Last updated: 2023-04-05
Elect Senator Kamala Harris as Vice President of the United States to get America back on track.
About the Position
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.
About the Race
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.
About the Candidate
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.
Last updated: 2023-04-05
Congress
Depending on where you live, you may have one of the below congressional districts on your ballot.
25th Congressional District
Elect Christy Smith to push CA-25 back in the right direction.
About the Position
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.
About the District
California's 25th Congressional District includes parts of Los Angeles and Ventura Counties. Republicans held this district from 1992 to 2018, when Katie Hill won and flipped CA-25 from red to blue in the historic 2018 midterm elections. Rep. Hill resigned mid-term in 2019, resulting in a low-turnout special election that was won by Republican Mike Garcia. A Democratic victory in this district in November will help retain control of the House of Representatives and advance a progressive agenda.
About the Race
In the primary, Democratic challenger Christy Smith led Republican incumbent Mike Garcia by a margin of 7.8 percent. Smith has not pledged to refuse fossil fuel or police money, but has pledged that her campaign will not take corporate PAC money. She has received financial support from a variety of progressive organization PACs, including End Citizens United, Equality California, EMILY’s List, and Clean. Smith has also pledged not to take donations from special interests, Washington lobbyists, health insurance companies, or big drug companies. In contrast, Rep. Garcia, who spent 10 years working for a defense contractor, has numerous problematic campaign funders, including Lockheed Martin Corporation, and the Lincoln Club of Orange County. Garcia has disagreed with Speaker Pelosi on 64 percent of votes since he joined the House.
About the Candidate
Christy Smith, an education professional and member of the State Assembly, has lived in Santa Clarita for the last 40 years. According to campaign materials, Assemblywoman Smith is running for office to invest in public education by providing teachers with a living wage, reducing class sizes, making college more affordable, and improving technical training programs.
Assemblywoman Smith wants to reinstate state and local tax deductions, which would lower taxes for families by up to $12,000 a year. She supports ending Citizens United and refuses donations from the gun lobby, Big Tobacco, and other federal corporate PACs. In Congress, Assemblywoman Smith would support a public health-care option to build on the Affordable Care Act, lowering the price of prescriptions, and protecting reproductive health-care rights and Planned Parenthood funding. She also supports strong climate action, gun safety, protecting our seniors retirement security, human rights, and immigration reform, and she serves as chair of the Joint Legislative Committee on Emergency Management.
Assemblywoman Smith currently represents portions of this district as a member of the California State Assembly. As is common in historically Republican districts like hers, she scored an unimpressive 48 out of 100 on Courage Score, our annual analysis of legislators’ progressive voting records. This rating is primarily owed to no votes on AB 362, which allows the state to contract operators at safe-injection sites in the Bay Area, and AB 1215, which bans biometric surveillance and facial-recognition technology from use in police body cameras for three years. She also had problematic votes on legislation related to affordable housing, economic justice, racial justice, and political accountability. However, she has also worked to protect homeowners against excessive property taxation, and to mandate that revenue from the gas tax be spent solely on transportation infrastructure projects. Based on our analysis, Assemblywoman Smith’s votes move her district in a progressive direction.
Christy Smith is endorsed by many progressive groups in the district. Former President Obama also endorsed her in this race, as well as many other current U.S. officials from across the country. According to our analysis, Rep. Christy Smith is the strongest choice for equitable leadership in office.
Last updated: 2023-04-05
Elect Christy Smith to push CA-25 back in the right direction.
About the Position
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.
About the District
California's 25th Congressional District includes parts of Los Angeles and Ventura Counties. Republicans held this district from 1992 to 2018, when Katie Hill won and flipped CA-25 from red to blue in the historic 2018 midterm elections. Rep. Hill resigned mid-term in 2019, resulting in a low-turnout special election that was won by Republican Mike Garcia. A Democratic victory in this district in November will help retain control of the House of Representatives and advance a progressive agenda.
About the Race
In the primary, Democratic challenger Christy Smith led Republican incumbent Mike Garcia by a margin of 7.8 percent. Smith has not pledged to refuse fossil fuel or police money, but has pledged that her campaign will not take corporate PAC money. She has received financial support from a variety of progressive organization PACs, including End Citizens United, Equality California, EMILY’s List, and Clean. Smith has also pledged not to take donations from special interests, Washington lobbyists, health insurance companies, or big drug companies. In contrast, Rep. Garcia, who spent 10 years working for a defense contractor, has numerous problematic campaign funders, including Lockheed Martin Corporation, and the Lincoln Club of Orange County. Garcia has disagreed with Speaker Pelosi on 64 percent of votes since he joined the House.
About the Candidate
Christy Smith, an education professional and member of the State Assembly, has lived in Santa Clarita for the last 40 years. According to campaign materials, Assemblywoman Smith is running for office to invest in public education by providing teachers with a living wage, reducing class sizes, making college more affordable, and improving technical training programs.
Assemblywoman Smith wants to reinstate state and local tax deductions, which would lower taxes for families by up to $12,000 a year. She supports ending Citizens United and refuses donations from the gun lobby, Big Tobacco, and other federal corporate PACs. In Congress, Assemblywoman Smith would support a public health-care option to build on the Affordable Care Act, lowering the price of prescriptions, and protecting reproductive health-care rights and Planned Parenthood funding. She also supports strong climate action, gun safety, protecting our seniors retirement security, human rights, and immigration reform, and she serves as chair of the Joint Legislative Committee on Emergency Management.
Assemblywoman Smith currently represents portions of this district as a member of the California State Assembly. As is common in historically Republican districts like hers, she scored an unimpressive 48 out of 100 on Courage Score, our annual analysis of legislators’ progressive voting records. This rating is primarily owed to no votes on AB 362, which allows the state to contract operators at safe-injection sites in the Bay Area, and AB 1215, which bans biometric surveillance and facial-recognition technology from use in police body cameras for three years. She also had problematic votes on legislation related to affordable housing, economic justice, racial justice, and political accountability. However, she has also worked to protect homeowners against excessive property taxation, and to mandate that revenue from the gas tax be spent solely on transportation infrastructure projects. Based on our analysis, Assemblywoman Smith’s votes move her district in a progressive direction.
Christy Smith is endorsed by many progressive groups in the district. Former President Obama also endorsed her in this race, as well as many other current U.S. officials from across the country. According to our analysis, Rep. Christy Smith is the strongest choice for equitable leadership in office.
Last updated: 2023-04-05
Endorsed By: AFSCME 3299
,
AFSCME State Council
,
California Labor Federation
,
Emily's List
,
SEIU United Healthcare Workers West
,
United Food & Commercial Workers Union
,
California Democratic Party
,
California Federation of Teachers
,
California League of Conservation Voters
,
CHIRLA Action fund
,
Indivisible CA 39
,
Indivisible OC 48
,
NARAL Pro-Choice California
,
National Union of Healthcare Workers
,
Planned Parenthood Action Fund
,
SEIU CA
,
Stonewall Democratic Club
,
United Farm Workers
,
Los Angeles County Democratic Party
Elect Christy Smith to push CA-25 back in the right direction.
About the Position
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.
About the District
California's 25th Congressional District includes parts of Los Angeles and Ventura Counties. Republicans held this district from 1992 to 2018, when Katie Hill won and flipped CA-25 from red to blue in the historic 2018 midterm elections. Rep. Hill resigned mid-term in 2019, resulting in a low-turnout special election that was won by Republican Mike Garcia. A Democratic victory in this district in November will help retain control of the House of Representatives and advance a progressive agenda.
About the Race
In the primary, Democratic challenger Christy Smith led Republican incumbent Mike Garcia by a margin of 7.8 percent. Smith has not pledged to refuse fossil fuel or police money, but has pledged that her campaign will not take corporate PAC money. She has received financial support from a variety of progressive organization PACs, including End Citizens United, Equality California, EMILY’s List, and Clean. Smith has also pledged not to take donations from special interests, Washington lobbyists, health insurance companies, or big drug companies. In contrast, Rep. Garcia, who spent 10 years working for a defense contractor, has numerous problematic campaign funders, including Lockheed Martin Corporation, and the Lincoln Club of Orange County. Garcia has disagreed with Speaker Pelosi on 64 percent of votes since he joined the House.
About the Candidate
Christy Smith, an education professional and member of the State Assembly, has lived in Santa Clarita for the last 40 years. According to campaign materials, Assemblywoman Smith is running for office to invest in public education by providing teachers with a living wage, reducing class sizes, making college more affordable, and improving technical training programs.
Assemblywoman Smith wants to reinstate state and local tax deductions, which would lower taxes for families by up to $12,000 a year. She supports ending Citizens United and refuses donations from the gun lobby, Big Tobacco, and other federal corporate PACs. In Congress, Assemblywoman Smith would support a public health-care option to build on the Affordable Care Act, lowering the price of prescriptions, and protecting reproductive health-care rights and Planned Parenthood funding. She also supports strong climate action, gun safety, protecting our seniors retirement security, human rights, and immigration reform, and she serves as chair of the Joint Legislative Committee on Emergency Management.
Assemblywoman Smith currently represents portions of this district as a member of the California State Assembly. As is common in historically Republican districts like hers, she scored an unimpressive 48 out of 100 on Courage Score, our annual analysis of legislators’ progressive voting records. This rating is primarily owed to no votes on AB 362, which allows the state to contract operators at safe-injection sites in the Bay Area, and AB 1215, which bans biometric surveillance and facial-recognition technology from use in police body cameras for three years. She also had problematic votes on legislation related to affordable housing, economic justice, racial justice, and political accountability. However, she has also worked to protect homeowners against excessive property taxation, and to mandate that revenue from the gas tax be spent solely on transportation infrastructure projects. Based on our analysis, Assemblywoman Smith’s votes move her district in a progressive direction.
Christy Smith is endorsed by many progressive groups in the district. Former President Obama also endorsed her in this race, as well as many other current U.S. officials from across the country. According to our analysis, Rep. Christy Smith is the strongest choice for equitable leadership in office.
Last updated: 2023-04-05
Endorsed By: AFSCME 3299
,
AFSCME State Council
,
California Labor Federation
,
Emily's List
,
SEIU United Healthcare Workers West
,
United Food & Commercial Workers Union
,
California Democratic Party
,
California Federation of Teachers
,
California League of Conservation Voters
,
CHIRLA Action fund
,
Indivisible CA 39
,
Indivisible OC 48
,
NARAL Pro-Choice California
,
National Union of Healthcare Workers
,
Planned Parenthood Action Fund
,
SEIU CA
,
Stonewall Democratic Club
,
United Farm Workers
,
Los Angeles County Democratic Party
35th Congressional District
Re-elect Congressional Representative Norma Torres to keep CA-35 on the right track.
About the Position
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.
About the District
California's 35th Congressional District includes parts of Los Angeles and San Bernardino Counties. Democrats typically hold this district. The most recent election results show 67.7 percent of AD-35 voted for Clinton for president in 2016, and 65.6 percent of the district voted for Newsom for governor in 2018.
About the Race
In the primary, Democrat incumbent Representative Torres led Republican challenger Mike Cargile by a margin of 41.6 percent. Neither candidate has pledged to refuse corporate PAC, fossil fuel, or police money. Rep. Torres’s campaign is funded mostly by labor groups, but also by real estate and agribusiness.
About the Candidate
Representative Norma Torres is from Guatemala and immigrated to the United States at five years old. She is a longtime resident of the Inland Empire and currently resides in Pomona, CA. Rep. Torres is the incumbent, having served in Congress since 2015. According to campaign materials, she is running for re-election to continue her fight against Republicans’ regressive policies.
In Congress, Rep. Torres has worked to address issues of national security by solving cybersecurity vulnerabilities at shipping ports. Furthermore, she has advanced initiatives to address the root causes of migration from Central America and public safety concerns of indigenous communities. Rep. Torres currently sits on the Appropriations Committee and the Rules Committee. Prior to her election to Congress, she served as the mayor of Pomona, CA, in the State Assembly, and the in State Senate, where she worked to promote diversity in leadership. She also successfully fought to restore local authority of the Ontario Airport, and played a pivotal role in developing the Keep Your Home California program, which allowed over 80,000 families to stay in their homes and avoid foreclosures following the Great Recession.
Rep. Torres’s priorities for CA-35 this year include growing the local economy, protecting public safety, and preserving natural resources. She currently sits on two committees, including the Appropriations Committee. This year, Rep. Torres has voted 100 percent of the time with Nancy Pelosi and 95 percent of the time with Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Rep. Torres has disagreed with Rep. Ocasio-Cortez on a non–defense spending bill. Rep. Torres has co-sponsored three bills about protecting the US Postal Service, expanding childcare, and providing for more police accountability this year, all of which all have successfully passed the House but are languishing in the Senate. While Rep. Torres voted to reauthorize FISA and the Patriot Act, she also offered an amendment to the fiscal year 2021 Department of Homeland Security Appropriations bill, calling for considering a breakup of the entity.
Rep. Torres is endorsed by a strong majority of progressive groups in the district. She is also endorsed by a police interest group. However, the threat of the potential policies of Republican challenger Cargile--a QAnon proponent with a history of racist and homophobic social media posts--greatly outweighs concerns regarding Torres’s police endorsement. According to our analysis, Rep. Torres is the strongest choice for equitable and representative leadership in office.
Last updated: 2023-04-05
Re-elect Congressional Representative Norma Torres to keep CA-35 on the right track.
About the Position
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.
About the District
California's 35th Congressional District includes parts of Los Angeles and San Bernardino Counties. Democrats typically hold this district. The most recent election results show 67.7 percent of AD-35 voted for Clinton for president in 2016, and 65.6 percent of the district voted for Newsom for governor in 2018.
About the Race
In the primary, Democrat incumbent Representative Torres led Republican challenger Mike Cargile by a margin of 41.6 percent. Neither candidate has pledged to refuse corporate PAC, fossil fuel, or police money. Rep. Torres’s campaign is funded mostly by labor groups, but also by real estate and agribusiness.
About the Candidate
Representative Norma Torres is from Guatemala and immigrated to the United States at five years old. She is a longtime resident of the Inland Empire and currently resides in Pomona, CA. Rep. Torres is the incumbent, having served in Congress since 2015. According to campaign materials, she is running for re-election to continue her fight against Republicans’ regressive policies.
In Congress, Rep. Torres has worked to address issues of national security by solving cybersecurity vulnerabilities at shipping ports. Furthermore, she has advanced initiatives to address the root causes of migration from Central America and public safety concerns of indigenous communities. Rep. Torres currently sits on the Appropriations Committee and the Rules Committee. Prior to her election to Congress, she served as the mayor of Pomona, CA, in the State Assembly, and the in State Senate, where she worked to promote diversity in leadership. She also successfully fought to restore local authority of the Ontario Airport, and played a pivotal role in developing the Keep Your Home California program, which allowed over 80,000 families to stay in their homes and avoid foreclosures following the Great Recession.
Rep. Torres’s priorities for CA-35 this year include growing the local economy, protecting public safety, and preserving natural resources. She currently sits on two committees, including the Appropriations Committee. This year, Rep. Torres has voted 100 percent of the time with Nancy Pelosi and 95 percent of the time with Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Rep. Torres has disagreed with Rep. Ocasio-Cortez on a non–defense spending bill. Rep. Torres has co-sponsored three bills about protecting the US Postal Service, expanding childcare, and providing for more police accountability this year, all of which all have successfully passed the House but are languishing in the Senate. While Rep. Torres voted to reauthorize FISA and the Patriot Act, she also offered an amendment to the fiscal year 2021 Department of Homeland Security Appropriations bill, calling for considering a breakup of the entity.
Rep. Torres is endorsed by a strong majority of progressive groups in the district. She is also endorsed by a police interest group. However, the threat of the potential policies of Republican challenger Cargile--a QAnon proponent with a history of racist and homophobic social media posts--greatly outweighs concerns regarding Torres’s police endorsement. According to our analysis, Rep. Torres is the strongest choice for equitable and representative leadership in office.
Last updated: 2023-04-05
Endorsed By: AFSCME State Council
,
SEIU United Healthcare Workers West
,
California Democratic Party
,
California League of Conservation Voters
,
National Union of Healthcare Workers
,
SEIU CA
,
United Farm Workers
,
Los Angeles County Democratic Party
Re-elect Congressional Representative Norma Torres to keep CA-35 on the right track.
About the Position
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.
About the District
California's 35th Congressional District includes parts of Los Angeles and San Bernardino Counties. Democrats typically hold this district. The most recent election results show 67.7 percent of AD-35 voted for Clinton for president in 2016, and 65.6 percent of the district voted for Newsom for governor in 2018.
About the Race
In the primary, Democrat incumbent Representative Torres led Republican challenger Mike Cargile by a margin of 41.6 percent. Neither candidate has pledged to refuse corporate PAC, fossil fuel, or police money. Rep. Torres’s campaign is funded mostly by labor groups, but also by real estate and agribusiness.
About the Candidate
Representative Norma Torres is from Guatemala and immigrated to the United States at five years old. She is a longtime resident of the Inland Empire and currently resides in Pomona, CA. Rep. Torres is the incumbent, having served in Congress since 2015. According to campaign materials, she is running for re-election to continue her fight against Republicans’ regressive policies.
In Congress, Rep. Torres has worked to address issues of national security by solving cybersecurity vulnerabilities at shipping ports. Furthermore, she has advanced initiatives to address the root causes of migration from Central America and public safety concerns of indigenous communities. Rep. Torres currently sits on the Appropriations Committee and the Rules Committee. Prior to her election to Congress, she served as the mayor of Pomona, CA, in the State Assembly, and the in State Senate, where she worked to promote diversity in leadership. She also successfully fought to restore local authority of the Ontario Airport, and played a pivotal role in developing the Keep Your Home California program, which allowed over 80,000 families to stay in their homes and avoid foreclosures following the Great Recession.
Rep. Torres’s priorities for CA-35 this year include growing the local economy, protecting public safety, and preserving natural resources. She currently sits on two committees, including the Appropriations Committee. This year, Rep. Torres has voted 100 percent of the time with Nancy Pelosi and 95 percent of the time with Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Rep. Torres has disagreed with Rep. Ocasio-Cortez on a non–defense spending bill. Rep. Torres has co-sponsored three bills about protecting the US Postal Service, expanding childcare, and providing for more police accountability this year, all of which all have successfully passed the House but are languishing in the Senate. While Rep. Torres voted to reauthorize FISA and the Patriot Act, she also offered an amendment to the fiscal year 2021 Department of Homeland Security Appropriations bill, calling for considering a breakup of the entity.
Rep. Torres is endorsed by a strong majority of progressive groups in the district. She is also endorsed by a police interest group. However, the threat of the potential policies of Republican challenger Cargile--a QAnon proponent with a history of racist and homophobic social media posts--greatly outweighs concerns regarding Torres’s police endorsement. According to our analysis, Rep. Torres is the strongest choice for equitable and representative leadership in office.
Last updated: 2023-04-05
Endorsed By: AFSCME State Council
,
SEIU United Healthcare Workers West
,
California Democratic Party
,
California League of Conservation Voters
,
National Union of Healthcare Workers
,
SEIU CA
,
United Farm Workers
,
Los Angeles County Democratic Party
39th Congressional District
Re-elect Congressional Representative Gil Cisneros to keep CA-39 on the right track.
About the Position
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.
About the District
California's 39th Congressional District includes parts of Los Angeles, Orange, and San Bernardino Counties. Republicans held this district from 2011 to 2018, when Gil Cisneros won and flipped CA-39 from red to blue. In 2016, Democrat Hillary Clinton won this district by an 8.6 percent margin. In 2018, Republican John Cox won this district in the gubernatorial general election by a narrow margin of 0.8 percent.
About the Race
In the primary, Democrat incumbent Representative Gil Cisneros trailed Republican challenger Young Kim by a margin of 1.4 percent. Cisneros’s campaign has pledged not to take fossil fuel money and has followed through on that commitment. He also pledged not to take corporate PAC funding, but he did attend a fundraiser hosted by corporate lobbyists. Kim’s campaign is backed by the Republican Super PAC Congressional Leadership Fund, which is dedicated to winning a Republican majority in the House of Representatives.
About the Candidate
Rep. Cisneros, a veteran and education advocate, is from Los Angeles. According to campaign materials, Rep. Cisneros is running for re-election to ensure that future generations have access to a ladder of opportunities similar to what was available to him through the Navy.
Rep. Cisneros’s priorities for CA-39 this year have included advocating for Small Business Development Centers, education programs that serve Hispanic- and Minority-Serving Institutions, students with disabilities and English language learners, Emergency Solutions Grants to prevent homelessness and the Community Development Block Grants, and funding for public health agencies. He currently sits on two committees: Veterans' Affairs (ranks 11th) and Armed Services (ranks 20th). This year, Rep. Cisneros has voted 100 percent of the time with Nancy Pelosi and 93 percent of the time with Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. His divergence from Rep. Ocasio-Cortez included votes in favor of the National Defense Authorization Act, the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement Implementation Act, and appropriations for the Department of the Interior. Rep. Cisneros has sponsored 15 bills about armed forces, national security, and immigration this year. Of those bills, five have been referred to committee, eight are in committee, and two have been received by the Senate.
Rep. Cisneros is endorsed by a strong majority of progressive groups in the district. He is also endorsed by the Los Angeles County Professional Peace Officers Association. However, the threat of Republican challenger and strong Trump supporter Kim’s potential policies greatly outweighs Cisneros’s moderate voting record and inaction on campaign financing. According to our analysis, Rep. Cisneros is the strongest choice for equitable and representative leadership in office.
Last updated: 2023-04-05
Re-elect Congressional Representative Gil Cisneros to keep CA-39 on the right track.
About the Position
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.
About the District
California's 39th Congressional District includes parts of Los Angeles, Orange, and San Bernardino Counties. Republicans held this district from 2011 to 2018, when Gil Cisneros won and flipped CA-39 from red to blue. In 2016, Democrat Hillary Clinton won this district by an 8.6 percent margin. In 2018, Republican John Cox won this district in the gubernatorial general election by a narrow margin of 0.8 percent.
About the Race
In the primary, Democrat incumbent Representative Gil Cisneros trailed Republican challenger Young Kim by a margin of 1.4 percent. Cisneros’s campaign has pledged not to take fossil fuel money and has followed through on that commitment. He also pledged not to take corporate PAC funding, but he did attend a fundraiser hosted by corporate lobbyists. Kim’s campaign is backed by the Republican Super PAC Congressional Leadership Fund, which is dedicated to winning a Republican majority in the House of Representatives.
About the Candidate
Rep. Cisneros, a veteran and education advocate, is from Los Angeles. According to campaign materials, Rep. Cisneros is running for re-election to ensure that future generations have access to a ladder of opportunities similar to what was available to him through the Navy.
Rep. Cisneros’s priorities for CA-39 this year have included advocating for Small Business Development Centers, education programs that serve Hispanic- and Minority-Serving Institutions, students with disabilities and English language learners, Emergency Solutions Grants to prevent homelessness and the Community Development Block Grants, and funding for public health agencies. He currently sits on two committees: Veterans' Affairs (ranks 11th) and Armed Services (ranks 20th). This year, Rep. Cisneros has voted 100 percent of the time with Nancy Pelosi and 93 percent of the time with Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. His divergence from Rep. Ocasio-Cortez included votes in favor of the National Defense Authorization Act, the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement Implementation Act, and appropriations for the Department of the Interior. Rep. Cisneros has sponsored 15 bills about armed forces, national security, and immigration this year. Of those bills, five have been referred to committee, eight are in committee, and two have been received by the Senate.
Rep. Cisneros is endorsed by a strong majority of progressive groups in the district. He is also endorsed by the Los Angeles County Professional Peace Officers Association. However, the threat of Republican challenger and strong Trump supporter Kim’s potential policies greatly outweighs Cisneros’s moderate voting record and inaction on campaign financing. According to our analysis, Rep. Cisneros is the strongest choice for equitable and representative leadership in office.
Last updated: 2023-04-05
Endorsed By: AFSCME 3299
,
AFSCME State Council
,
California Labor Federation
,
SEIU United Healthcare Workers West
,
United Food & Commercial Workers Union
,
California Democratic Party
,
California Federation of Teachers
,
California League of Conservation Voters
,
California Teachers Association
,
Indivisible CA 39
,
Indivisible OC 48
,
LA County Federation of Labor, AFL-CIO
,
NARAL Pro-Choice California
,
National Union of Healthcare Workers
,
Planned Parenthood Action Fund
,
SEIU CA
,
Sierra Club California
,
Stonewall Democratic Club
,
Los Angeles County Democratic Party
Re-elect Congressional Representative Gil Cisneros to keep CA-39 on the right track.
About the Position
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.
About the District
California's 39th Congressional District includes parts of Los Angeles, Orange, and San Bernardino Counties. Republicans held this district from 2011 to 2018, when Gil Cisneros won and flipped CA-39 from red to blue. In 2016, Democrat Hillary Clinton won this district by an 8.6 percent margin. In 2018, Republican John Cox won this district in the gubernatorial general election by a narrow margin of 0.8 percent.
About the Race
In the primary, Democrat incumbent Representative Gil Cisneros trailed Republican challenger Young Kim by a margin of 1.4 percent. Cisneros’s campaign has pledged not to take fossil fuel money and has followed through on that commitment. He also pledged not to take corporate PAC funding, but he did attend a fundraiser hosted by corporate lobbyists. Kim’s campaign is backed by the Republican Super PAC Congressional Leadership Fund, which is dedicated to winning a Republican majority in the House of Representatives.
About the Candidate
Rep. Cisneros, a veteran and education advocate, is from Los Angeles. According to campaign materials, Rep. Cisneros is running for re-election to ensure that future generations have access to a ladder of opportunities similar to what was available to him through the Navy.
Rep. Cisneros’s priorities for CA-39 this year have included advocating for Small Business Development Centers, education programs that serve Hispanic- and Minority-Serving Institutions, students with disabilities and English language learners, Emergency Solutions Grants to prevent homelessness and the Community Development Block Grants, and funding for public health agencies. He currently sits on two committees: Veterans' Affairs (ranks 11th) and Armed Services (ranks 20th). This year, Rep. Cisneros has voted 100 percent of the time with Nancy Pelosi and 93 percent of the time with Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. His divergence from Rep. Ocasio-Cortez included votes in favor of the National Defense Authorization Act, the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement Implementation Act, and appropriations for the Department of the Interior. Rep. Cisneros has sponsored 15 bills about armed forces, national security, and immigration this year. Of those bills, five have been referred to committee, eight are in committee, and two have been received by the Senate.
Rep. Cisneros is endorsed by a strong majority of progressive groups in the district. He is also endorsed by the Los Angeles County Professional Peace Officers Association. However, the threat of Republican challenger and strong Trump supporter Kim’s potential policies greatly outweighs Cisneros’s moderate voting record and inaction on campaign financing. According to our analysis, Rep. Cisneros is the strongest choice for equitable and representative leadership in office.
Last updated: 2023-04-05
Endorsed By: AFSCME 3299
,
AFSCME State Council
,
California Labor Federation
,
SEIU United Healthcare Workers West
,
United Food & Commercial Workers Union
,
California Democratic Party
,
California Federation of Teachers
,
California League of Conservation Voters
,
California Teachers Association
,
Indivisible CA 39
,
Indivisible OC 48
,
LA County Federation of Labor, AFL-CIO
,
NARAL Pro-Choice California
,
National Union of Healthcare Workers
,
Planned Parenthood Action Fund
,
SEIU CA
,
Sierra Club California
,
Stonewall Democratic Club
,
Los Angeles County Democratic Party
40th Congressional District
Re-elect Congressional Representative Lucille Roybal-Allard to keep CA-40 on the right track.
About the Position
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.
About the District
California's 40th Congressional District includes parts of Los Angeles County. Republicans held this district until 2012, when Lucille Roybal-Allard won and flipped CA-40 from red to blue. The most recent election results show 82.2 percent of AD-40 voted for Clinton for president in 2016, and 80.5 percent of the district voted for Newsom for governor in 2018.
About the Race
In the primary, Democrat incumbent Representative Lucille Roybal-Allard led Republican challenger C. Antonio Delgado by a margin of 37.3 percent. Neither candidate has pledged to refuse corporate PAC, fossil fuel, or police money. Most of Roybal-Allard’s campaign donations come from organized labor, but there are also contributions from corporate PACs and fossil fuel money. Opponent Delgado has not made any FEC filings.
About the Candidate
Representative Lucille Roybal-Allard is from Los Angeles. She is the incumbent, having served in Congress since 1993. According to campaign materials, Rep. Royal-Allard is running for Congress to support small businesses, protect seniors, and improve access to health care and quality education.
In Congress, she has been a voice for marginalized communities, and has worked to advance policies to benefit American families. Rep. Roybal-Allard was also an original co-author of the Dream Act and used her position as vice chair on the House Labor, Health and Human Services Appropriations Subcommittee to secure funds for local health needs. Prior to her election to Congress, she served in the State Assembly.
Rep. Roybal-Allard’s priorities for CA-40 this year have included obtaining FEMA grants for the state in fighting COVID-19, strengthening maternity care, and protecting DACA. She currently sits on the Committee on Appropriations. This year, Rep. Roybal-Allard has voted 100 percent of the time with Nancy Pelosi and 95 percent of the time with Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Rep. Roybal-Allard has co-sponsored five bills, including those on expanding childcare and providing for more police accountability this year, all of which have successfully passed the House but remain in the Senate.
Rep. Roybal-Allard is endorsed by a strong majority of progressive groups in the district. According to our analysis, Rep. Roybal-Allard is the strongest choice for equitable and representative leadership in office.
Last updated: 2023-04-05
Re-elect Congressional Representative Lucille Roybal-Allard to keep CA-40 on the right track.
About the Position
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.
About the District
California's 40th Congressional District includes parts of Los Angeles County. Republicans held this district until 2012, when Lucille Roybal-Allard won and flipped CA-40 from red to blue. The most recent election results show 82.2 percent of AD-40 voted for Clinton for president in 2016, and 80.5 percent of the district voted for Newsom for governor in 2018.
About the Race
In the primary, Democrat incumbent Representative Lucille Roybal-Allard led Republican challenger C. Antonio Delgado by a margin of 37.3 percent. Neither candidate has pledged to refuse corporate PAC, fossil fuel, or police money. Most of Roybal-Allard’s campaign donations come from organized labor, but there are also contributions from corporate PACs and fossil fuel money. Opponent Delgado has not made any FEC filings.
About the Candidate
Representative Lucille Roybal-Allard is from Los Angeles. She is the incumbent, having served in Congress since 1993. According to campaign materials, Rep. Royal-Allard is running for Congress to support small businesses, protect seniors, and improve access to health care and quality education.
In Congress, she has been a voice for marginalized communities, and has worked to advance policies to benefit American families. Rep. Roybal-Allard was also an original co-author of the Dream Act and used her position as vice chair on the House Labor, Health and Human Services Appropriations Subcommittee to secure funds for local health needs. Prior to her election to Congress, she served in the State Assembly.
Rep. Roybal-Allard’s priorities for CA-40 this year have included obtaining FEMA grants for the state in fighting COVID-19, strengthening maternity care, and protecting DACA. She currently sits on the Committee on Appropriations. This year, Rep. Roybal-Allard has voted 100 percent of the time with Nancy Pelosi and 95 percent of the time with Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Rep. Roybal-Allard has co-sponsored five bills, including those on expanding childcare and providing for more police accountability this year, all of which have successfully passed the House but remain in the Senate.
Rep. Roybal-Allard is endorsed by a strong majority of progressive groups in the district. According to our analysis, Rep. Roybal-Allard is the strongest choice for equitable and representative leadership in office.
Last updated: 2023-04-05
Endorsed By: AFSCME 3299
,
AFSCME State Council
,
California Labor Federation
,
SEIU United Healthcare Workers West
,
United Food & Commercial Workers Union
,
California Democratic Party
,
California Federation of Teachers
,
California League of Conservation Voters
,
Center for Biological Diversity Action Fund
,
National Union of Healthcare Workers
,
Planned Parenthood Action Fund
,
SEIU CA
,
United Farm Workers
,
Los Angeles County Democratic Party
Re-elect Congressional Representative Lucille Roybal-Allard to keep CA-40 on the right track.
About the Position
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.
About the District
California's 40th Congressional District includes parts of Los Angeles County. Republicans held this district until 2012, when Lucille Roybal-Allard won and flipped CA-40 from red to blue. The most recent election results show 82.2 percent of AD-40 voted for Clinton for president in 2016, and 80.5 percent of the district voted for Newsom for governor in 2018.
About the Race
In the primary, Democrat incumbent Representative Lucille Roybal-Allard led Republican challenger C. Antonio Delgado by a margin of 37.3 percent. Neither candidate has pledged to refuse corporate PAC, fossil fuel, or police money. Most of Roybal-Allard’s campaign donations come from organized labor, but there are also contributions from corporate PACs and fossil fuel money. Opponent Delgado has not made any FEC filings.
About the Candidate
Representative Lucille Roybal-Allard is from Los Angeles. She is the incumbent, having served in Congress since 1993. According to campaign materials, Rep. Royal-Allard is running for Congress to support small businesses, protect seniors, and improve access to health care and quality education.
In Congress, she has been a voice for marginalized communities, and has worked to advance policies to benefit American families. Rep. Roybal-Allard was also an original co-author of the Dream Act and used her position as vice chair on the House Labor, Health and Human Services Appropriations Subcommittee to secure funds for local health needs. Prior to her election to Congress, she served in the State Assembly.
Rep. Roybal-Allard’s priorities for CA-40 this year have included obtaining FEMA grants for the state in fighting COVID-19, strengthening maternity care, and protecting DACA. She currently sits on the Committee on Appropriations. This year, Rep. Roybal-Allard has voted 100 percent of the time with Nancy Pelosi and 95 percent of the time with Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Rep. Roybal-Allard has co-sponsored five bills, including those on expanding childcare and providing for more police accountability this year, all of which have successfully passed the House but remain in the Senate.
Rep. Roybal-Allard is endorsed by a strong majority of progressive groups in the district. According to our analysis, Rep. Roybal-Allard is the strongest choice for equitable and representative leadership in office.
Last updated: 2023-04-05
Endorsed By: AFSCME 3299
,
AFSCME State Council
,
California Labor Federation
,
SEIU United Healthcare Workers West
,
United Food & Commercial Workers Union
,
California Democratic Party
,
California Federation of Teachers
,
California League of Conservation Voters
,
Center for Biological Diversity Action Fund
,
National Union of Healthcare Workers
,
Planned Parenthood Action Fund
,
SEIU CA
,
United Farm Workers
,
Los Angeles County Democratic Party
41st Congressional District
Re-elect Congressional Representative Mark Takano to keep CA-41 on the right track.
About the Position
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.
About the District
California's 41st Congressional District includes parts of Riverside County. Republicans held this district until 2012, when Mark Takano won and flipped CA-41 from red to blue. The most recent election results show 61 percent of AD-41 voted for Clinton for president in 2016, and 59.4 percent of the district voted for Newsom for governor in 2018.
About the Race
In the primary, Democrat incumbent Representative Takano led Republican challenger Aja Smith by a margin of 17.8 percent. Neither candidate has pledged to refuse corporate PAC, fossil fuel, or police money. Rep. Takano’s campaign is funded mostly by labor and rights groups but is also backed by some corporations. Smith’s campaign is funded by retirees as well as real estate, business, and oil and gas interests.
About the Candidate
Representative Mark Takano is from Riverside, CA. He is the incumbent, having served in this position since 2013. According to campaign materials, he is running for re-election to continue to fight for his district’s progressive priorities and be an advocate for veterans, seniors, students, local businesses and hardworking families.
In Congress, Rep. Takano has authored and advanced legislation to limit for-profit colleges’ abusive practices, protect veterans’ benefits, and increase access to vocational training programs. Prior to his election to Congress, Rep. Takano served on the Riverside Community College District’s Board of Trustees, where he increased access to higher education and job-skills training programs for adults seeking new careers. Rep. Takano’s public service in the Riverside community includes positions on the Community Advisory Board of the Children’s Spine Foundation, as well as the mayor of Riverside’s Task Force on the Digital Divide. He also served as chair for the Asain Pacific Islander Caucus of the California Democratic Party.
Rep. Takano’s priorities for CA-41 this year have included pushing for accountability from the US Postmaster General and from the ICE Adelanto Detention Center, as well as to protect servicemembers’ education benefits. He currently sits on two committees: the Education and Labor Committee, and the Veterans’ Affairs Committee, which he chairs. This year, Rep. Takano has voted 99 percent of the time with Nancy Pelosi and 96 percent of the time with Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Rep. Takano has co-sponsored six bills this year--including about protecting the USPS and providing for more police accountability, all of which have successfully passed the House but remain in the Senate.
Rep. Takano is endorsed by a strong majority of progressive groups in the district. The threat of anti-choice Republican challenger and strong Trump supporter Smith’s potential policies greatly outweighs Takano’s moderate corporate backing. According to our analysis, Rep. Takano is the strongest choice for equitable and representative leadership in office.
Last updated: 2023-04-05
Re-elect Congressional Representative Mark Takano to keep CA-41 on the right track.
About the Position
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.
About the District
California's 41st Congressional District includes parts of Riverside County. Republicans held this district until 2012, when Mark Takano won and flipped CA-41 from red to blue. The most recent election results show 61 percent of AD-41 voted for Clinton for president in 2016, and 59.4 percent of the district voted for Newsom for governor in 2018.
About the Race
In the primary, Democrat incumbent Representative Takano led Republican challenger Aja Smith by a margin of 17.8 percent. Neither candidate has pledged to refuse corporate PAC, fossil fuel, or police money. Rep. Takano’s campaign is funded mostly by labor and rights groups but is also backed by some corporations. Smith’s campaign is funded by retirees as well as real estate, business, and oil and gas interests.
About the Candidate
Representative Mark Takano is from Riverside, CA. He is the incumbent, having served in this position since 2013. According to campaign materials, he is running for re-election to continue to fight for his district’s progressive priorities and be an advocate for veterans, seniors, students, local businesses and hardworking families.
In Congress, Rep. Takano has authored and advanced legislation to limit for-profit colleges’ abusive practices, protect veterans’ benefits, and increase access to vocational training programs. Prior to his election to Congress, Rep. Takano served on the Riverside Community College District’s Board of Trustees, where he increased access to higher education and job-skills training programs for adults seeking new careers. Rep. Takano’s public service in the Riverside community includes positions on the Community Advisory Board of the Children’s Spine Foundation, as well as the mayor of Riverside’s Task Force on the Digital Divide. He also served as chair for the Asain Pacific Islander Caucus of the California Democratic Party.
Rep. Takano’s priorities for CA-41 this year have included pushing for accountability from the US Postmaster General and from the ICE Adelanto Detention Center, as well as to protect servicemembers’ education benefits. He currently sits on two committees: the Education and Labor Committee, and the Veterans’ Affairs Committee, which he chairs. This year, Rep. Takano has voted 99 percent of the time with Nancy Pelosi and 96 percent of the time with Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Rep. Takano has co-sponsored six bills this year--including about protecting the USPS and providing for more police accountability, all of which have successfully passed the House but remain in the Senate.
Rep. Takano is endorsed by a strong majority of progressive groups in the district. The threat of anti-choice Republican challenger and strong Trump supporter Smith’s potential policies greatly outweighs Takano’s moderate corporate backing. According to our analysis, Rep. Takano is the strongest choice for equitable and representative leadership in office.
Last updated: 2023-04-05
Endorsed By: AFSCME 3299
,
AFSCME State Council
,
California Labor Federation
,
SEIU United Healthcare Workers West
,
United Food & Commercial Workers Union
,
California Democratic Party
,
California Federation of Teachers
,
California League of Conservation Voters
,
California Nurses Association
,
Center for Biological Diversity Action Fund
,
National Union of Healthcare Workers
,
Planned Parenthood Action Fund
,
SEIU CA
Re-elect Congressional Representative Mark Takano to keep CA-41 on the right track.
About the Position
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.
About the District
California's 41st Congressional District includes parts of Riverside County. Republicans held this district until 2012, when Mark Takano won and flipped CA-41 from red to blue. The most recent election results show 61 percent of AD-41 voted for Clinton for president in 2016, and 59.4 percent of the district voted for Newsom for governor in 2018.
About the Race
In the primary, Democrat incumbent Representative Takano led Republican challenger Aja Smith by a margin of 17.8 percent. Neither candidate has pledged to refuse corporate PAC, fossil fuel, or police money. Rep. Takano’s campaign is funded mostly by labor and rights groups but is also backed by some corporations. Smith’s campaign is funded by retirees as well as real estate, business, and oil and gas interests.
About the Candidate
Representative Mark Takano is from Riverside, CA. He is the incumbent, having served in this position since 2013. According to campaign materials, he is running for re-election to continue to fight for his district’s progressive priorities and be an advocate for veterans, seniors, students, local businesses and hardworking families.
In Congress, Rep. Takano has authored and advanced legislation to limit for-profit colleges’ abusive practices, protect veterans’ benefits, and increase access to vocational training programs. Prior to his election to Congress, Rep. Takano served on the Riverside Community College District’s Board of Trustees, where he increased access to higher education and job-skills training programs for adults seeking new careers. Rep. Takano’s public service in the Riverside community includes positions on the Community Advisory Board of the Children’s Spine Foundation, as well as the mayor of Riverside’s Task Force on the Digital Divide. He also served as chair for the Asain Pacific Islander Caucus of the California Democratic Party.
Rep. Takano’s priorities for CA-41 this year have included pushing for accountability from the US Postmaster General and from the ICE Adelanto Detention Center, as well as to protect servicemembers’ education benefits. He currently sits on two committees: the Education and Labor Committee, and the Veterans’ Affairs Committee, which he chairs. This year, Rep. Takano has voted 99 percent of the time with Nancy Pelosi and 96 percent of the time with Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Rep. Takano has co-sponsored six bills this year--including about protecting the USPS and providing for more police accountability, all of which have successfully passed the House but remain in the Senate.
Rep. Takano is endorsed by a strong majority of progressive groups in the district. The threat of anti-choice Republican challenger and strong Trump supporter Smith’s potential policies greatly outweighs Takano’s moderate corporate backing. According to our analysis, Rep. Takano is the strongest choice for equitable and representative leadership in office.
Last updated: 2023-04-05
Endorsed By: AFSCME 3299
,
AFSCME State Council
,
California Labor Federation
,
SEIU United Healthcare Workers West
,
United Food & Commercial Workers Union
,
California Democratic Party
,
California Federation of Teachers
,
California League of Conservation Voters
,
California Nurses Association
,
Center for Biological Diversity Action Fund
,
National Union of Healthcare Workers
,
Planned Parenthood Action Fund
,
SEIU CA
48th Congressional District
Re-elect Congressional Representative Harley Rouda to keep CA-48 on the right track.
About the Position
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.
About the District
California's 48th Congressional District includes parts of Orange County. Republicans typically held this district until 2018, when Harley Rouda won and flipped CA-48 from red to blue. Recent state and federal elections have shown close margins in CA-48. This district voted for Hillary Clinton in 2016, with 47.9 percent. However, CA-48 voted in favor of Republican candidate John Cox in the 2018 gubernatorial election, with 52.1 percent.
About the Race
Following the March 3 primary election, Democrat incumbent Representative Rouda is leading Republican challenger Michelle Steel by a margin of 11.8 percent. Rep. Rouda’s campaign is not funded by fossil fuel money or corporate PAC money. While he has not taken the police money pledge, he has not received any donations from police organizations. Rep. Rouda has been financially backed by a variety of progressive organization PACs, including Human Rights Campaign, Indivisible, Equality, and End Citizens United. Challenger Steel’s campaign has not committed to refusing police money, fossil fuel money, or corporate PAC money. She is funded by several right-wing and libertarian organizations, including the Liberty Fund and the Lincoln Club of Orange County. Steel has also donated $1.25 million of her own money to the campaign. Although Rep. Rouda bested challenger Steel by a double-digit margin in the March primary, the four Republican candidates in that race earned a combined total of 50.6 percent of the vote, confirming the likelihood of a close race in November.
About the Candidate
Rep. Rouda, a former attorney and real estate executive, is from Ohio and has lived in Laguna Beach, CA, since 2007. According to campaign materials, Rep. Rouda is running for re-election to continue his bipartisan efforts to improve life in Orange County by revitalizing the economy, reducing taxation, and improving the affordability of prescription drugs.
Rep. Rouda’s priorities for CA-48 this year have included allocating federal dollars to combat climate change, protections for refugees of the Vietnam War, mental-health services for veterans, and support for homeless individuals and low-income home ownership. He currently sits on two committees: Oversight and Reform (ranks 9th), and Transportation and Infrastructure (ranks 37th). This year, Rep. Rouda has voted 100 percent of the time with Nancy Pelosi and 92 percent of the time with Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. In contrast to Rep. Ocasio-Cortez, Rep. Rouda voted in favor of passing the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement Implementation Act, the conference report for the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020, and the motion to concur on Senate amendments to the DHS Cyber Hunt and Incident Response Teams Act. Rep. Rouda has sponsored 24 bills about environmental and coastal protections, infrastructure improvements, and small-business support. Of those bills, one has been received in the Senate, and the majority of the others are in committee or referred to committee.
Rep. Rouda is endorsed by a strong majority of progressive groups in the district. The threat of Republican challenger and strong Trump supporter Michelle Steel’s potential policies greatly outweighs the moderating effect of Rep. Rouda’s bipartisan approach to the legislative process. According to our analysis, Rep. Rouda is the strongest choice for representative leadership in office.
Last updated: 2023-04-05
Re-elect Congressional Representative Harley Rouda to keep CA-48 on the right track.
About the Position
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.
About the District
California's 48th Congressional District includes parts of Orange County. Republicans typically held this district until 2018, when Harley Rouda won and flipped CA-48 from red to blue. Recent state and federal elections have shown close margins in CA-48. This district voted for Hillary Clinton in 2016, with 47.9 percent. However, CA-48 voted in favor of Republican candidate John Cox in the 2018 gubernatorial election, with 52.1 percent.
About the Race
Following the March 3 primary election, Democrat incumbent Representative Rouda is leading Republican challenger Michelle Steel by a margin of 11.8 percent. Rep. Rouda’s campaign is not funded by fossil fuel money or corporate PAC money. While he has not taken the police money pledge, he has not received any donations from police organizations. Rep. Rouda has been financially backed by a variety of progressive organization PACs, including Human Rights Campaign, Indivisible, Equality, and End Citizens United. Challenger Steel’s campaign has not committed to refusing police money, fossil fuel money, or corporate PAC money. She is funded by several right-wing and libertarian organizations, including the Liberty Fund and the Lincoln Club of Orange County. Steel has also donated $1.25 million of her own money to the campaign. Although Rep. Rouda bested challenger Steel by a double-digit margin in the March primary, the four Republican candidates in that race earned a combined total of 50.6 percent of the vote, confirming the likelihood of a close race in November.
About the Candidate
Rep. Rouda, a former attorney and real estate executive, is from Ohio and has lived in Laguna Beach, CA, since 2007. According to campaign materials, Rep. Rouda is running for re-election to continue his bipartisan efforts to improve life in Orange County by revitalizing the economy, reducing taxation, and improving the affordability of prescription drugs.
Rep. Rouda’s priorities for CA-48 this year have included allocating federal dollars to combat climate change, protections for refugees of the Vietnam War, mental-health services for veterans, and support for homeless individuals and low-income home ownership. He currently sits on two committees: Oversight and Reform (ranks 9th), and Transportation and Infrastructure (ranks 37th). This year, Rep. Rouda has voted 100 percent of the time with Nancy Pelosi and 92 percent of the time with Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. In contrast to Rep. Ocasio-Cortez, Rep. Rouda voted in favor of passing the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement Implementation Act, the conference report for the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020, and the motion to concur on Senate amendments to the DHS Cyber Hunt and Incident Response Teams Act. Rep. Rouda has sponsored 24 bills about environmental and coastal protections, infrastructure improvements, and small-business support. Of those bills, one has been received in the Senate, and the majority of the others are in committee or referred to committee.
Rep. Rouda is endorsed by a strong majority of progressive groups in the district. The threat of Republican challenger and strong Trump supporter Michelle Steel’s potential policies greatly outweighs the moderating effect of Rep. Rouda’s bipartisan approach to the legislative process. According to our analysis, Rep. Rouda is the strongest choice for representative leadership in office.
Last updated: 2023-04-05
Endorsed By: AFSCME 3299
,
AFSCME State Council
,
California Labor Federation
,
Orange County Civic Engagement Table Action
,
SEIU United Healthcare Workers West
,
United Food & Commercial Workers Union
,
California Democratic Party
,
California Federation of Teachers
,
California League of Conservation Voters
,
Indivisible CA 39
,
Indivisible OC 48
,
MoveOn.org
,
NARAL Pro-Choice California
,
National Union of Healthcare Workers
,
Planned Parenthood Action Fund
,
SEIU CA
,
Sierra Club California
Re-elect Congressional Representative Harley Rouda to keep CA-48 on the right track.
About the Position
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.
About the District
California's 48th Congressional District includes parts of Orange County. Republicans typically held this district until 2018, when Harley Rouda won and flipped CA-48 from red to blue. Recent state and federal elections have shown close margins in CA-48. This district voted for Hillary Clinton in 2016, with 47.9 percent. However, CA-48 voted in favor of Republican candidate John Cox in the 2018 gubernatorial election, with 52.1 percent.
About the Race
Following the March 3 primary election, Democrat incumbent Representative Rouda is leading Republican challenger Michelle Steel by a margin of 11.8 percent. Rep. Rouda’s campaign is not funded by fossil fuel money or corporate PAC money. While he has not taken the police money pledge, he has not received any donations from police organizations. Rep. Rouda has been financially backed by a variety of progressive organization PACs, including Human Rights Campaign, Indivisible, Equality, and End Citizens United. Challenger Steel’s campaign has not committed to refusing police money, fossil fuel money, or corporate PAC money. She is funded by several right-wing and libertarian organizations, including the Liberty Fund and the Lincoln Club of Orange County. Steel has also donated $1.25 million of her own money to the campaign. Although Rep. Rouda bested challenger Steel by a double-digit margin in the March primary, the four Republican candidates in that race earned a combined total of 50.6 percent of the vote, confirming the likelihood of a close race in November.
About the Candidate
Rep. Rouda, a former attorney and real estate executive, is from Ohio and has lived in Laguna Beach, CA, since 2007. According to campaign materials, Rep. Rouda is running for re-election to continue his bipartisan efforts to improve life in Orange County by revitalizing the economy, reducing taxation, and improving the affordability of prescription drugs.
Rep. Rouda’s priorities for CA-48 this year have included allocating federal dollars to combat climate change, protections for refugees of the Vietnam War, mental-health services for veterans, and support for homeless individuals and low-income home ownership. He currently sits on two committees: Oversight and Reform (ranks 9th), and Transportation and Infrastructure (ranks 37th). This year, Rep. Rouda has voted 100 percent of the time with Nancy Pelosi and 92 percent of the time with Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. In contrast to Rep. Ocasio-Cortez, Rep. Rouda voted in favor of passing the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement Implementation Act, the conference report for the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020, and the motion to concur on Senate amendments to the DHS Cyber Hunt and Incident Response Teams Act. Rep. Rouda has sponsored 24 bills about environmental and coastal protections, infrastructure improvements, and small-business support. Of those bills, one has been received in the Senate, and the majority of the others are in committee or referred to committee.
Rep. Rouda is endorsed by a strong majority of progressive groups in the district. The threat of Republican challenger and strong Trump supporter Michelle Steel’s potential policies greatly outweighs the moderating effect of Rep. Rouda’s bipartisan approach to the legislative process. According to our analysis, Rep. Rouda is the strongest choice for representative leadership in office.
Last updated: 2023-04-05
Endorsed By: AFSCME 3299
,
AFSCME State Council
,
California Labor Federation
,
Orange County Civic Engagement Table Action
,
SEIU United Healthcare Workers West
,
United Food & Commercial Workers Union
,
California Democratic Party
,
California Federation of Teachers
,
California League of Conservation Voters
,
Indivisible CA 39
,
Indivisible OC 48
,
MoveOn.org
,
NARAL Pro-Choice California
,
National Union of Healthcare Workers
,
Planned Parenthood Action Fund
,
SEIU CA
,
Sierra Club California
State Assembly
Depending on where you live, you may have one of the below State Assembly races on your ballot.
State Assembly, 36th District
Based on our analysis, there is no progressive candidate to recommend for your vote in this race.
About the Position
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.
About the District
California's 36th Assembly District includes parts of Kern, Los Angeles, and San Bernardino Counties. Democrats held this district before 2014, when Tom Lackey first won the seat and flipped AD-36 from blue to red. The most recent election results show 49.9 percent of AD-36 voted for Clinton for president in 2016, and 51.2 percent of the district voted for Newsom for governor in 2018.
About the Race
In the primary, Democrat challenger Steve Fox trailed Republican incumbent Representative Tom Lackey by a margin of 35.7 percent. Neither candidate has pledged to refuse corporate PAC, fossil fuel, or police money. Fox’s campaign has raised $59,603.81, entirely from individual donors. Lackey’s campaign has raised $546,214.02 and is backed by corporate PACs, fossil fuel, and police money.
About the Candidate
Steve Fox is the challenger and the former assemblymember for this district from 2012–2014. While Fox has co-authored legislation that expanded housing for veterans, he has also been absent for, or voted against, key progressive legislation, such as for environmental protections and raising the minimum wage. Steve Fox has also been accused of sexual misconduct during his time as assemblymember. Based on his track record, Fox is likely to provide no progressive leadership in office.
Keep reading for progressive recommendations in other key races and on ballot measures where your vote can make a critical difference.
Based on our analysis, there is no progressive candidate to recommend for your vote in this race.
About the Position
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.
About the District
California's 36th Assembly District includes parts of Kern, Los Angeles, and San Bernardino Counties. Democrats held this district before 2014, when Tom Lackey first won the seat and flipped AD-36 from blue to red. The most recent election results show 49.9 percent of AD-36 voted for Clinton for president in 2016, and 51.2 percent of the district voted for Newsom for governor in 2018.
About the Race
In the primary, Democrat challenger Steve Fox trailed Republican incumbent Representative Tom Lackey by a margin of 35.7 percent. Neither candidate has pledged to refuse corporate PAC, fossil fuel, or police money. Fox’s campaign has raised $59,603.81, entirely from individual donors. Lackey’s campaign has raised $546,214.02 and is backed by corporate PACs, fossil fuel, and police money.
About the Candidate
Steve Fox is the challenger and the former assemblymember for this district from 2012–2014. While Fox has co-authored legislation that expanded housing for veterans, he has also been absent for, or voted against, key progressive legislation, such as for environmental protections and raising the minimum wage. Steve Fox has also been accused of sexual misconduct during his time as assemblymember. Based on his track record, Fox is likely to provide no progressive leadership in office.
Keep reading for progressive recommendations in other key races and on ballot measures where your vote can make a critical difference.
State Assembly, 47th District
Re-elect State Assemblymember Eloise Gómez Reyes to keep AD-47 on the right track.
About the Position
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.
About the District
California's 47th Assembly District includes parts of San Bernardino County. Democrats typically hold this district. The most recent election results show 70.1 percent of AD-47 voted for Clinton for president in 2016, and 67.4 percent of the district voted for Newsom for governor in 2018.
About the Race
In the primary, Democrat incumbent Representative Reyes led Republican challenger Matthew Gordon by a margin of 42 percent. Neither candidate has pledged to refuse corporate PAC, fossil fuel, and police money. Reyes’s campaign has raised $464,982.45 and is funded by labor unions and individuals, but also by corporations, fossil fuel, and police money. Opponent Gordon’s campaign has raised $7,301.68 is backed mostly by individuals.
About the Candidate
Assemblymember Eloise Gómez Reyes grew up in the San Bernardino Valley and lives in Grand Terrace, CA. She is the incumbent, having served as assemblymember for the 47th District in the State Assembly since 2016.
During her tenure, Assemblymember Reyes has been committed to the progressive values of her community, securing millions in funding for higher education, health care, and other community services. She has worked with progressive organizations to pass legislation across nearly every progressive issue area, from criminal-justice reform to strengthening worker protections to protecting the environment. She currently sits on sixteen committees, and serves as chair of the Human Services Committee and the Select Committee on Environmental Quality, and the Green Economy in the Inland Empire.
Rep. Reyes’s priorities for AD-47 this year include a clean economy, gun violence protection, and making higher education affordable. Rep. Reyes has sponsored two bills about environmental and worker protection this year, both of which successfully passed. She scores a lifetime score of 98 out of 100 on Courage Score, our annual analysis of legislators’ progressive voting records. Based on our Courage Score analysis, Rep. Reyes has supported the most progressive bills that made it to a vote. That said, she was absent from a vote that would allow local governments to sponsor public banks. Such banks are likely to charge lower fees and invest in locally oriented resources.
Prior to her election to the State Assembly, she taught as an adjunct professor at Cal Poly Pomona, provided free legal aid to residents of the Inland Empire, and co-founded the Inland Empire Community Health Center. She was also the first Latina to open her own law firm in the Inland Empire, where she successfully represented the residents of Colton in their effort to prevent the development of a hazardous-waste dump in their community.
Rep. Reyes is endorsed by a strong majority of progressive groups in the district. According to our analysis, Rep. Eloise Gómez Reyes is the strongest choice for equitable and representative leadership in office.
Last updated: 2023-04-05
Re-elect State Assemblymember Eloise Gómez Reyes to keep AD-47 on the right track.
About the Position
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.
About the District
California's 47th Assembly District includes parts of San Bernardino County. Democrats typically hold this district. The most recent election results show 70.1 percent of AD-47 voted for Clinton for president in 2016, and 67.4 percent of the district voted for Newsom for governor in 2018.
About the Race
In the primary, Democrat incumbent Representative Reyes led Republican challenger Matthew Gordon by a margin of 42 percent. Neither candidate has pledged to refuse corporate PAC, fossil fuel, and police money. Reyes’s campaign has raised $464,982.45 and is funded by labor unions and individuals, but also by corporations, fossil fuel, and police money. Opponent Gordon’s campaign has raised $7,301.68 is backed mostly by individuals.
About the Candidate
Assemblymember Eloise Gómez Reyes grew up in the San Bernardino Valley and lives in Grand Terrace, CA. She is the incumbent, having served as assemblymember for the 47th District in the State Assembly since 2016.
During her tenure, Assemblymember Reyes has been committed to the progressive values of her community, securing millions in funding for higher education, health care, and other community services. She has worked with progressive organizations to pass legislation across nearly every progressive issue area, from criminal-justice reform to strengthening worker protections to protecting the environment. She currently sits on sixteen committees, and serves as chair of the Human Services Committee and the Select Committee on Environmental Quality, and the Green Economy in the Inland Empire.
Rep. Reyes’s priorities for AD-47 this year include a clean economy, gun violence protection, and making higher education affordable. Rep. Reyes has sponsored two bills about environmental and worker protection this year, both of which successfully passed. She scores a lifetime score of 98 out of 100 on Courage Score, our annual analysis of legislators’ progressive voting records. Based on our Courage Score analysis, Rep. Reyes has supported the most progressive bills that made it to a vote. That said, she was absent from a vote that would allow local governments to sponsor public banks. Such banks are likely to charge lower fees and invest in locally oriented resources.
Prior to her election to the State Assembly, she taught as an adjunct professor at Cal Poly Pomona, provided free legal aid to residents of the Inland Empire, and co-founded the Inland Empire Community Health Center. She was also the first Latina to open her own law firm in the Inland Empire, where she successfully represented the residents of Colton in their effort to prevent the development of a hazardous-waste dump in their community.
Rep. Reyes is endorsed by a strong majority of progressive groups in the district. According to our analysis, Rep. Eloise Gómez Reyes is the strongest choice for equitable and representative leadership in office.
Last updated: 2023-04-05
Endorsed By: AFSCME 3299
,
AFSCME State Council
,
California Federation of Teachers
,
California Labor Federation
,
Close the Gap CA
,
Emily's List
,
SEIU United Healthcare Workers West
,
United Food & Commercial Workers Union
,
California Democratic Party
,
California Environmental Justice Alliance
,
California League of Conservation Voters
,
California Teachers Association
,
Equality California
,
NARAL Pro-Choice California
,
National Union of Healthcare Workers
,
Sierra Club California
,
United Farm Workers
Re-elect State Assemblymember Eloise Gómez Reyes to keep AD-47 on the right track.
About the Position
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.
About the District
California's 47th Assembly District includes parts of San Bernardino County. Democrats typically hold this district. The most recent election results show 70.1 percent of AD-47 voted for Clinton for president in 2016, and 67.4 percent of the district voted for Newsom for governor in 2018.
About the Race
In the primary, Democrat incumbent Representative Reyes led Republican challenger Matthew Gordon by a margin of 42 percent. Neither candidate has pledged to refuse corporate PAC, fossil fuel, and police money. Reyes’s campaign has raised $464,982.45 and is funded by labor unions and individuals, but also by corporations, fossil fuel, and police money. Opponent Gordon’s campaign has raised $7,301.68 is backed mostly by individuals.
About the Candidate
Assemblymember Eloise Gómez Reyes grew up in the San Bernardino Valley and lives in Grand Terrace, CA. She is the incumbent, having served as assemblymember for the 47th District in the State Assembly since 2016.
During her tenure, Assemblymember Reyes has been committed to the progressive values of her community, securing millions in funding for higher education, health care, and other community services. She has worked with progressive organizations to pass legislation across nearly every progressive issue area, from criminal-justice reform to strengthening worker protections to protecting the environment. She currently sits on sixteen committees, and serves as chair of the Human Services Committee and the Select Committee on Environmental Quality, and the Green Economy in the Inland Empire.
Rep. Reyes’s priorities for AD-47 this year include a clean economy, gun violence protection, and making higher education affordable. Rep. Reyes has sponsored two bills about environmental and worker protection this year, both of which successfully passed. She scores a lifetime score of 98 out of 100 on Courage Score, our annual analysis of legislators’ progressive voting records. Based on our Courage Score analysis, Rep. Reyes has supported the most progressive bills that made it to a vote. That said, she was absent from a vote that would allow local governments to sponsor public banks. Such banks are likely to charge lower fees and invest in locally oriented resources.
Prior to her election to the State Assembly, she taught as an adjunct professor at Cal Poly Pomona, provided free legal aid to residents of the Inland Empire, and co-founded the Inland Empire Community Health Center. She was also the first Latina to open her own law firm in the Inland Empire, where she successfully represented the residents of Colton in their effort to prevent the development of a hazardous-waste dump in their community.
Rep. Reyes is endorsed by a strong majority of progressive groups in the district. According to our analysis, Rep. Eloise Gómez Reyes is the strongest choice for equitable and representative leadership in office.
Last updated: 2023-04-05
Endorsed By: AFSCME 3299
,
AFSCME State Council
,
California Federation of Teachers
,
California Labor Federation
,
Close the Gap CA
,
Emily's List
,
SEIU United Healthcare Workers West
,
United Food & Commercial Workers Union
,
California Democratic Party
,
California Environmental Justice Alliance
,
California League of Conservation Voters
,
California Teachers Association
,
Equality California
,
NARAL Pro-Choice California
,
National Union of Healthcare Workers
,
Sierra Club California
,
United Farm Workers
State Assembly, 58th District
Based on our analysis, there is no competitive progressive candidate to recommend for your vote in this race.
About the Position
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.
About the District
California's 58th Assembly District includes parts of Los Angeles County and the cities of Montebello and Norwalk. Democrats typically hold this district. The most recent election results show 72.5 percent of AD-58 voted for Clinton for president in 2016 and 71 percent of the district voted for Newsom for governor in 2018.
About the Race
In the March 3 primary election, Green Party challenger Margaret Villa trailed Democratic incumbent Cristina Garcia by a margin of 54.6 percent. Villa’s campaign has raised $700, entirely from individual donors. While Villa has not received corporate PAC, fossil fuel, or police money, she has not officially pledged to refuse such funds. Garcia has raised $387,506.98, is also not committed to any campaign finance pledges, and is backed by Clorox Co., Edison International, the California Correctional Peace Officers Association, and numerous real estate/property development interests.
About the Candidates (presented in alphabetical order, with no implied preference)
Incumbent Assemblymember Cristina Garcia received a 79 out of 100 for 2019 on Courage Score, our annual analysis of legislators’ progressive voting records. She has offered progressive votes on obtaining police misconduct records, regulating the dialysis industry, strengthening emissions reporting requirements, and banning biometric surveillance/facial recognition from use in police body cams. However, Garcia has abstained or voted no on establishing public banks, prohibiting "no rehire" provisions that bar victims of mistreatment from employment with the offending company, capping rent increases at 5 percent in a 12-month period, forcing landlords to present “just cause” before evicting, creating the Bay Area Housing Finance Authority to raise and distribute affordable housing funds, and establishing penalties for claims that arise under the Fair Housing and Employment Act. She herself is a landlord, providing a potential correlation to her consistent abstention from voting on renters’ issues while publicly espousing progressive leanings on the topic.
Cristina Garcia has also been mired in public controversy. In 2018, she was accused of creating a hostile work environment by her staff and of sexual harassment by a former Capitol staff member and a Sacramento lobbyist. While her sexual misconduct was under official investigation, her re-election campaign received over $10,000 in contributions from fellow legislators, including the co-chairs of the subcommittee charged with leading the investigation. This same subcommittee later cleared her of the allegations. Garcia was also investigated for misconduct in 2018, and the investigation concluded that she had ‘commonly and pervasively’ used vulgar language around staff, used staff to perform personal services, and ‘disparaged other elected officials.’
Due to her positions on housing and history of problematic language and actions, we cannot recommend Cristina Garcia for your vote.
Last updated: 2023-04-05
Incumbent Assemblymember Cristina Garcia received a 79 out of 100 for 2019 on Courage Score, our annual analysis of legislators’ progressive voting records. She has offered progressive votes on obtaining police misconduct records, regulating the dialysis industry, strengthening emissions reporting requirements, and banning biometric surveillance/facial recognition from use in police body cams. However, Garcia has abstained or voted no on establishing public banks, prohibiting "no rehire" provisions that bar victims of mistreatment from employment with the offending company, capping rent increases at 5 percent in a 12-month period, forcing landlords to present “just cause” before evicting, creating the Bay Area Housing Finance Authority to raise and distribute affordable housing funds, and establishing penalties for claims that arise under the Fair Housing and Employment Act. She herself is a landlord, providing a potential correlation to her consistent abstention from voting on renters’ issues while publicly espousing progressive leanings on the topic.
Cristina Garcia has also been mired in public controversy. In 2018, she was accused of creating a hostile work environment by her staff and of sexual harassment by a former Capitol staff member and a Sacramento lobbyist. While her sexual misconduct was under official investigation, her re-election campaign received over $10,000 in contributions from fellow legislators, including the co-chairs of the subcommittee charged with leading the investigation. This same subcommittee later cleared her of the allegations. Garcia was also investigated for misconduct in 2018, and the investigation concluded that she had ‘commonly and pervasively’ used vulgar language around staff, used staff to perform personal services, and ‘disparaged other elected officials.’
Due to her positions on housing and history of problematic language and actions, we cannot recommend Cristina Garcia for your vote.
Last updated: 2023-04-05
Incumbent Assemblymember Cristina Garcia received a 79 out of 100 for 2019 on Courage Score, our annual analysis of legislators’ progressive voting records. She has offered progressive votes on obtaining police misconduct records, regulating the dialysis industry, strengthening emissions reporting requirements, and banning biometric surveillance/facial recognition from use in police body cams. However, Garcia has abstained or voted no on establishing public banks, prohibiting "no rehire" provisions that bar victims of mistreatment from employment with the offending company, capping rent increases at 5 percent in a 12-month period, forcing landlords to present “just cause” before evicting, creating the Bay Area Housing Finance Authority to raise and distribute affordable housing funds, and establishing penalties for claims that arise under the Fair Housing and Employment Act. She herself is a landlord, providing a potential correlation to her consistent abstention from voting on renters’ issues while publicly espousing progressive leanings on the topic.
Cristina Garcia has also been mired in public controversy. In 2018, she was accused of creating a hostile work environment by her staff and of sexual harassment by a former Capitol staff member and a Sacramento lobbyist. While her sexual misconduct was under official investigation, her re-election campaign received over $10,000 in contributions from fellow legislators, including the co-chairs of the subcommittee charged with leading the investigation. This same subcommittee later cleared her of the allegations. Garcia was also investigated for misconduct in 2018, and the investigation concluded that she had ‘commonly and pervasively’ used vulgar language around staff, used staff to perform personal services, and ‘disparaged other elected officials.’
Due to her positions on housing and history of problematic language and actions, we cannot recommend Cristina Garcia for your vote.
Last updated: 2023-04-05
Margaret Villa, an airline employee, is running for AD-58 under the Green Party banner. While Villa states support for rent control, Medicare for All, ranked-choice voting, environmentalism, making college tuition-free, as well as her intent to bring working class people into politics, her campaign has unfortunately not made a significant impact on the race due to lack of outreach and funding. Due to the absence of both engagement and specific policy proposals to attain her listed progressive goals, we do not feel we have enough information to recommend Villa for your vote.
Last updated: 2023-04-05
Margaret Villa, an airline employee, is running for AD-58 under the Green Party banner. While Villa states support for rent control, Medicare for All, ranked-choice voting, environmentalism, making college tuition-free, as well as her intent to bring working class people into politics, her campaign has unfortunately not made a significant impact on the race due to lack of outreach and funding. Due to the absence of both engagement and specific policy proposals to attain her listed progressive goals, we do not feel we have enough information to recommend Villa for your vote.
Last updated: 2023-04-05
Margaret Villa, an airline employee, is running for AD-58 under the Green Party banner. While Villa states support for rent control, Medicare for All, ranked-choice voting, environmentalism, making college tuition-free, as well as her intent to bring working class people into politics, her campaign has unfortunately not made a significant impact on the race due to lack of outreach and funding. Due to the absence of both engagement and specific policy proposals to attain her listed progressive goals, we do not feel we have enough information to recommend Villa for your vote.
Last updated: 2023-04-05
State Assembly, 60th District
Re-elect State Assemblymember Sabrina Cervantes to keep AD-60 under Democratic control.
About the Position
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.
About the District
California's 60th Assembly District includes parts of Riverside County. Republicans typically hold this district. The most recent election results show AD-60 voted for Hillary Clinton for president in 2016 and Gavin Newsom for governor in 2018.
About the Race
In the primary, Democrat incumbent Representative Sabrina Cervantes led far-right Republican challenger Chris Raahauge by a margin of 8.8 percent.
Rep. Cervantes’s campaign has raised $1,015,215, has not committed to any campaign finance pledges, and has taken significant money from Chevron, Exxon Mobil, PBF Energy, the California Independent Petroleum Association, Edison International, PG&E, the California Statewide Law Enforcement Association, the Los Angeles Police Protective League, the Los Angeles County Professional Peace Officers Association, the Riverside Sheriffs Association, the Corona Police Officers Association, and numerous banking, real estate, pharmaceutical, private healthcare, pawnbroker/payday loan, and corporate organizations.
Raahauge’s campaign has raised $9,785, also not committed to any campaign finance pledges, and commands only three endorsements: the California Pro-Life Council, Gun Owners of California, and the National Rifle Association. Raahauge works as a peace officer for a county probation department and cites public treatment of law enforcement as what spurred his decision to run. He says on his campaign website: “...we have seen anti-law enforcement legislation, homeless encampments tolerated, and even officers contracting typhus.” The website goes on to claim that there is an epidemic of shoplifting in society and provides links to two petitions to stop early prisoner release. Raahague’s campaign Facebook page includes advertisements for a fundraiser featuring a 9/11 documentary “So Secret We Can Not Even Tell You The Title”, hinting at an affiliation with the 9/11 Truther conspiracy movement. He has stated on Facebook and in interviews that he supports ending all Covid prevention measures and believes President Trump’s assertion that California wildfires are caused by mismanaged brush clearing efforts.
Furthermore, the Raahauge family is known throughout the district as gun range owners. In 2013, it was discovered that Patrick Raahauge was operating the range despite being a convicted felon barred from firearm possession and in 2017 the range was served with a lawsuit for wrongful death and negligence after a man was killed. The Press Enterprise reports: “The lawsuit says the range was designed ‘contrary to all design standards and common sense’ so that rifle fire was aimed directly toward a crowd of people, with some areas protected from an off-target shot only by plywood.”
About the Candidate
Rep. Sabrina Cervantes is the incumbent, having served as assemblymember since 2016. She scores a lifetime 29 out of 100 on Courage Score, our annual analysis of legislators’ progressive voting records. Based on our Courage Score analysis, Rep. Cervantes abstained or voted no on most progressive bills that made it to a vote from 2017 to 2019. She has voted against expanding overtime pay, eliminating life sentences for minors, allowing minors to consult lawyers during interrogations, preventing children under 12 from being tried in juvenile court, rejecting concealed-carry gun permits from out-of-state holders, prohibiting the state from charging inmates administrative fees for medical visits, encouraging affordable housing production in “high-resource” areas, capping rent increases, reinstating net neutrality, decriminalizing truancy, and repealing sentencing enhancements for those with prior offenses. She abstained from voting on reforming War on Drugs–era sentence enhancements, allowing workers to return to work during labor claim processes, requiring law enforcement to notify the public when acquiring military equipment, ending the transport of oil from offshore drilling facilities to the state, setting a goal of 100 percent clean energy in California by 2045, requiring charter schools to get permission from local school districts to operate, and prohibiting no-rehire provisions that bar victims of mistreatment from employment with the offending company.
While we recognize Rep. Sabrina Cervantes’s problematic track record does not suggest she will provide progressive leadership in office, her inaction on legislation and campaign finance is greatly overshadowed by the threat of Chris Raahague’s far-right campaign, stances, and history in the district. According to our analysis, Rep. Sabrina Cervantes is the best choice for keeping the district under Democratic control. We encourage progressive organizations and individuals in AD-60 to consider future runs for office that accurately reflect the voting tendencies of the citizenry.
Last updated: 2023-04-05
Re-elect State Assemblymember Sabrina Cervantes to keep AD-60 under Democratic control.
About the Position
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.
About the District
California's 60th Assembly District includes parts of Riverside County. Republicans typically hold this district. The most recent election results show AD-60 voted for Hillary Clinton for president in 2016 and Gavin Newsom for governor in 2018.
About the Race
In the primary, Democrat incumbent Representative Sabrina Cervantes led far-right Republican challenger Chris Raahauge by a margin of 8.8 percent.
Rep. Cervantes’s campaign has raised $1,015,215, has not committed to any campaign finance pledges, and has taken significant money from Chevron, Exxon Mobil, PBF Energy, the California Independent Petroleum Association, Edison International, PG&E, the California Statewide Law Enforcement Association, the Los Angeles Police Protective League, the Los Angeles County Professional Peace Officers Association, the Riverside Sheriffs Association, the Corona Police Officers Association, and numerous banking, real estate, pharmaceutical, private healthcare, pawnbroker/payday loan, and corporate organizations.
Raahauge’s campaign has raised $9,785, also not committed to any campaign finance pledges, and commands only three endorsements: the California Pro-Life Council, Gun Owners of California, and the National Rifle Association. Raahauge works as a peace officer for a county probation department and cites public treatment of law enforcement as what spurred his decision to run. He says on his campaign website: “...we have seen anti-law enforcement legislation, homeless encampments tolerated, and even officers contracting typhus.” The website goes on to claim that there is an epidemic of shoplifting in society and provides links to two petitions to stop early prisoner release. Raahague’s campaign Facebook page includes advertisements for a fundraiser featuring a 9/11 documentary “So Secret We Can Not Even Tell You The Title”, hinting at an affiliation with the 9/11 Truther conspiracy movement. He has stated on Facebook and in interviews that he supports ending all Covid prevention measures and believes President Trump’s assertion that California wildfires are caused by mismanaged brush clearing efforts.
Furthermore, the Raahauge family is known throughout the district as gun range owners. In 2013, it was discovered that Patrick Raahauge was operating the range despite being a convicted felon barred from firearm possession and in 2017 the range was served with a lawsuit for wrongful death and negligence after a man was killed. The Press Enterprise reports: “The lawsuit says the range was designed ‘contrary to all design standards and common sense’ so that rifle fire was aimed directly toward a crowd of people, with some areas protected from an off-target shot only by plywood.”
About the Candidate
Rep. Sabrina Cervantes is the incumbent, having served as assemblymember since 2016. She scores a lifetime 29 out of 100 on Courage Score, our annual analysis of legislators’ progressive voting records. Based on our Courage Score analysis, Rep. Cervantes abstained or voted no on most progressive bills that made it to a vote from 2017 to 2019. She has voted against expanding overtime pay, eliminating life sentences for minors, allowing minors to consult lawyers during interrogations, preventing children under 12 from being tried in juvenile court, rejecting concealed-carry gun permits from out-of-state holders, prohibiting the state from charging inmates administrative fees for medical visits, encouraging affordable housing production in “high-resource” areas, capping rent increases, reinstating net neutrality, decriminalizing truancy, and repealing sentencing enhancements for those with prior offenses. She abstained from voting on reforming War on Drugs–era sentence enhancements, allowing workers to return to work during labor claim processes, requiring law enforcement to notify the public when acquiring military equipment, ending the transport of oil from offshore drilling facilities to the state, setting a goal of 100 percent clean energy in California by 2045, requiring charter schools to get permission from local school districts to operate, and prohibiting no-rehire provisions that bar victims of mistreatment from employment with the offending company.
While we recognize Rep. Sabrina Cervantes’s problematic track record does not suggest she will provide progressive leadership in office, her inaction on legislation and campaign finance is greatly overshadowed by the threat of Chris Raahague’s far-right campaign, stances, and history in the district. According to our analysis, Rep. Sabrina Cervantes is the best choice for keeping the district under Democratic control. We encourage progressive organizations and individuals in AD-60 to consider future runs for office that accurately reflect the voting tendencies of the citizenry.
Last updated: 2023-04-05
Endorsed By: AFSCME 3299
,
AFSCME State Council
,
California Labor Federation
,
Close the Gap CA
,
Emily's List
,
SEIU United Healthcare Workers West
,
United Food & Commercial Workers Union
,
California Democratic Party
,
California Teachers Association
,
Equality California
,
National Union of Healthcare Workers
,
Sierra Club California
Re-elect State Assemblymember Sabrina Cervantes to keep AD-60 under Democratic control.
About the Position
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.
About the District
California's 60th Assembly District includes parts of Riverside County. Republicans typically hold this district. The most recent election results show AD-60 voted for Hillary Clinton for president in 2016 and Gavin Newsom for governor in 2018.
About the Race
In the primary, Democrat incumbent Representative Sabrina Cervantes led far-right Republican challenger Chris Raahauge by a margin of 8.8 percent.
Rep. Cervantes’s campaign has raised $1,015,215, has not committed to any campaign finance pledges, and has taken significant money from Chevron, Exxon Mobil, PBF Energy, the California Independent Petroleum Association, Edison International, PG&E, the California Statewide Law Enforcement Association, the Los Angeles Police Protective League, the Los Angeles County Professional Peace Officers Association, the Riverside Sheriffs Association, the Corona Police Officers Association, and numerous banking, real estate, pharmaceutical, private healthcare, pawnbroker/payday loan, and corporate organizations.
Raahauge’s campaign has raised $9,785, also not committed to any campaign finance pledges, and commands only three endorsements: the California Pro-Life Council, Gun Owners of California, and the National Rifle Association. Raahauge works as a peace officer for a county probation department and cites public treatment of law enforcement as what spurred his decision to run. He says on his campaign website: “...we have seen anti-law enforcement legislation, homeless encampments tolerated, and even officers contracting typhus.” The website goes on to claim that there is an epidemic of shoplifting in society and provides links to two petitions to stop early prisoner release. Raahague’s campaign Facebook page includes advertisements for a fundraiser featuring a 9/11 documentary “So Secret We Can Not Even Tell You The Title”, hinting at an affiliation with the 9/11 Truther conspiracy movement. He has stated on Facebook and in interviews that he supports ending all Covid prevention measures and believes President Trump’s assertion that California wildfires are caused by mismanaged brush clearing efforts.
Furthermore, the Raahauge family is known throughout the district as gun range owners. In 2013, it was discovered that Patrick Raahauge was operating the range despite being a convicted felon barred from firearm possession and in 2017 the range was served with a lawsuit for wrongful death and negligence after a man was killed. The Press Enterprise reports: “The lawsuit says the range was designed ‘contrary to all design standards and common sense’ so that rifle fire was aimed directly toward a crowd of people, with some areas protected from an off-target shot only by plywood.”
About the Candidate
Rep. Sabrina Cervantes is the incumbent, having served as assemblymember since 2016. She scores a lifetime 29 out of 100 on Courage Score, our annual analysis of legislators’ progressive voting records. Based on our Courage Score analysis, Rep. Cervantes abstained or voted no on most progressive bills that made it to a vote from 2017 to 2019. She has voted against expanding overtime pay, eliminating life sentences for minors, allowing minors to consult lawyers during interrogations, preventing children under 12 from being tried in juvenile court, rejecting concealed-carry gun permits from out-of-state holders, prohibiting the state from charging inmates administrative fees for medical visits, encouraging affordable housing production in “high-resource” areas, capping rent increases, reinstating net neutrality, decriminalizing truancy, and repealing sentencing enhancements for those with prior offenses. She abstained from voting on reforming War on Drugs–era sentence enhancements, allowing workers to return to work during labor claim processes, requiring law enforcement to notify the public when acquiring military equipment, ending the transport of oil from offshore drilling facilities to the state, setting a goal of 100 percent clean energy in California by 2045, requiring charter schools to get permission from local school districts to operate, and prohibiting no-rehire provisions that bar victims of mistreatment from employment with the offending company.
While we recognize Rep. Sabrina Cervantes’s problematic track record does not suggest she will provide progressive leadership in office, her inaction on legislation and campaign finance is greatly overshadowed by the threat of Chris Raahague’s far-right campaign, stances, and history in the district. According to our analysis, Rep. Sabrina Cervantes is the best choice for keeping the district under Democratic control. We encourage progressive organizations and individuals in AD-60 to consider future runs for office that accurately reflect the voting tendencies of the citizenry.
Last updated: 2023-04-05
Endorsed By: AFSCME 3299
,
AFSCME State Council
,
California Labor Federation
,
Close the Gap CA
,
Emily's List
,
SEIU United Healthcare Workers West
,
United Food & Commercial Workers Union
,
California Democratic Party
,
California Teachers Association
,
Equality California
,
National Union of Healthcare Workers
,
Sierra Club California
State Assembly, 63rd District
Re-elect State Assemblymember Anthony Rendón to keep AD-63 on the right track.
About the Position
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.
About the District
California's 63rd Assembly District includes parts of Los Angeles County and includes Bell Gardens and parts of Long Beach. Democrats typically hold this district. The most recent election results show 77.4 percent of AD-63 voted for Clinton for president in 2016, and 74.6 percent of the district voted for Newsom for governor in 2018.
About the Race
In the primary, Democrat incumbent Representative Anthony Rendón led another Democratic challenger Maria Estrada by a margin of 16 percent. Rendón’s campaign has raised $1,343,191.78. His campaign has not committed to refusing corporate PAC, fossil fuel, or police money, and is funded by all three groups. Estrada’s campaign has raised $27,581.76, the bulk of which comes from individual donors. While her campaign has not taken corporate PAC, fossil fuel, or police money, Estrada has yet to pledge to refuse such funds.
About the Candidate
Rep. Anthony Rendón, assemblymember since 2012 and speaker of the California State Assembly since 2016, is the son of working-class parents and grandson of Mexican immigrants.
He currently sits on the Arts Committee and the Rules Committee. As assemblymember, Rendón has passed key progressive legislation, including on environmental protections, gun violence prevention, affordable housing, and minimum wage.
He scores a lifetime score of 97 out of 100 on Courage Score, our annual analysis of legislators’ progressive voting records. Based on our Courage Score analysis, Rep. Anthony Rendón has supported the most progressive bills that made it to a vote. That said, in 2017 Rep. Rendón used his power as speaker to sideline legislation that would have established single-payer health care in California after receiving $100,000 from pharmaceutical groups and $50,000 from medical insurance groups, so his Courage Score is misleading.
Prior to his election to the State Assembly, Rep. Rendón served as executive director of Plaza de la Raza Child Development Services, which provides child development, social, and medical services to families in Los Angeles County. He is a longtime supporter of child education.
Anthony Rendón is endorsed by many progressive groups in the district. He is also endorsed by several police organizations. Although we disagree with Rendón’s ties to corporate, fossil fuel, and police interests, and know that a stronger progressive candidate would more accurately represent SD-15, Rendón is the strongest choice for equitable and representative leadership in office. That said, we encourage more progressive candidates that will better reflect this community’s needs to run formidable campaigns in future cycles.
Last updated: 2023-04-05
Re-elect State Assemblymember Anthony Rendón to keep AD-63 on the right track.
About the Position
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.
About the District
California's 63rd Assembly District includes parts of Los Angeles County and includes Bell Gardens and parts of Long Beach. Democrats typically hold this district. The most recent election results show 77.4 percent of AD-63 voted for Clinton for president in 2016, and 74.6 percent of the district voted for Newsom for governor in 2018.
About the Race
In the primary, Democrat incumbent Representative Anthony Rendón led another Democratic challenger Maria Estrada by a margin of 16 percent. Rendón’s campaign has raised $1,343,191.78. His campaign has not committed to refusing corporate PAC, fossil fuel, or police money, and is funded by all three groups. Estrada’s campaign has raised $27,581.76, the bulk of which comes from individual donors. While her campaign has not taken corporate PAC, fossil fuel, or police money, Estrada has yet to pledge to refuse such funds.
About the Candidate
Rep. Anthony Rendón, assemblymember since 2012 and speaker of the California State Assembly since 2016, is the son of working-class parents and grandson of Mexican immigrants.
He currently sits on the Arts Committee and the Rules Committee. As assemblymember, Rendón has passed key progressive legislation, including on environmental protections, gun violence prevention, affordable housing, and minimum wage.
He scores a lifetime score of 97 out of 100 on Courage Score, our annual analysis of legislators’ progressive voting records. Based on our Courage Score analysis, Rep. Anthony Rendón has supported the most progressive bills that made it to a vote. That said, in 2017 Rep. Rendón used his power as speaker to sideline legislation that would have established single-payer health care in California after receiving $100,000 from pharmaceutical groups and $50,000 from medical insurance groups, so his Courage Score is misleading.
Prior to his election to the State Assembly, Rep. Rendón served as executive director of Plaza de la Raza Child Development Services, which provides child development, social, and medical services to families in Los Angeles County. He is a longtime supporter of child education.
Anthony Rendón is endorsed by many progressive groups in the district. He is also endorsed by several police organizations. Although we disagree with Rendón’s ties to corporate, fossil fuel, and police interests, and know that a stronger progressive candidate would more accurately represent SD-15, Rendón is the strongest choice for equitable and representative leadership in office. That said, we encourage more progressive candidates that will better reflect this community’s needs to run formidable campaigns in future cycles.
Last updated: 2023-04-05
Endorsed By: AFSCME 3299
,
AFSCME State Council
,
California Labor Federation
,
SEIU United Healthcare Workers West
,
United Food & Commercial Workers Union
,
California Democratic Party
,
California Federation of Teachers
,
California League of Conservation Voters
,
California Teachers Association
,
Equality California
,
NARAL Pro-Choice California
,
National Union of Healthcare Workers
,
Sierra Club California
Re-elect State Assemblymember Anthony Rendón to keep AD-63 on the right track.
About the Position
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.
About the District
California's 63rd Assembly District includes parts of Los Angeles County and includes Bell Gardens and parts of Long Beach. Democrats typically hold this district. The most recent election results show 77.4 percent of AD-63 voted for Clinton for president in 2016, and 74.6 percent of the district voted for Newsom for governor in 2018.
About the Race
In the primary, Democrat incumbent Representative Anthony Rendón led another Democratic challenger Maria Estrada by a margin of 16 percent. Rendón’s campaign has raised $1,343,191.78. His campaign has not committed to refusing corporate PAC, fossil fuel, or police money, and is funded by all three groups. Estrada’s campaign has raised $27,581.76, the bulk of which comes from individual donors. While her campaign has not taken corporate PAC, fossil fuel, or police money, Estrada has yet to pledge to refuse such funds.
About the Candidate
Rep. Anthony Rendón, assemblymember since 2012 and speaker of the California State Assembly since 2016, is the son of working-class parents and grandson of Mexican immigrants.
He currently sits on the Arts Committee and the Rules Committee. As assemblymember, Rendón has passed key progressive legislation, including on environmental protections, gun violence prevention, affordable housing, and minimum wage.
He scores a lifetime score of 97 out of 100 on Courage Score, our annual analysis of legislators’ progressive voting records. Based on our Courage Score analysis, Rep. Anthony Rendón has supported the most progressive bills that made it to a vote. That said, in 2017 Rep. Rendón used his power as speaker to sideline legislation that would have established single-payer health care in California after receiving $100,000 from pharmaceutical groups and $50,000 from medical insurance groups, so his Courage Score is misleading.
Prior to his election to the State Assembly, Rep. Rendón served as executive director of Plaza de la Raza Child Development Services, which provides child development, social, and medical services to families in Los Angeles County. He is a longtime supporter of child education.
Anthony Rendón is endorsed by many progressive groups in the district. He is also endorsed by several police organizations. Although we disagree with Rendón’s ties to corporate, fossil fuel, and police interests, and know that a stronger progressive candidate would more accurately represent SD-15, Rendón is the strongest choice for equitable and representative leadership in office. That said, we encourage more progressive candidates that will better reflect this community’s needs to run formidable campaigns in future cycles.
Last updated: 2023-04-05
Endorsed By: AFSCME 3299
,
AFSCME State Council
,
California Labor Federation
,
SEIU United Healthcare Workers West
,
United Food & Commercial Workers Union
,
California Democratic Party
,
California Federation of Teachers
,
California League of Conservation Voters
,
California Teachers Association
,
Equality California
,
NARAL Pro-Choice California
,
National Union of Healthcare Workers
,
Sierra Club California
State Assembly, 71st District
Elect Liz Lavertu to push AD-71 in the right direction.
About the Position
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.
About the District
California's 71st Assembly District includes parts of San Diego and Riverside Counties. Republicans typically hold this district. The most recent election results show AD-71 voted for Donald Trump for president in 2016 and John H. Cox for governor in 2018.
About the Race
In the primary, Democratic challenger Liz Lavertu trailed Republican incumbent Representative Randy Voepel by a margin of 22.2 percent. Lavertu’s campaign has raised $28,821 and has pledged not to accept money from the fossil fuel industry. Voepel’s campaign has raised $140,304, has not committed to any such pledges, and is funded by Chevron, PG&E, Altria Tobacco, Philip Morris, the Peace Officers Association of California, Deputy Sheriffs of San Diego County, the Riverside Sheriffs Association Public Education Fund, the California Institute of Highway Patrolmen, DaVita Inc., and many more problematic organizations and interest groups.
About the Candidate
Liz Lavertu is originally from Wisconsin and has been active as a community organizer in San Diego County for over twenty years. According to campaign materials, she is running for election to focus on affordable housing and rent control, establish health care as a universal right, and guarantee increased funding for public schools.
Liz Lavertu is co-chair of the Spring Valley Community Planning Group and a former volunteer with the Girl Scouts and AIDS Research Center. Through her work in education, she has prevented local arts programs from being subject to budget cuts, and helped to secure over $100,000 for the installation of an outdoor fitness circuit at Jamacha Elementary. Her time with the Spring Valley Community Planning Group has seen an increased investment in public infrastructure maintenance.
Liz Lavertu is endorsed by many local progressive groups in the district and her financial disclosures reveal no problematic backers. According to our analysis, Liz Lavertu is the strongest choice for equitable and representative leadership in office.
Last updated: 2023-04-05
Elect Liz Lavertu to push AD-71 in the right direction.
About the Position
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.
About the District
California's 71st Assembly District includes parts of San Diego and Riverside Counties. Republicans typically hold this district. The most recent election results show AD-71 voted for Donald Trump for president in 2016 and John H. Cox for governor in 2018.
About the Race
In the primary, Democratic challenger Liz Lavertu trailed Republican incumbent Representative Randy Voepel by a margin of 22.2 percent. Lavertu’s campaign has raised $28,821 and has pledged not to accept money from the fossil fuel industry. Voepel’s campaign has raised $140,304, has not committed to any such pledges, and is funded by Chevron, PG&E, Altria Tobacco, Philip Morris, the Peace Officers Association of California, Deputy Sheriffs of San Diego County, the Riverside Sheriffs Association Public Education Fund, the California Institute of Highway Patrolmen, DaVita Inc., and many more problematic organizations and interest groups.
About the Candidate
Liz Lavertu is originally from Wisconsin and has been active as a community organizer in San Diego County for over twenty years. According to campaign materials, she is running for election to focus on affordable housing and rent control, establish health care as a universal right, and guarantee increased funding for public schools.
Liz Lavertu is co-chair of the Spring Valley Community Planning Group and a former volunteer with the Girl Scouts and AIDS Research Center. Through her work in education, she has prevented local arts programs from being subject to budget cuts, and helped to secure over $100,000 for the installation of an outdoor fitness circuit at Jamacha Elementary. Her time with the Spring Valley Community Planning Group has seen an increased investment in public infrastructure maintenance.
Liz Lavertu is endorsed by many local progressive groups in the district and her financial disclosures reveal no problematic backers. According to our analysis, Liz Lavertu is the strongest choice for equitable and representative leadership in office.
Last updated: 2023-04-05
Elect Liz Lavertu to push AD-71 in the right direction.
About the Position
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.
About the District
California's 71st Assembly District includes parts of San Diego and Riverside Counties. Republicans typically hold this district. The most recent election results show AD-71 voted for Donald Trump for president in 2016 and John H. Cox for governor in 2018.
About the Race
In the primary, Democratic challenger Liz Lavertu trailed Republican incumbent Representative Randy Voepel by a margin of 22.2 percent. Lavertu’s campaign has raised $28,821 and has pledged not to accept money from the fossil fuel industry. Voepel’s campaign has raised $140,304, has not committed to any such pledges, and is funded by Chevron, PG&E, Altria Tobacco, Philip Morris, the Peace Officers Association of California, Deputy Sheriffs of San Diego County, the Riverside Sheriffs Association Public Education Fund, the California Institute of Highway Patrolmen, DaVita Inc., and many more problematic organizations and interest groups.
About the Candidate
Liz Lavertu is originally from Wisconsin and has been active as a community organizer in San Diego County for over twenty years. According to campaign materials, she is running for election to focus on affordable housing and rent control, establish health care as a universal right, and guarantee increased funding for public schools.
Liz Lavertu is co-chair of the Spring Valley Community Planning Group and a former volunteer with the Girl Scouts and AIDS Research Center. Through her work in education, she has prevented local arts programs from being subject to budget cuts, and helped to secure over $100,000 for the installation of an outdoor fitness circuit at Jamacha Elementary. Her time with the Spring Valley Community Planning Group has seen an increased investment in public infrastructure maintenance.
Liz Lavertu is endorsed by many local progressive groups in the district and her financial disclosures reveal no problematic backers. According to our analysis, Liz Lavertu is the strongest choice for equitable and representative leadership in office.
Last updated: 2023-04-05
State Senate
Depending on where you live, you may have one of the below State Senate races on your ballot.
State Senator, 19th District
Re-elect State Senate Representative Monique Limón to keep SD-19 on the right track.
About the Position
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.
About the District
California's 19th Senate District includes all of Santa Barbara County and parts of Ventura County. Democrats typically hold this district. Most recent election results show SD-19 voted for Clinton for president in 2016 and Newsom for governor in 2018.
About the Race
In the primary, Democrat candidate Monique Limón led Republican challenger Gary Michaels by a margin of 28.1 percent. Limón’s campaign has raised $306,923.02, and her campaign has not committed to refusing corporate PAC or fossil fuel money, and has accepted corporate and police money. Michaels’s campaign has not made any FEC filings.
About the Candidate
Monique Limón is a lifelong resident of Santa Barbara. According to campaign materials, she is running for State Senate because she understands the values of the region and will use her public service experience to advocate for environmental protection, educational reforms, and improved health-care access.
Limón is a member of the California State Assembly, where she uses her understanding of her community to establish meaningful legislation to positively affect educational outcomes and environmental protections. She was chair of the Assembly Select Committee on Natural Disaster Response, Recovery, and Rebuilding, and worked to improve emergency communication and fire prevention. Prior to serving in the Assembly, Limón served two terms on the Santa Barbara Unified School Board, and was assistant director for the McNair Scholars program at UCSB.
Limón’s priorities for SD-19 this year include health, women, consumer protection, and natural disasters. As an assemblymember this year, Limón has sponsored or cosponsored three bills about consumer protection, expanding paid family leave, and increasing the penalty for oil spills. She scores 90 out of 100 on Courage Score, our annual analysis of legislators’ progressive voting records. Based on our Courage Score analysis, Limón has supported the most progressive bills that made it to a vote. That said, she has not supported legislation to continue oversight of telecommunications companies.
Limón is endorsed by a majority of progressive groups in the district. According to our analysis, Monique Limón is the strongest choice for equitable and representative leadership in office.
Last updated: 2023-04-05
Re-elect State Senate Representative Monique Limón to keep SD-19 on the right track.
About the Position
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.
About the District
California's 19th Senate District includes all of Santa Barbara County and parts of Ventura County. Democrats typically hold this district. Most recent election results show SD-19 voted for Clinton for president in 2016 and Newsom for governor in 2018.
About the Race
In the primary, Democrat candidate Monique Limón led Republican challenger Gary Michaels by a margin of 28.1 percent. Limón’s campaign has raised $306,923.02, and her campaign has not committed to refusing corporate PAC or fossil fuel money, and has accepted corporate and police money. Michaels’s campaign has not made any FEC filings.
About the Candidate
Monique Limón is a lifelong resident of Santa Barbara. According to campaign materials, she is running for State Senate because she understands the values of the region and will use her public service experience to advocate for environmental protection, educational reforms, and improved health-care access.
Limón is a member of the California State Assembly, where she uses her understanding of her community to establish meaningful legislation to positively affect educational outcomes and environmental protections. She was chair of the Assembly Select Committee on Natural Disaster Response, Recovery, and Rebuilding, and worked to improve emergency communication and fire prevention. Prior to serving in the Assembly, Limón served two terms on the Santa Barbara Unified School Board, and was assistant director for the McNair Scholars program at UCSB.
Limón’s priorities for SD-19 this year include health, women, consumer protection, and natural disasters. As an assemblymember this year, Limón has sponsored or cosponsored three bills about consumer protection, expanding paid family leave, and increasing the penalty for oil spills. She scores 90 out of 100 on Courage Score, our annual analysis of legislators’ progressive voting records. Based on our Courage Score analysis, Limón has supported the most progressive bills that made it to a vote. That said, she has not supported legislation to continue oversight of telecommunications companies.
Limón is endorsed by a majority of progressive groups in the district. According to our analysis, Monique Limón is the strongest choice for equitable and representative leadership in office.
Last updated: 2023-04-05
Endorsed By: AFSCME 3299
,
AFSCME State Council
,
California Labor Federation
,
California Women’s List
,
Close the Gap CA
,
Emily's List
,
Fund Her
,
SEIU United Healthcare Workers West
,
California Democratic Party
,
California Environmental Justice Alliance
,
California Federation of Teachers
,
California League of Conservation Voters
,
California Teachers Association
,
CAUSE Action Fund
,
Center for Biological Diversity Action Fund
,
NARAL Pro-Choice California
,
National Union of Healthcare Workers
,
SEIU CA
,
Sierra Club California
,
United Domestic Workers
,
United Farm Workers
Re-elect State Senate Representative Monique Limón to keep SD-19 on the right track.
About the Position
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.
About the District
California's 19th Senate District includes all of Santa Barbara County and parts of Ventura County. Democrats typically hold this district. Most recent election results show SD-19 voted for Clinton for president in 2016 and Newsom for governor in 2018.
About the Race
In the primary, Democrat candidate Monique Limón led Republican challenger Gary Michaels by a margin of 28.1 percent. Limón’s campaign has raised $306,923.02, and her campaign has not committed to refusing corporate PAC or fossil fuel money, and has accepted corporate and police money. Michaels’s campaign has not made any FEC filings.
About the Candidate
Monique Limón is a lifelong resident of Santa Barbara. According to campaign materials, she is running for State Senate because she understands the values of the region and will use her public service experience to advocate for environmental protection, educational reforms, and improved health-care access.
Limón is a member of the California State Assembly, where she uses her understanding of her community to establish meaningful legislation to positively affect educational outcomes and environmental protections. She was chair of the Assembly Select Committee on Natural Disaster Response, Recovery, and Rebuilding, and worked to improve emergency communication and fire prevention. Prior to serving in the Assembly, Limón served two terms on the Santa Barbara Unified School Board, and was assistant director for the McNair Scholars program at UCSB.
Limón’s priorities for SD-19 this year include health, women, consumer protection, and natural disasters. As an assemblymember this year, Limón has sponsored or cosponsored three bills about consumer protection, expanding paid family leave, and increasing the penalty for oil spills. She scores 90 out of 100 on Courage Score, our annual analysis of legislators’ progressive voting records. Based on our Courage Score analysis, Limón has supported the most progressive bills that made it to a vote. That said, she has not supported legislation to continue oversight of telecommunications companies.
Limón is endorsed by a majority of progressive groups in the district. According to our analysis, Monique Limón is the strongest choice for equitable and representative leadership in office.
Last updated: 2023-04-05
Endorsed By: AFSCME 3299
,
AFSCME State Council
,
California Labor Federation
,
California Women’s List
,
Close the Gap CA
,
Emily's List
,
Fund Her
,
SEIU United Healthcare Workers West
,
California Democratic Party
,
California Environmental Justice Alliance
,
California Federation of Teachers
,
California League of Conservation Voters
,
California Teachers Association
,
CAUSE Action Fund
,
Center for Biological Diversity Action Fund
,
NARAL Pro-Choice California
,
National Union of Healthcare Workers
,
SEIU CA
,
Sierra Club California
,
United Domestic Workers
,
United Farm Workers
State Senator, 31st District
Re-elect State Senate Representative Richard Roth to keep SD-31 on the right track.
About the Position
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.
About the District
California's 31st Senate District includes parts of Riverside County. Democrats typically hold this district. The most recent election results show SD-31 voted for Hillary Clinton for president in 2016 and Gavin Newsom for governor in 2018.
About the Race
In the primary, Democrat incumbent Representative Richard Roth led Republican challenger Rod Taylor by a margin of 98 percent. Roth’s campaign has raised $702,617 and has taken no campaign finance pledges. Taylor’s campaign has raised $0.
About the Candidate
Rep. Richard Roth, a retired Air Force major general and former attorney, is from Columbus, OH. According to campaign materials, Rep. Roth is running for re-election to create jobs and continue investing in Riverside’s education system.
Sen. Richard Roth’s priorities for SD-31 this year include further investment in UC Riverside’s School of Medicine and protecting our groundwater. He currently sits on 8 committees: the Legislative Audit Committee (vice chair), Budget and Fiscal Review Committee, Insurance Committee, Veterans Affairs Committee, Housing Committee, Transportation and Housing Committee, and both the State Senate and Legislature Rules Committees. Sen. Roth has sponsored seven bills this year centered around bolstering Riverside’s schools and groundwater regulation, of which all have successfully passed. He scores a Lifetime Courage Score of 44 out of 100 on Courage Score, our annual analysis of legislators’ progressive voting records. Based on our Courage Score analysis, Senator Roth has supported some progressive bills that made it to a vote. That said, Sen. Roth has not supported prohibiting landlords from rejecting applicants based on Section 8 status, granting tenants the right to a tenant association, prohibiting no-rehire policies that bar victims of workplace mistreatment from employment with the offending company, and banning the use of biometric surveillance and facial-recognition technology from being used in police body cameras.
Prior to his election to the State Senate, Sen. Richard Roth served in the United States Air Force as a reservist, eventually achieving the rank of major general. He was also an employment attorney for 30 years, licensed to practice in California and Georgia, until joining the California State Senate in 2012. He is a longtime supporter of UC Riverside and local community colleges.
Rep. Richard Roth is endorsed by many progressive groups in the district. He is also endorsed by the California Association of Highway Patrolmen, California Correctional Peace Officers Association, and California Apartment Association. However, the threat of Republican challenger and strong Trump supporter Rod Taylor’s potential policies greatly outweighs Sen. Roth’s moderate voting record, problematic endorsements, and lack of campaign finance pledges. According to our analysis, Rep. Richard Roth is the strongest choice for representative leadership in office.
Last updated: 2023-04-05
Re-elect State Senate Representative Richard Roth to keep SD-31 on the right track.
About the Position
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.
About the District
California's 31st Senate District includes parts of Riverside County. Democrats typically hold this district. The most recent election results show SD-31 voted for Hillary Clinton for president in 2016 and Gavin Newsom for governor in 2018.
About the Race
In the primary, Democrat incumbent Representative Richard Roth led Republican challenger Rod Taylor by a margin of 98 percent. Roth’s campaign has raised $702,617 and has taken no campaign finance pledges. Taylor’s campaign has raised $0.
About the Candidate
Rep. Richard Roth, a retired Air Force major general and former attorney, is from Columbus, OH. According to campaign materials, Rep. Roth is running for re-election to create jobs and continue investing in Riverside’s education system.
Sen. Richard Roth’s priorities for SD-31 this year include further investment in UC Riverside’s School of Medicine and protecting our groundwater. He currently sits on 8 committees: the Legislative Audit Committee (vice chair), Budget and Fiscal Review Committee, Insurance Committee, Veterans Affairs Committee, Housing Committee, Transportation and Housing Committee, and both the State Senate and Legislature Rules Committees. Sen. Roth has sponsored seven bills this year centered around bolstering Riverside’s schools and groundwater regulation, of which all have successfully passed. He scores a Lifetime Courage Score of 44 out of 100 on Courage Score, our annual analysis of legislators’ progressive voting records. Based on our Courage Score analysis, Senator Roth has supported some progressive bills that made it to a vote. That said, Sen. Roth has not supported prohibiting landlords from rejecting applicants based on Section 8 status, granting tenants the right to a tenant association, prohibiting no-rehire policies that bar victims of workplace mistreatment from employment with the offending company, and banning the use of biometric surveillance and facial-recognition technology from being used in police body cameras.
Prior to his election to the State Senate, Sen. Richard Roth served in the United States Air Force as a reservist, eventually achieving the rank of major general. He was also an employment attorney for 30 years, licensed to practice in California and Georgia, until joining the California State Senate in 2012. He is a longtime supporter of UC Riverside and local community colleges.
Rep. Richard Roth is endorsed by many progressive groups in the district. He is also endorsed by the California Association of Highway Patrolmen, California Correctional Peace Officers Association, and California Apartment Association. However, the threat of Republican challenger and strong Trump supporter Rod Taylor’s potential policies greatly outweighs Sen. Roth’s moderate voting record, problematic endorsements, and lack of campaign finance pledges. According to our analysis, Rep. Richard Roth is the strongest choice for representative leadership in office.
Last updated: 2023-04-05
Endorsed By: AFSCME 3299
,
AFSCME State Council
,
California Federation of Teachers
,
California Labor Federation
,
SEIU United Healthcare Workers West
,
United Food & Commercial Workers Union
,
California Democratic Party
,
California League of Conservation Voters
,
California Teachers Association
,
National Union of Healthcare Workers
,
SEIU CA
,
Sierra Club California
,
United Domestic Workers
Re-elect State Senate Representative Richard Roth to keep SD-31 on the right track.
About the Position
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.
About the District
California's 31st Senate District includes parts of Riverside County. Democrats typically hold this district. The most recent election results show SD-31 voted for Hillary Clinton for president in 2016 and Gavin Newsom for governor in 2018.
About the Race
In the primary, Democrat incumbent Representative Richard Roth led Republican challenger Rod Taylor by a margin of 98 percent. Roth’s campaign has raised $702,617 and has taken no campaign finance pledges. Taylor’s campaign has raised $0.
About the Candidate
Rep. Richard Roth, a retired Air Force major general and former attorney, is from Columbus, OH. According to campaign materials, Rep. Roth is running for re-election to create jobs and continue investing in Riverside’s education system.
Sen. Richard Roth’s priorities for SD-31 this year include further investment in UC Riverside’s School of Medicine and protecting our groundwater. He currently sits on 8 committees: the Legislative Audit Committee (vice chair), Budget and Fiscal Review Committee, Insurance Committee, Veterans Affairs Committee, Housing Committee, Transportation and Housing Committee, and both the State Senate and Legislature Rules Committees. Sen. Roth has sponsored seven bills this year centered around bolstering Riverside’s schools and groundwater regulation, of which all have successfully passed. He scores a Lifetime Courage Score of 44 out of 100 on Courage Score, our annual analysis of legislators’ progressive voting records. Based on our Courage Score analysis, Senator Roth has supported some progressive bills that made it to a vote. That said, Sen. Roth has not supported prohibiting landlords from rejecting applicants based on Section 8 status, granting tenants the right to a tenant association, prohibiting no-rehire policies that bar victims of workplace mistreatment from employment with the offending company, and banning the use of biometric surveillance and facial-recognition technology from being used in police body cameras.
Prior to his election to the State Senate, Sen. Richard Roth served in the United States Air Force as a reservist, eventually achieving the rank of major general. He was also an employment attorney for 30 years, licensed to practice in California and Georgia, until joining the California State Senate in 2012. He is a longtime supporter of UC Riverside and local community colleges.
Rep. Richard Roth is endorsed by many progressive groups in the district. He is also endorsed by the California Association of Highway Patrolmen, California Correctional Peace Officers Association, and California Apartment Association. However, the threat of Republican challenger and strong Trump supporter Rod Taylor’s potential policies greatly outweighs Sen. Roth’s moderate voting record, problematic endorsements, and lack of campaign finance pledges. According to our analysis, Rep. Richard Roth is the strongest choice for representative leadership in office.
Last updated: 2023-04-05
Endorsed By: AFSCME 3299
,
AFSCME State Council
,
California Federation of Teachers
,
California Labor Federation
,
SEIU United Healthcare Workers West
,
United Food & Commercial Workers Union
,
California Democratic Party
,
California League of Conservation Voters
,
California Teachers Association
,
National Union of Healthcare Workers
,
SEIU CA
,
Sierra Club California
,
United Domestic Workers
Statewide Ballot Measures
Voters will be asked to vote YES to authorize $5.5 billion in bonds to continue a large-scale, long-term stem cell research funding initiative or vote NO to not authorize bond funding and let the initiative lapse.
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.
YES on Prop 14 Supporters Say
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.
- Funding from the CIRM has been available for 15 years, and ending the program could have a limiting impact on research programs in areas that include central nervous system and brain conditions, but also immunotherapy trials, cancer research, and vision-loss research currently funded by the CIRM.
- In 2018 (the last year it was fully funded), CIRM-funded companies raised more than $1 billion in funding from outside investors; a sign of validation not just for the companies and their therapies, but also for CIRM and its judgment.
- Stem cell research has the potential to lead to groundbreaking medical treatments, which we need more than ever in the face of COVID-19.
- CIRM has changed its policies for those who receive CIRM funding through an academic or nonprofit institution to require project proposals to address considerations of racial, ethnic, sex, and gender diversity, which is an important step in remedying past inequities in medical research. It is important to note that this policy change does not appear to apply to for-profit entities funded by the CIRM.
NO on Prop 14 Supporters Say
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.
- The federal government provides significantly more funding for stem cell research now than it did 16 years ago, which makes the CIRM less necessary as a source of stem cell research funding. According to National Institute of Health estimates, the federal government will spend $2,129 billion on stem cell research just this year alone, while the CIRM has granted a fraction of that, $2.7 billion, in its entire 16-year history. Private-sector funding is also growing for stem cell research.
- There is a lack of accountability and transparency around the funds distributed to the various research entities, as there is no legislative oversight in the program design, and the program has built-in conflicts of interest that Prop 14 does not address. In fact, multiple sources state that the majority of the board overseeing the CIRM come from institutions that have received the bulk of the CIRM’s spending.
- Prop. 71 was designed to kick-start the research at a time when federal funding was blocked. Opponents say the CIRM should continue its work as a self-sustaining nonprofit organization or close down and allow federal grants and venture funding to push the industry forward.
- The California Constitution prevents the state from holding equity, and Prop 14 is designed in such a way that any returns the state could generate are then used to improve the affordability of stem cell treatments, with no possibility of paying back the interest being paid back over many years by the state.
- Prop 14 will add billions of dollars in debt through bond financing tied to the state's General Fund. The bond interest has to be paid first, which makes the overall General Fund budget smaller for other services for years, even while the debt from Prop 71 still hasn't been paid back.
Top Funders of Prop 14
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.
Misinformation
There is no notable misinformation about Proposition 14.
Progressive Landscape
Last updated: 2023-04-05
Voters will be asked to vote YES to authorize $5.5 billion in bonds to continue a large-scale, long-term stem cell research funding initiative or vote NO to not authorize bond funding and let the initiative lapse.
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.
YES on Prop 14 Supporters Say
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.
- Funding from the CIRM has been available for 15 years, and ending the program could have a limiting impact on research programs in areas that include central nervous system and brain conditions, but also immunotherapy trials, cancer research, and vision-loss research currently funded by the CIRM.
- In 2018 (the last year it was fully funded), CIRM-funded companies raised more than $1 billion in funding from outside investors; a sign of validation not just for the companies and their therapies, but also for CIRM and its judgment.
- Stem cell research has the potential to lead to groundbreaking medical treatments, which we need more than ever in the face of COVID-19.
- CIRM has changed its policies for those who receive CIRM funding through an academic or nonprofit institution to require project proposals to address considerations of racial, ethnic, sex, and gender diversity, which is an important step in remedying past inequities in medical research. It is important to note that this policy change does not appear to apply to for-profit entities funded by the CIRM.
NO on Prop 14 Supporters Say
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.
- The federal government provides significantly more funding for stem cell research now than it did 16 years ago, which makes the CIRM less necessary as a source of stem cell research funding. According to National Institute of Health estimates, the federal government will spend $2,129 billion on stem cell research just this year alone, while the CIRM has granted a fraction of that, $2.7 billion, in its entire 16-year history. Private-sector funding is also growing for stem cell research.
- There is a lack of accountability and transparency around the funds distributed to the various research entities, as there is no legislative oversight in the program design, and the program has built-in conflicts of interest that Prop 14 does not address. In fact, multiple sources state that the majority of the board overseeing the CIRM come from institutions that have received the bulk of the CIRM’s spending.
- Prop. 71 was designed to kick-start the research at a time when federal funding was blocked. Opponents say the CIRM should continue its work as a self-sustaining nonprofit organization or close down and allow federal grants and venture funding to push the industry forward.
- The California Constitution prevents the state from holding equity, and Prop 14 is designed in such a way that any returns the state could generate are then used to improve the affordability of stem cell treatments, with no possibility of paying back the interest being paid back over many years by the state.
- Prop 14 will add billions of dollars in debt through bond financing tied to the state's General Fund. The bond interest has to be paid first, which makes the overall General Fund budget smaller for other services for years, even while the debt from Prop 71 still hasn't been paid back.
Top Funders of Prop 14
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.
Misinformation
There is no notable misinformation about Proposition 14.
Progressive Landscape
Last updated: 2023-04-05
Vote YES on Prop 15 to provide between $6.4 billion to $11.5 billion in additional funding to 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.
Why voting YES on Prop 15 matters
- Proposition 15 closes a corporate tax loophole by taxing all large commercial properties of $3 million or more at fair market value – not purchase price. This reform will restore $6.5 billion to $11.5 billion of critically needed funds for schools and local community services without raising taxes on homeowners, renters, or small businesses.
- Prop 15 also cuts taxes for small business owners who have been especially harmed by the pandemic.
- Prop 15 is a way to invest in our communities without having to raise taxes on small businesses, renters, and homeowners. Closing the corporate tax loophole will restore billions to underfunded public schools that serve low income and communities of color.
- California schools have the largest class sizes in the nation, and California ranks 41st (with adjusted cost of living) out of all states and Washington, D.C. in spending per K-12 student (California Budget & Policy Center).
- California is ranked 51st in three categories: number of K-12 students per teacher, number of K-12 students per guidance counselor, and number of K-12 students per librarian (National Education Association / National Center for Education Statistics).
Misinformation about Prop 15 includes
- "It hurts small businesses" -- FALSE. Prop 15 exempts small businesses, homeowners, renters, and agricultural land.
- "It taxes working families" -- FALSE. 92% of the revenue comes from only 10% of large commercial properties that have been undertaxed for decades.
- "It is a step towards repealing Prop 13" -- FALSE. – This is scare tactic used by large commercial property owners to avoid paying their fair share. Prop 15 protects homeowners, renters and small business owners.
- "Small business operations from home aren’t protected under Prop 15" -- FALSE. Prop 15 not only clearly exempts small businesses, but helps them by exempting the first $500,000 of business equipment from being taxed. This eliminates this tax for nearly all small businesses.
Primary Funders of Prop 15 include
Prop 15’s main opponents include realty and industrial property owners, while the California Teachers Association and SEIU California State Council are main supporters.
Progressive Landscape
Last updated: 2023-04-05
Vote YES on Prop 15 to provide between $6.4 billion to $11.5 billion in additional funding to 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.
Why voting YES on Prop 15 matters
- Proposition 15 closes a corporate tax loophole by taxing all large commercial properties of $3 million or more at fair market value – not purchase price. This reform will restore $6.5 billion to $11.5 billion of critically needed funds for schools and local community services without raising taxes on homeowners, renters, or small businesses.
- Prop 15 also cuts taxes for small business owners who have been especially harmed by the pandemic.
- Prop 15 is a way to invest in our communities without having to raise taxes on small businesses, renters, and homeowners. Closing the corporate tax loophole will restore billions to underfunded public schools that serve low income and communities of color.
- California schools have the largest class sizes in the nation, and California ranks 41st (with adjusted cost of living) out of all states and Washington, D.C. in spending per K-12 student (California Budget & Policy Center).
- California is ranked 51st in three categories: number of K-12 students per teacher, number of K-12 students per guidance counselor, and number of K-12 students per librarian (National Education Association / National Center for Education Statistics).
Misinformation about Prop 15 includes
- "It hurts small businesses" -- FALSE. Prop 15 exempts small businesses, homeowners, renters, and agricultural land.
- "It taxes working families" -- FALSE. 92% of the revenue comes from only 10% of large commercial properties that have been undertaxed for decades.
- "It is a step towards repealing Prop 13" -- FALSE. – This is scare tactic used by large commercial property owners to avoid paying their fair share. Prop 15 protects homeowners, renters and small business owners.
- "Small business operations from home aren’t protected under Prop 15" -- FALSE. Prop 15 not only clearly exempts small businesses, but helps them by exempting the first $500,000 of business equipment from being taxed. This eliminates this tax for nearly all small businesses.
Primary Funders of Prop 15 include
Prop 15’s main opponents include realty and industrial property owners, while the California Teachers Association and SEIU California State Council are main supporters.
Progressive Landscape
Last updated: 2023-04-05
Vote YES on Prop 16 to repeal 1996’s Prop 209 and reinstate affirmative action in the state.
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.
Why voting YES on Prop 16 matters
- It is time that California follows the other 42 states that have taken gender, race, ethnicity, and national origin into account for college admissions and hiring in government and public agencies.
- Prop 209’s affirmative action ban resulted in an over $820 million loss every year in Minority- and Women-Owned Business Enterprise Program (MWBE) contracts with the state of California.
- Reports conclude that the percentage of contracts granted to MWBEs never returned to pre-Prop 209 levels. Restoring affirmative action is the next step in building a more equitable and diverse future for California.
- The University of California’s analysis of Prop 209 revealed that affirmative action had increased the population of underrepresented students by at least 12 percent, with the largest effects seen at UCLA and Berkeley.
Misinformation about Prop 16 includes
- "Gains for women of color in workforce diversity have already been addressed." -- FALSE. Women of color continue to face systemic racism in the wage gap and earn an estimated $946,120 less than white men over a 40-year career.
- "Black civil workers are overrepresented." -- FALSE. According to the 2018 Civil Service Census of California employees, Black Californians made up 5.5 percent of the total population and 9.8 percent of the total civil-service workforce, compared to white Californians, who made up 37 percent of the total population but 43.5 percent of the total civil-service workforce.
- "Colleges and universities would be able to use racial quotas." -- FALSE. Racial quotas for university admissions have been outlawed as unconstitutional since Regents of the University of California v. Bakke in 1978.
Top Funders of Prop 16 include
- Opposition to Prop 16 is sponsored by Students for Fair Admissions, Inc., which contributed to the Californians for Equal Rights committee.
- Support for Prop 16 is largely financed by philanthropists M. Quinn Delaney and Patty Quillin, California Nurses Association Initiative PAC, California Works (a project of California Labor Federation AFL-CIO), and Elizabeth Cabraser.
Progressive Landscape
Last updated: 2023-04-05
Vote YES on Prop 16 to repeal 1996’s Prop 209 and reinstate affirmative action in the state.
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.
Why voting YES on Prop 16 matters
- It is time that California follows the other 42 states that have taken gender, race, ethnicity, and national origin into account for college admissions and hiring in government and public agencies.
- Prop 209’s affirmative action ban resulted in an over $820 million loss every year in Minority- and Women-Owned Business Enterprise Program (MWBE) contracts with the state of California.
- Reports conclude that the percentage of contracts granted to MWBEs never returned to pre-Prop 209 levels. Restoring affirmative action is the next step in building a more equitable and diverse future for California.
- The University of California’s analysis of Prop 209 revealed that affirmative action had increased the population of underrepresented students by at least 12 percent, with the largest effects seen at UCLA and Berkeley.
Misinformation about Prop 16 includes
- "Gains for women of color in workforce diversity have already been addressed." -- FALSE. Women of color continue to face systemic racism in the wage gap and earn an estimated $946,120 less than white men over a 40-year career.
- "Black civil workers are overrepresented." -- FALSE. According to the 2018 Civil Service Census of California employees, Black Californians made up 5.5 percent of the total population and 9.8 percent of the total civil-service workforce, compared to white Californians, who made up 37 percent of the total population but 43.5 percent of the total civil-service workforce.
- "Colleges and universities would be able to use racial quotas." -- FALSE. Racial quotas for university admissions have been outlawed as unconstitutional since Regents of the University of California v. Bakke in 1978.
Top Funders of Prop 16 include
- Opposition to Prop 16 is sponsored by Students for Fair Admissions, Inc., which contributed to the Californians for Equal Rights committee.
- Support for Prop 16 is largely financed by philanthropists M. Quinn Delaney and Patty Quillin, California Nurses Association Initiative PAC, California Works (a project of California Labor Federation AFL-CIO), and Elizabeth Cabraser.
Progressive Landscape
Last updated: 2023-04-05
Vote YES on Prop 17 to restore voting rights to Californians 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.
Why voting YES on Prop 17 matters
- California is one of the 31 states that do not automatically restore voting rights upon completion of a person’s sentence. In Maine and Vermont, there are no laws that disenfranchise and discriminate against people with criminal convictions even when they’re still serving out their sentences.
- Parolees who are reintegrating into society resume other civic responsibilities, such as paying taxes and jury duty. Being barred from voting while paying taxes is taxation without representation.
- In 2017, Black Californians made up 28% of all prison populations despite only making up 6% of California’s total population. With an astonishing and horrifying incarceration rate at 8 times the rate of white Californians, it is clear that the disenfranchisement of parolees is the disenfranchisement of Black voters.
Misinformation about Prop 17 includes
- "Voting is a privilege" -- FALSE. Voting is a right, not privilege. Projecting voting as a privilege and not a right inherently undermines our democracy.
- "Individuals who have not completed their parole period have not completed their sentence" -- FALSE. As soon as a person completes their sentence in prison, they are released into their parole period in order to reintegrate into society. The sentence in prison and parole period are two separate phases.
Top Funders of Prop 17 include
There are no contributions recorded for support or opposition to Prop 17.
Progressive Landscape
Last updated: 2023-04-05
Vote YES on Prop 17 to restore voting rights to Californians 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.
Why voting YES on Prop 17 matters
- California is one of the 31 states that do not automatically restore voting rights upon completion of a person’s sentence. In Maine and Vermont, there are no laws that disenfranchise and discriminate against people with criminal convictions even when they’re still serving out their sentences.
- Parolees who are reintegrating into society resume other civic responsibilities, such as paying taxes and jury duty. Being barred from voting while paying taxes is taxation without representation.
- In 2017, Black Californians made up 28% of all prison populations despite only making up 6% of California’s total population. With an astonishing and horrifying incarceration rate at 8 times the rate of white Californians, it is clear that the disenfranchisement of parolees is the disenfranchisement of Black voters.
Misinformation about Prop 17 includes
- "Voting is a privilege" -- FALSE. Voting is a right, not privilege. Projecting voting as a privilege and not a right inherently undermines our democracy.
- "Individuals who have not completed their parole period have not completed their sentence" -- FALSE. As soon as a person completes their sentence in prison, they are released into their parole period in order to reintegrate into society. The sentence in prison and parole period are two separate phases.
Top Funders of Prop 17 include
There are no contributions recorded for support or opposition to Prop 17.
Progressive Landscape
Last updated: 2023-04-05
Vote YES on Prop 18 to allow 17-year-olds to vote in the primary election if they will turn 18 by the following general election.
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.
Why voting YES on Prop 18 matters
- Nineteen other states, including D.C., allow 17-year-olds to vote in the primary election if they will be 18 by the general election.
- Research has proven time and again that voting is habit-forming. These states recognize the importance of allowing 18-year-olds to vote, to help form their voting habits and amplify their voices.
Top Funders of Prop 18 include
There are no recorded contributions in support of or opposition to Prop 18.
Misinformation about Prop 18 includes
There is no prominent misinformation about Prop 18.
Progressive Landscape
Last updated: 2023-04-05
Vote YES on Prop 18 to allow 17-year-olds to vote in the primary election if they will turn 18 by the following general election.
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.
Why voting YES on Prop 18 matters
- Nineteen other states, including D.C., allow 17-year-olds to vote in the primary election if they will be 18 by the general election.
- Research has proven time and again that voting is habit-forming. These states recognize the importance of allowing 18-year-olds to vote, to help form their voting habits and amplify their voices.
Top Funders of Prop 18 include
There are no recorded contributions in support of or opposition to Prop 18.
Misinformation about Prop 18 includes
There is no prominent misinformation about Prop 18.
Progressive Landscape
Last updated: 2023-04-05
Vote NO on Proposition 19 to maintain property tax savings for all and avoid increasing housing inequity.
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.
Why voting NO on Prop 19 matters
- Proposition 19 widens the generational wealth gap by giving homeowners older than 55 and other qualified groups a way to keep property tax breaks they receive for having bought their homes decades ago if they move anywhere else in the state, up to three times. They can also keep that break if they move to a more expensive property.
- Proposition 13 caps most property tax rates at 1 percent of a home’s sale price and holds annual increases in assessed value to 2 percent or less. This means people who purchased their home a few decades ago already pay significantly less property tax than newer homeowners. Prop 19 further builds the wealth of longtime homeowners and denies wealth-building opportunities to people who don’t own a home or who may be struggling to buy one.
- While Prop 19 does eliminate a $1 million property tax exemption for parent-to-child transfers and could potentially generate state revenue that would be distributed to fire protection agencies and schools, this amendment is being paired with the primary tax break for longtime homeowners to make it more appealing.
Top Funders of Prop 19
Realtor associations have contributed $36,270,000 in support of Prop 19. There is no registered financial opposition.
Misinformation
There is no prominent misinformation about Proposition 19.
Progressive Landscape
Last updated: 2023-04-05
Vote NO on Proposition 19 to maintain property tax savings for all and avoid increasing housing inequity.
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.
Why voting NO on Prop 19 matters
- Proposition 19 widens the generational wealth gap by giving homeowners older than 55 and other qualified groups a way to keep property tax breaks they receive for having bought their homes decades ago if they move anywhere else in the state, up to three times. They can also keep that break if they move to a more expensive property.
- Proposition 13 caps most property tax rates at 1 percent of a home’s sale price and holds annual increases in assessed value to 2 percent or less. This means people who purchased their home a few decades ago already pay significantly less property tax than newer homeowners. Prop 19 further builds the wealth of longtime homeowners and denies wealth-building opportunities to people who don’t own a home or who may be struggling to buy one.
- While Prop 19 does eliminate a $1 million property tax exemption for parent-to-child transfers and could potentially generate state revenue that would be distributed to fire protection agencies and schools, this amendment is being paired with the primary tax break for longtime homeowners to make it more appealing.
Top Funders of Prop 19
Realtor associations have contributed $36,270,000 in support of Prop 19. There is no registered financial opposition.
Misinformation
There is no prominent misinformation about Proposition 19.
Progressive Landscape
Last updated: 2023-04-05
Vote NO on Prop 20 to protect criminal justice reforms and constitutional rights to privacy.
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.
Why voting NO on Prop 20 matters
- Prop 20 is a dangerous proposition put forth by Courage Score Hall of Shame Assemblymember Jim Cooper, and it is sponsored by Courage Score Hall of Shame Assemblymember Vince Fong. Time and again, Assemblymembers Cooper and Fong vote to protect police brutality and discriminatory criminal justice policies. Both voted no on AB 1600, which would expedite access to police misconduct records for a trial.
- Association for L.A. Deputy Sheriffs, L.A. Police Protective League, and the Peace Officers Research Association of California all support and have heavily financed Prop 20.
- Prop 20 would increase recidivism by removing positive incentives from Prop 57.
- Parole review boards would consider an individual’s entire criminal history, not just the offense they are on parole for, when deciding to release a person convicted of a felony on parole.
Top Funders of Prop 20
- Three police unions are the top funders in support of Prop 20, including the CA Correctional Peace Officers Association, the Association for LA Deputy Sheriffs, and the LA Police Protective League Issues PAC.
- Philanthropists are the top funders of campaigns against Prop 20, including the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, Patty Quillin, and Stacy Schusterman.
Misinformation about Prop 20
- "Criminals are getting away with more violent crimes." -- FALSE. The nonpartisan Public Policy Institute of California found that Prop 47, which Prop 20 attempts to roll back, not only decreased racial disparities in bookings and arrests, but also found that violent crimes did not increase after it was passed.
Progressive Landscape
Last updated: 2023-04-05
Vote NO on Prop 20 to protect criminal justice reforms and constitutional rights to privacy.
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.
Why voting NO on Prop 20 matters
- Prop 20 is a dangerous proposition put forth by Courage Score Hall of Shame Assemblymember Jim Cooper, and it is sponsored by Courage Score Hall of Shame Assemblymember Vince Fong. Time and again, Assemblymembers Cooper and Fong vote to protect police brutality and discriminatory criminal justice policies. Both voted no on AB 1600, which would expedite access to police misconduct records for a trial.
- Association for L.A. Deputy Sheriffs, L.A. Police Protective League, and the Peace Officers Research Association of California all support and have heavily financed Prop 20.
- Prop 20 would increase recidivism by removing positive incentives from Prop 57.
- Parole review boards would consider an individual’s entire criminal history, not just the offense they are on parole for, when deciding to release a person convicted of a felony on parole.
Top Funders of Prop 20
- Three police unions are the top funders in support of Prop 20, including the CA Correctional Peace Officers Association, the Association for LA Deputy Sheriffs, and the LA Police Protective League Issues PAC.
- Philanthropists are the top funders of campaigns against Prop 20, including the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, Patty Quillin, and Stacy Schusterman.
Misinformation about Prop 20
- "Criminals are getting away with more violent crimes." -- FALSE. The nonpartisan Public Policy Institute of California found that Prop 47, which Prop 20 attempts to roll back, not only decreased racial disparities in bookings and arrests, but also found that violent crimes did not increase after it was passed.
Progressive Landscape
Last updated: 2023-04-05
Vote YES on Prop 21 to allow cities and counties to establish and regulate rent control.
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.
Why voting YES on Prop 21 matters
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.
Misinformation about Prop 21 includes
- "Makes the housing crisis worse." -- FALSE. With one in three Californians paying 50 percent of their income just for rent, Prop 21 offers local governments the opportunity to prevent displacement, and as a result, prevent homelessness. A person who experiences homelessness will cost taxpayers an average of $35,578, and chronic homelessness generally costs around $100,000.
- "Removes a landlord’s right to profit." -- FALSE. Prop 21 actually guarantees a landlord’s right to profit.
- "California just passed AB 1482, which went into effect in January of this year, so California doesn’t need any more rent laws." -- FALSE AB 1482 only affects residential properties built after 2005, and according to Zillow’s analysis, only 7 percent of renters would have benefited from AB 1482’s rent cap in 2018.
Top Funders of Prop 21 include
- Three of the top 10 property owners in Silicon Valley (Prometheus Real Estate Group, Inc., Essex Property Trust, and Equity Residential) have contributed over $10 million in opposition to Prop 21.
- The leading funder in support of Prop 21 is the AIDS Healthcare Foundation, and its housing advocacy division Housing Is A Human Right is a leading sponsor of the Rental Affordability Act.
Progressive Landscape
Last updated: 2023-04-05
Vote YES on Prop 21 to allow cities and counties to establish and regulate rent control.
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.
Why voting YES on Prop 21 matters
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.
Misinformation about Prop 21 includes
- "Makes the housing crisis worse." -- FALSE. With one in three Californians paying 50 percent of their income just for rent, Prop 21 offers local governments the opportunity to prevent displacement, and as a result, prevent homelessness. A person who experiences homelessness will cost taxpayers an average of $35,578, and chronic homelessness generally costs around $100,000.
- "Removes a landlord’s right to profit." -- FALSE. Prop 21 actually guarantees a landlord’s right to profit.
- "California just passed AB 1482, which went into effect in January of this year, so California doesn’t need any more rent laws." -- FALSE AB 1482 only affects residential properties built after 2005, and according to Zillow’s analysis, only 7 percent of renters would have benefited from AB 1482’s rent cap in 2018.
Top Funders of Prop 21 include
- Three of the top 10 property owners in Silicon Valley (Prometheus Real Estate Group, Inc., Essex Property Trust, and Equity Residential) have contributed over $10 million in opposition to Prop 21.
- The leading funder in support of Prop 21 is the AIDS Healthcare Foundation, and its housing advocacy division Housing Is A Human Right is a leading sponsor of the Rental Affordability Act.
Progressive Landscape
Last updated: 2023-04-05
Vote NO on Prop 22 to protect labor rights and classify app-based drivers as employees, not contractors.
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.
Why voting NO on Prop 22 matters
-
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.
Misinformation About Prop 22
- "The cost of ride-share will go up, decreasing the amount of people who will pay for rides and services and forcing companies to lay off more workers." -- FALSE. The nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office found that because these companies would not have to pay for standard employee benefits and protections (roughly 20 percent of total employee costs), companies can charge lower delivery fees and fares. It is projected that this will increase companies’ profits and drivers’ state income taxes.
-
"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.
What Is At Stake
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.
Top Funders of Prop 22
- Lyft, Uber, and DoorDash are leading contributions in support of Prop 22, with over $148 million between the three of them. Both InstaCart and Postmates have contributed $27 and $11 million each respectively, for a grand total of over $187 million in support of Prop 22. Their coalition to pass Prop 22 is now the most expensive California ballot measure since 1992.
- International Brotherhood of Teamsters, United Food & Commercial Workers International Union, Service Employees International Union, United Food & Commercial Workers Local 770, and SEIU-UWH Political Issues Committee have contributed a total of $5.5 million in opposition to Prop 22.
Progressive Landscape
Last updated: 2023-04-05
Vote NO on Prop 22 to protect labor rights and classify app-based drivers as employees, not contractors.
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.
Why voting NO on Prop 22 matters
-
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.
Misinformation About Prop 22
- "The cost of ride-share will go up, decreasing the amount of people who will pay for rides and services and forcing companies to lay off more workers." -- FALSE. The nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office found that because these companies would not have to pay for standard employee benefits and protections (roughly 20 percent of total employee costs), companies can charge lower delivery fees and fares. It is projected that this will increase companies’ profits and drivers’ state income taxes.
-
"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.
What Is At Stake
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.
Top Funders of Prop 22
- Lyft, Uber, and DoorDash are leading contributions in support of Prop 22, with over $148 million between the three of them. Both InstaCart and Postmates have contributed $27 and $11 million each respectively, for a grand total of over $187 million in support of Prop 22. Their coalition to pass Prop 22 is now the most expensive California ballot measure since 1992.
- International Brotherhood of Teamsters, United Food & Commercial Workers International Union, Service Employees International Union, United Food & Commercial Workers Local 770, and SEIU-UWH Political Issues Committee have contributed a total of $5.5 million in opposition to Prop 22.
Progressive Landscape
Last updated: 2023-04-05
Vote YES on Prop 23 to require infection reporting and state approval to close or reduce services at hospitals.
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.
Why voting YES on Prop 23 matters:
- Prop 23 builds upon current federal requirements that report dialysis-related infections to the National Healthcare Safety Network at the Center for Disease Control to include reporting these infections to the California Department of Health.
- Having a physician on-site at chronic dialysis clinics during all treatment hours provides a higher quality of medical care with an additional layer of patient safety.
- Prop 23 protects the 80,000 Californians who require dialysis on a weekly basis by ensuring chronic dialysis clinics cannot discriminate against patients based on how they are paying for their treatments. Insurances like Medi-Cal pay less for dialysis treatments than private insurance, which is why corporations like DaVita and Fresenius are spending millions to oppose this proposition.
Top funders of Prop 23 include:
- Opposition to Prop 23 is heavily financed by dialysis giants Davita and Fresenius, who maintain larger profit margins if Prop 23 fails.
- Support for Prop 23 is financed by SEIU United Healthcare Workers West PAC.
Misinformation about Prop 23 includes:
- “Prop 23 is just being used as leverage in unionizing against dialysis employers.” A spokesperson for SEIU-UHW West, Sean Wherley, said that health-care workers in dialysis clinics “want these [initiative] reforms regardless of what happens with their union efforts.”
Progressive Landscape
Last updated: 2023-04-05
Vote YES on Prop 23 to require infection reporting and state approval to close or reduce services at hospitals.
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.
Why voting YES on Prop 23 matters:
- Prop 23 builds upon current federal requirements that report dialysis-related infections to the National Healthcare Safety Network at the Center for Disease Control to include reporting these infections to the California Department of Health.
- Having a physician on-site at chronic dialysis clinics during all treatment hours provides a higher quality of medical care with an additional layer of patient safety.
- Prop 23 protects the 80,000 Californians who require dialysis on a weekly basis by ensuring chronic dialysis clinics cannot discriminate against patients based on how they are paying for their treatments. Insurances like Medi-Cal pay less for dialysis treatments than private insurance, which is why corporations like DaVita and Fresenius are spending millions to oppose this proposition.
Top funders of Prop 23 include:
- Opposition to Prop 23 is heavily financed by dialysis giants Davita and Fresenius, who maintain larger profit margins if Prop 23 fails.
- Support for Prop 23 is financed by SEIU United Healthcare Workers West PAC.
Misinformation about Prop 23 includes:
- “Prop 23 is just being used as leverage in unionizing against dialysis employers.” A spokesperson for SEIU-UHW West, Sean Wherley, said that health-care workers in dialysis clinics “want these [initiative] reforms regardless of what happens with their union efforts.”
Progressive Landscape
Last updated: 2023-04-05
Vote NO on Prop 24 to protect consumers’ personal information.
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.
Why voting NO on Prop 24 matters
- Prop 24 removes the existing ability for a consumer to direct all companies to not sell their personal information with one instruction. Instead, consumers will have to direct each individual website and app to do so. This puts an impossible burden on consumers.
- Prop 24 removes the existing prohibition on companies from tracking a consumer's data once an individual leaves the state boundary.
- Prop 24 requires consumers to pay for privacy, disproportionately affect working people and families of color. California should maintain net neutrality so people do not have to pay for companies to safeguard their personal information.
- Prop 24 would create a new state agency to exclusively oversee and enforce consumer privacy. Adding a new agency that costs an estimated $100 million annually is pointless when the power to enforce new consumer privacy rights is built into the position of the State Attorney General and the justice department.
- Prop 24 is written to make it extremely hard for legislators to pass new legislation regulating consumer privacy in the future.
Misinformation about Prop 24
- "It will better safeguard consumers’ information." -- FALSE. Prop 24 will weaken existing safeguards and strengthen them only for consumers who are financially able to pay for better protections.
- "It will give us the strongest privacy rights in the world." -- FALSE. Not only does Prop 24 revoke several protections established in the 2018 California Consumer Privacy Act, but Europe's GDPR protects consumer data regardless of location within the EU and consumers’ citizenship/residence. This is not true of Prop 24.
Top Funders of Prop 24
- Alastair Mactaggart, a real estate developer from San Francisco, donated the majority of the total funds for the support campaign entirely by himself, with a total of $4,892,400.
- A coalition called California Consumer and Privacy Advocates Against Prop 24 has been registered in opposition, with $20,000 contributed by California Nurses Association.
Progressive Landscape
Last updated: 2023-04-05
Vote NO on Prop 24 to protect consumers’ personal information.
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.
Why voting NO on Prop 24 matters
- Prop 24 removes the existing ability for a consumer to direct all companies to not sell their personal information with one instruction. Instead, consumers will have to direct each individual website and app to do so. This puts an impossible burden on consumers.
- Prop 24 removes the existing prohibition on companies from tracking a consumer's data once an individual leaves the state boundary.
- Prop 24 requires consumers to pay for privacy, disproportionately affect working people and families of color. California should maintain net neutrality so people do not have to pay for companies to safeguard their personal information.
- Prop 24 would create a new state agency to exclusively oversee and enforce consumer privacy. Adding a new agency that costs an estimated $100 million annually is pointless when the power to enforce new consumer privacy rights is built into the position of the State Attorney General and the justice department.
- Prop 24 is written to make it extremely hard for legislators to pass new legislation regulating consumer privacy in the future.
Misinformation about Prop 24
- "It will better safeguard consumers’ information." -- FALSE. Prop 24 will weaken existing safeguards and strengthen them only for consumers who are financially able to pay for better protections.
- "It will give us the strongest privacy rights in the world." -- FALSE. Not only does Prop 24 revoke several protections established in the 2018 California Consumer Privacy Act, but Europe's GDPR protects consumer data regardless of location within the EU and consumers’ citizenship/residence. This is not true of Prop 24.
Top Funders of Prop 24
- Alastair Mactaggart, a real estate developer from San Francisco, donated the majority of the total funds for the support campaign entirely by himself, with a total of $4,892,400.
- A coalition called California Consumer and Privacy Advocates Against Prop 24 has been registered in opposition, with $20,000 contributed by California Nurses Association.
Progressive Landscape
Last updated: 2023-04-05
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.
Why voting YES on Prop 25 Matters
- Nearly two-thirds of the jail population—nearly 48,000 people—are incarcerated pretrial, and California’s average bail is $50,000, more than five times the national average. The cash bail system directly ties an individual’s wealth and ability to pay to the question of whether they pose a risk to the community and their conditions of pretrial release. This system is unfair from every angle and perpetuates the cycle of poverty and incarceration existing in many low-income communities, which are also disproportionately Black and brown communities.
- In New Jersey, where similar legislation passed eliminating the use of cash bail in 2017, overall pretrial incarceration rates have dropped, racial disparities in pretrial incarceration rates have lessened, and the use of invasive monitoring strategies after release have been applied in far fewer eligible cases (8.3 percent) than feared. California’s SB 10 goes further than New Jersey’s legislation by fully eliminating the cash bail system and has the potential to have even more positive outcomes.
- The bail bond industry uses its influence to lobby for legislation favorable to them, which perpetuates but also escalates the cycle of poverty and incarceration. Passing Prop 25 will permanently end their influence in the political process.
- If Prop 25 does not pass, voters will be perceived as having rejected SB 10’s reforms, in particular the effort to end the cash bail system. This will be framed as a significant precedent for opponents of criminal-justice reform to use in lobbying and legal arguments to keep the system intact in the future.
- If Prop 25 passes, community groups will have the opportunity to advance further criminal-justice reforms related to this initiative.
Special Circumstances Surrounding Prop 25
- Originally, there was unanimous support for SB 10 from most criminal-justice reform groups across the state. The process of making amendments to the legislation caused many groups to drop their support. In our research, we discovered that the legislative decision-making process around SB 10 was strongly influenced by applied political pressure, resulting in a process and an outcome with less buy-in. Despite the widely acknowledged flaws in the overall process, a strong majority of Courage California's statewide progressive partners are aligned around a yes position on Prop 25.
- In a ruling in August 2020, the state Supreme Court issued a binding resolution in the case of In re Humphrey that orders all trial judges in the state of California to consider a person’s ability to pay in setting the cash bail amount for pretrial release. Grassroots groups objecting to Prop 25 argue that this ruling already creates systemic reform that will mitigate the impacts of the cash bail system, making SB 10 unnecessary. Advocates for Prop 25 contend that ending the cash bail system is an essential first step in eliminating the cycle of poverty and incarceration entirely.
- Organized opposition to Prop 25 from grassroots groups is strongest in Los Angeles County, where community leaders have been most successful in partnering with county officials to design and implement community-based alternatives to the incarceration system. In Los Angeles County, there are major concerns about how the implementation of a state-mandated pretrial incarceration program could interfere with their major strides in redressing the harms done to communities by an unfair justice system. These concerns are entirely valid, and attention will be focused on the actions of L.A. County’s Board of Supervisors to ensure that the alternatives to incarceration recommendations developed through a robust, community-driven dialogue process will continue to be implemented. The breakthroughs achieved by L.A. County’s criminal-justice reform movement have been characterized as historic and a model for other counties in California to follow, and this work must continue to move forward without delay.
Concerns About Prop 25
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.
- Algorithm-based risk-assessment tools will be used as the core component of the new pretrial incarceration system in all California counties. There are concerns about how inherent biases in the system could influence the implementation of these tools. There are two notable countermeasures in place to address these concerns, and both are overseen by the Judicial Council, the policymaking body of the California court system.
- First, counties must validate the chosen risk-assessment tool for the communities in which it will be used. This is not a standardized approach to validation; the tool must be proven to provide a higher level of responsiveness and sensitivity to community conditions before it is implemented. The Judicial Council will have to certify each county's tool, and the tool must be revalidated for the communities it serves every three years.
- Second, counties are now required by law to track and publicly report how a defendant’s circumstances and background correspond to the decision a judge makes about their pretrial release conditions. This data has to be collected, compiled, and reported annually to the Judicial Council, as well as made publicly available for review. This law was passed the year after SB 10 to provide an avenue to monitor the implementation of SB 10, and is an important step in making risk-assessment tools more accountable and the overall pretrial incarceration system more transparent.
- The new pretrial incarceration system is directly implemented by the probation departments of each county in California. Probation departments are currently responsible for investigating offenders’ backgrounds, making sentencing recommendations to the court, enforcing court orders, and supervising sentenced offenders. They also recommend and collect restitution, oversee community service, and provide oversight of criminal-diversion programs. There are strong concerns about how probation departments will approach the oversight of people who have not been convicted of crimes. Probation supervision has been historically used for people who have been convicted and are released, and SB 10 expands that pool of people to those who are accused but not convicted. Probation violations are a primary driver of incarceration in LA, and in Sacramento under SB 10, initial data indicates that 30-40% of people released end up rearrested and 90%+ of those that are released have high conditions of release.
- We encourage counties to 1) require probation departments to work in partnership with other agencies, including the public defender’s office, mental-health services, and other community-based programs, in both implementing the risk-assessment system and in the pretrial release and monitoring of released individuals; 2) use their power to hold probation departments accountable for how they implement pretrial incarceration programs in communities with a particular focus on ensuring non-invasive monitoring, minimizing conditions of release, and maintaining a low rearrest rate ; and 3) invest in alternatives to the overall incarceration system, such as Measure J on the ballot in Los Angeles County, which amends the county charter to require that at least 10 percent of the county’s local revenues go to community-based programs, such as affordable housing and rent assistance, job training, and mental-health and social services.
- There are also concerns that judicial discretion is greatly expanded by SB 10. While this is technically true, there are two additional changes to the judicial role in the pretrial system that limit judicial discretion.
- First, anyone arrested with a misdemeanor, with some exceptions, is considered to not pose a significant risk to a community and is automatically released without going in front of a judge. This greatly reduces the overall role that a judge currently plays in the pretrial incarceration system.
- Second, while judges are not required to adhere by the risk scores findings in their determination of pretrial release or pretrial detention, this is not an expansion of judicial discretion from the current system. Instead, SB 10 simply gives judges additional information to inform their decision.
- Third, all judicial decisions are now required to be publicly recorded and therefore more transparent and available for public scrutiny. This is essential because judges now have increased discretion over the more serious felony cases, and they also have discretion to carve out other other exclusions from release for misdemeanors at the county-level. Under the new system, when a prosecutor exercises their option to seek detention, a judge must hold a hearing and make the findings available on record before they order the person detained pretrial. In the current cash bail system, judges can use their discretion to set cash bail at any number with no requirement to make any findings public, which effectively detains an individual with no judicial accountability. The new judicial transparency requirement makes it easier for an individual to appeal a judge’s preventative detention decision. This is a clear improvement over the lax requirements that existed before SB 10.
Misinformation About Prop 25
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.
- “Prop 25 denies a U.S. constitutional right.” FALSE. The 8th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution prohibits the courts from imposing excessive bail. By eliminating the cash bail system, Prop 25 simply makes this prohibition irrelevant.
- “Prop 25 puts our public safety at risk.” FALSE. Judges will have increased judicial discretion over the more serious felony cases, which means defendants who may pose a threat to a community or specific individual will be given individual consideration. All decisions made by judges will also be required to be publicly recorded.
- “Prop 25 deprives justice for crime victims.” FALSE. In New Jersey, where similar legislation passed eliminating the use of cash bail in 2017, a recent study concluded that defendants are continuing to show up for court cases at the same rate and that people released under the new regulations are no more likely to commit a crime while waiting for trial than those released under the previous system on money bail.
- “Prop 25 creates additional biases against minorities and the poor.” FALSE. In New Jersey, similar legislation passed eliminating the use of cash bail has reduced racial disparities in the jail population. In California, new reporting requirements enable racial disparities to be systematically tracked for the first time. And ending cash bail immediately eliminates the most immediate factor in the criminal-justice system that drives the cycle of poverty and incarceration existing in many low-income communities, which are also disproportionately Black and brown communities.
Top Funders of Prop 25
- The two largest donors in support of Prop 25 are Connie and Steve Ballmer. Steve Ballmer is the former CEO of Microsoft and current owner of the L.A. Clippers team. The Ballmers are philanthropists who have given over $300 million to 70 nonprofits over the last three years for gun safety and racial justice. They have also pledged $25 million in coronavirus aid. In a statement, they said that “far too many people that are not a danger are getting stuck in jail waiting for their trials simply because they can’t afford bail.”
- The next largest donor is John Arnold of Arnold Ventures and the Laura and John Arnold Foundation. Arnold’s foundation created an algorithm-based pretrial risk-assessment tool called the Public Safety Assessment (PSA) that is currently used in 30 different counties including San Francisco, Santa Cruz, and Tulare counties in California. The foundation has also created several think tank projects including the National Partnership for Pretrial Justice and Advancing Pretrial Policy and Research, which produce research, policy advocacy, and implementation support for the PSA specifically and more generally for the process of replacing cash bail with pretrial risk assessments. Arnold has been sued for a judge’s use of PSA resulting in a murder by the released suspect. In our research, we did not find a connection between Arnold and any of the three pre-trial assessment service providers that have been approved for use under SB 10, which are Journal Technologies Inc., FivePoint Solutions, and Equivant. It is also unclear if the PSA will continue to be used in California counties under SB 10. Arnold is a former hedge fund manager and was involved in the Enron scandal in which he walked away with an $8 million bonus.
- The other three top donors in support of Prop 25 are SEIU California State Council; Action Now Initiative, LLC; and philanthropist Patty Quillin.
- The top donor in opposition to Prop 25 is Triton Management Services, LLC, the parent company of Aladdin Bail Bonds.
- The American Bail Coalition, consisting of several insurance and bail companies, is opposed to Prop 25, as it wants the bail system to remain in place to avoid going out of business.
Progressive Landscape
Last updated: 2023-04-05
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.
Why voting YES on Prop 25 Matters
- Nearly two-thirds of the jail population—nearly 48,000 people—are incarcerated pretrial, and California’s average bail is $50,000, more than five times the national average. The cash bail system directly ties an individual’s wealth and ability to pay to the question of whether they pose a risk to the community and their conditions of pretrial release. This system is unfair from every angle and perpetuates the cycle of poverty and incarceration existing in many low-income communities, which are also disproportionately Black and brown communities.
- In New Jersey, where similar legislation passed eliminating the use of cash bail in 2017, overall pretrial incarceration rates have dropped, racial disparities in pretrial incarceration rates have lessened, and the use of invasive monitoring strategies after release have been applied in far fewer eligible cases (8.3 percent) than feared. California’s SB 10 goes further than New Jersey’s legislation by fully eliminating the cash bail system and has the potential to have even more positive outcomes.
- The bail bond industry uses its influence to lobby for legislation favorable to them, which perpetuates but also escalates the cycle of poverty and incarceration. Passing Prop 25 will permanently end their influence in the political process.
- If Prop 25 does not pass, voters will be perceived as having rejected SB 10’s reforms, in particular the effort to end the cash bail system. This will be framed as a significant precedent for opponents of criminal-justice reform to use in lobbying and legal arguments to keep the system intact in the future.
- If Prop 25 passes, community groups will have the opportunity to advance further criminal-justice reforms related to this initiative.
Special Circumstances Surrounding Prop 25
- Originally, there was unanimous support for SB 10 from most criminal-justice reform groups across the state. The process of making amendments to the legislation caused many groups to drop their support. In our research, we discovered that the legislative decision-making process around SB 10 was strongly influenced by applied political pressure, resulting in a process and an outcome with less buy-in. Despite the widely acknowledged flaws in the overall process, a strong majority of Courage California's statewide progressive partners are aligned around a yes position on Prop 25.
- In a ruling in August 2020, the state Supreme Court issued a binding resolution in the case of In re Humphrey that orders all trial judges in the state of California to consider a person’s ability to pay in setting the cash bail amount for pretrial release. Grassroots groups objecting to Prop 25 argue that this ruling already creates systemic reform that will mitigate the impacts of the cash bail system, making SB 10 unnecessary. Advocates for Prop 25 contend that ending the cash bail system is an essential first step in eliminating the cycle of poverty and incarceration entirely.
- Organized opposition to Prop 25 from grassroots groups is strongest in Los Angeles County, where community leaders have been most successful in partnering with county officials to design and implement community-based alternatives to the incarceration system. In Los Angeles County, there are major concerns about how the implementation of a state-mandated pretrial incarceration program could interfere with their major strides in redressing the harms done to communities by an unfair justice system. These concerns are entirely valid, and attention will be focused on the actions of L.A. County’s Board of Supervisors to ensure that the alternatives to incarceration recommendations developed through a robust, community-driven dialogue process will continue to be implemented. The breakthroughs achieved by L.A. County’s criminal-justice reform movement have been characterized as historic and a model for other counties in California to follow, and this work must continue to move forward without delay.
Concerns About Prop 25
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.
- Algorithm-based risk-assessment tools will be used as the core component of the new pretrial incarceration system in all California counties. There are concerns about how inherent biases in the system could influence the implementation of these tools. There are two notable countermeasures in place to address these concerns, and both are overseen by the Judicial Council, the policymaking body of the California court system.
- First, counties must validate the chosen risk-assessment tool for the communities in which it will be used. This is not a standardized approach to validation; the tool must be proven to provide a higher level of responsiveness and sensitivity to community conditions before it is implemented. The Judicial Council will have to certify each county's tool, and the tool must be revalidated for the communities it serves every three years.
- Second, counties are now required by law to track and publicly report how a defendant’s circumstances and background correspond to the decision a judge makes about their pretrial release conditions. This data has to be collected, compiled, and reported annually to the Judicial Council, as well as made publicly available for review. This law was passed the year after SB 10 to provide an avenue to monitor the implementation of SB 10, and is an important step in making risk-assessment tools more accountable and the overall pretrial incarceration system more transparent.
- The new pretrial incarceration system is directly implemented by the probation departments of each county in California. Probation departments are currently responsible for investigating offenders’ backgrounds, making sentencing recommendations to the court, enforcing court orders, and supervising sentenced offenders. They also recommend and collect restitution, oversee community service, and provide oversight of criminal-diversion programs. There are strong concerns about how probation departments will approach the oversight of people who have not been convicted of crimes. Probation supervision has been historically used for people who have been convicted and are released, and SB 10 expands that pool of people to those who are accused but not convicted. Probation violations are a primary driver of incarceration in LA, and in Sacramento under SB 10, initial data indicates that 30-40% of people released end up rearrested and 90%+ of those that are released have high conditions of release.
- We encourage counties to 1) require probation departments to work in partnership with other agencies, including the public defender’s office, mental-health services, and other community-based programs, in both implementing the risk-assessment system and in the pretrial release and monitoring of released individuals; 2) use their power to hold probation departments accountable for how they implement pretrial incarceration programs in communities with a particular focus on ensuring non-invasive monitoring, minimizing conditions of release, and maintaining a low rearrest rate ; and 3) invest in alternatives to the overall incarceration system, such as Measure J on the ballot in Los Angeles County, which amends the county charter to require that at least 10 percent of the county’s local revenues go to community-based programs, such as affordable housing and rent assistance, job training, and mental-health and social services.
- There are also concerns that judicial discretion is greatly expanded by SB 10. While this is technically true, there are two additional changes to the judicial role in the pretrial system that limit judicial discretion.
- First, anyone arrested with a misdemeanor, with some exceptions, is considered to not pose a significant risk to a community and is automatically released without going in front of a judge. This greatly reduces the overall role that a judge currently plays in the pretrial incarceration system.
- Second, while judges are not required to adhere by the risk scores findings in their determination of pretrial release or pretrial detention, this is not an expansion of judicial discretion from the current system. Instead, SB 10 simply gives judges additional information to inform their decision.
- Third, all judicial decisions are now required to be publicly recorded and therefore more transparent and available for public scrutiny. This is essential because judges now have increased discretion over the more serious felony cases, and they also have discretion to carve out other other exclusions from release for misdemeanors at the county-level. Under the new system, when a prosecutor exercises their option to seek detention, a judge must hold a hearing and make the findings available on record before they order the person detained pretrial. In the current cash bail system, judges can use their discretion to set cash bail at any number with no requirement to make any findings public, which effectively detains an individual with no judicial accountability. The new judicial transparency requirement makes it easier for an individual to appeal a judge’s preventative detention decision. This is a clear improvement over the lax requirements that existed before SB 10.
Misinformation About Prop 25
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.
- “Prop 25 denies a U.S. constitutional right.” FALSE. The 8th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution prohibits the courts from imposing excessive bail. By eliminating the cash bail system, Prop 25 simply makes this prohibition irrelevant.
- “Prop 25 puts our public safety at risk.” FALSE. Judges will have increased judicial discretion over the more serious felony cases, which means defendants who may pose a threat to a community or specific individual will be given individual consideration. All decisions made by judges will also be required to be publicly recorded.
- “Prop 25 deprives justice for crime victims.” FALSE. In New Jersey, where similar legislation passed eliminating the use of cash bail in 2017, a recent study concluded that defendants are continuing to show up for court cases at the same rate and that people released under the new regulations are no more likely to commit a crime while waiting for trial than those released under the previous system on money bail.
- “Prop 25 creates additional biases against minorities and the poor.” FALSE. In New Jersey, similar legislation passed eliminating the use of cash bail has reduced racial disparities in the jail population. In California, new reporting requirements enable racial disparities to be systematically tracked for the first time. And ending cash bail immediately eliminates the most immediate factor in the criminal-justice system that drives the cycle of poverty and incarceration existing in many low-income communities, which are also disproportionately Black and brown communities.
Top Funders of Prop 25
- The two largest donors in support of Prop 25 are Connie and Steve Ballmer. Steve Ballmer is the former CEO of Microsoft and current owner of the L.A. Clippers team. The Ballmers are philanthropists who have given over $300 million to 70 nonprofits over the last three years for gun safety and racial justice. They have also pledged $25 million in coronavirus aid. In a statement, they said that “far too many people that are not a danger are getting stuck in jail waiting for their trials simply because they can’t afford bail.”
- The next largest donor is John Arnold of Arnold Ventures and the Laura and John Arnold Foundation. Arnold’s foundation created an algorithm-based pretrial risk-assessment tool called the Public Safety Assessment (PSA) that is currently used in 30 different counties including San Francisco, Santa Cruz, and Tulare counties in California. The foundation has also created several think tank projects including the National Partnership for Pretrial Justice and Advancing Pretrial Policy and Research, which produce research, policy advocacy, and implementation support for the PSA specifically and more generally for the process of replacing cash bail with pretrial risk assessments. Arnold has been sued for a judge’s use of PSA resulting in a murder by the released suspect. In our research, we did not find a connection between Arnold and any of the three pre-trial assessment service providers that have been approved for use under SB 10, which are Journal Technologies Inc., FivePoint Solutions, and Equivant. It is also unclear if the PSA will continue to be used in California counties under SB 10. Arnold is a former hedge fund manager and was involved in the Enron scandal in which he walked away with an $8 million bonus.
- The other three top donors in support of Prop 25 are SEIU California State Council; Action Now Initiative, LLC; and philanthropist Patty Quillin.
- The top donor in opposition to Prop 25 is Triton Management Services, LLC, the parent company of Aladdin Bail Bonds.
- The American Bail Coalition, consisting of several insurance and bail companies, is opposed to Prop 25, as it wants the bail system to remain in place to avoid going out of business.
Progressive Landscape
Last updated: 2023-04-05
City Races
Depending on where you live, you may have the below city races on your ballot.
City of Coachella
Elect Neftalí Galarza to push Coachella in the right direction.
About the Position
Coachella is governed by a five-person city council, the members of which are elected at large. 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 council members in Coachella serve four-year overlapping terms, and the mayor serves a two-year term.
About the District
Coachella is Riverside County’s 18th most populous city. The Coachella City Council oversees the needs of 41,648 people and manages an estimated budget of $24 million annually. Coachella is managed by a mayor-council structured government.
About the Race
Neftalí Galarza is running against Philip Bautista, Denise Delgado, and Emmanuel Martinez. There are no campaign filings available for any candidate.
About the Candidate
Neftalí Galarza, a member of the Coachella Valley Unified School District Board of Trustees since 2017, was born and raised in the Eastern Coachella Valley, where he attended public schools. Galarza’s motivation for running is to create positive changes for residents and visitors to the city. If elected, Galarza aims to focus on expanding youth engagement opportunities, increasing neighborhood participation, and collaborating with various government agencies to create resources.
Galarza was appointed to the Coachella Valley Unified School District Board of Trustees in 2017, replacing a member who had been forced to resign. He won his seat in 2018. Prior to his service as School District Board member, Galarza worked as a community advocate in voter registration and on get-out-the-vote campaigns across California with the Southwest Voter Registration Education Project.
Galarza is endorsed by a large progressive coalition in the area called IE United. According to our analysis, Galarza is the strongest choice for equitable and representative leadership in office.
Last updated: 2023-04-05
Elect Neftalí Galarza to push Coachella in the right direction.
About the Position
Coachella is governed by a five-person city council, the members of which are elected at large. 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 council members in Coachella serve four-year overlapping terms, and the mayor serves a two-year term.
About the District
Coachella is Riverside County’s 18th most populous city. The Coachella City Council oversees the needs of 41,648 people and manages an estimated budget of $24 million annually. Coachella is managed by a mayor-council structured government.
About the Race
Neftalí Galarza is running against Philip Bautista, Denise Delgado, and Emmanuel Martinez. There are no campaign filings available for any candidate.
About the Candidate
Neftalí Galarza, a member of the Coachella Valley Unified School District Board of Trustees since 2017, was born and raised in the Eastern Coachella Valley, where he attended public schools. Galarza’s motivation for running is to create positive changes for residents and visitors to the city. If elected, Galarza aims to focus on expanding youth engagement opportunities, increasing neighborhood participation, and collaborating with various government agencies to create resources.
Galarza was appointed to the Coachella Valley Unified School District Board of Trustees in 2017, replacing a member who had been forced to resign. He won his seat in 2018. Prior to his service as School District Board member, Galarza worked as a community advocate in voter registration and on get-out-the-vote campaigns across California with the Southwest Voter Registration Education Project.
Galarza is endorsed by a large progressive coalition in the area called IE United. According to our analysis, Galarza is the strongest choice for equitable and representative leadership in office.
Last updated: 2023-04-05
Elect Neftalí Galarza to push Coachella in the right direction.
About the Position
Coachella is governed by a five-person city council, the members of which are elected at large. 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 council members in Coachella serve four-year overlapping terms, and the mayor serves a two-year term.
About the District
Coachella is Riverside County’s 18th most populous city. The Coachella City Council oversees the needs of 41,648 people and manages an estimated budget of $24 million annually. Coachella is managed by a mayor-council structured government.
About the Race
Neftalí Galarza is running against Philip Bautista, Denise Delgado, and Emmanuel Martinez. There are no campaign filings available for any candidate.
About the Candidate
Neftalí Galarza, a member of the Coachella Valley Unified School District Board of Trustees since 2017, was born and raised in the Eastern Coachella Valley, where he attended public schools. Galarza’s motivation for running is to create positive changes for residents and visitors to the city. If elected, Galarza aims to focus on expanding youth engagement opportunities, increasing neighborhood participation, and collaborating with various government agencies to create resources.
Galarza was appointed to the Coachella Valley Unified School District Board of Trustees in 2017, replacing a member who had been forced to resign. He won his seat in 2018. Prior to his service as School District Board member, Galarza worked as a community advocate in voter registration and on get-out-the-vote campaigns across California with the Southwest Voter Registration Education Project.
Galarza is endorsed by a large progressive coalition in the area called IE United. According to our analysis, Galarza is the strongest choice for equitable and representative leadership in office.
Last updated: 2023-04-05
City of Riverside
Elect Andy Melendrez as mayor to push Riverside in the right direction.
About the Position
The Riverside mayor is elected at large in March of U.S. Presidential election years. A runoff election, if required, is held the following November. Riverside uses a council-manager form of government.
About the City
Riverside is Riverside County’s most populous city. The mayor’s office of Riverside oversees the needs of an estimated 303,569 people and manages an estimated budget of $354 million annually. Demographic data reveals a notable Latinx population, about 49 percent.
About the Race
In the March 3 race, challenger Andy Melendrez led challenger Patricia Lock Dawson by a margin of 7.7 percent. Melendrez’s campaign has raised $168,343 in 2020 and has not committed to any campaign finance pledges. Dawson’s campaign has raised $153,215 and has also not committed to any campaign finance pledges. According to campaign materials, Dawson’s top priorities involve funding and relying on law enforcement and church institutions to address the issue of homelessness.
About the Candidate
Andy Melendrez, a four-term Riverside City Council member, is a lifelong resident, having been born in Casa Blanca. According to campaign materials, he is running for election to continue his improvements to public parks, push for transit-oriented development, establish two affordable housing unit complexes, and continue the planning for a new Canyon Crossing Medical Hospital, Medical Clinics, and housing.
As a city council member, Andy Melendrez brought the Transitional Aged Youth Center to Ward 2, a drop-in organization where at-risk youth can safely access treatment services. He brought the Small Business Administration and Inland Empire Small Business Development Center together to offer community training for local citizens wanting to start their own business, making licensing more readily available through community funding. Affordable housing projects in his district were vetted with the neighborhood, ensuring that the facilities contain all the services the community needs, including on-site behavioral-health treatment for senior citizens and people with disabilities.
Melendrez has also worked as a gang intervention counselor and vocational rehabilitation counselor, founded the Riverside Arts Academy, established the Youth Opportunity Center, and assisted with funding the Centro De Ninos Child Care Center. To help promote local businesses in his city, he created the Shop Local Shop Small Riverside YouTube channel, interviewing business owners and employees about their experiences and services.
For his strong record in the community and long service on the city council, Andy Melendrez is, according to our analysis, the strongest choice for representative leadership in office.
Last updated: 2023-04-05
Elect Andy Melendrez as mayor to push Riverside in the right direction.
About the Position
The Riverside mayor is elected at large in March of U.S. Presidential election years. A runoff election, if required, is held the following November. Riverside uses a council-manager form of government.
About the City
Riverside is Riverside County’s most populous city. The mayor’s office of Riverside oversees the needs of an estimated 303,569 people and manages an estimated budget of $354 million annually. Demographic data reveals a notable Latinx population, about 49 percent.
About the Race
In the March 3 race, challenger Andy Melendrez led challenger Patricia Lock Dawson by a margin of 7.7 percent. Melendrez’s campaign has raised $168,343 in 2020 and has not committed to any campaign finance pledges. Dawson’s campaign has raised $153,215 and has also not committed to any campaign finance pledges. According to campaign materials, Dawson’s top priorities involve funding and relying on law enforcement and church institutions to address the issue of homelessness.
About the Candidate
Andy Melendrez, a four-term Riverside City Council member, is a lifelong resident, having been born in Casa Blanca. According to campaign materials, he is running for election to continue his improvements to public parks, push for transit-oriented development, establish two affordable housing unit complexes, and continue the planning for a new Canyon Crossing Medical Hospital, Medical Clinics, and housing.
As a city council member, Andy Melendrez brought the Transitional Aged Youth Center to Ward 2, a drop-in organization where at-risk youth can safely access treatment services. He brought the Small Business Administration and Inland Empire Small Business Development Center together to offer community training for local citizens wanting to start their own business, making licensing more readily available through community funding. Affordable housing projects in his district were vetted with the neighborhood, ensuring that the facilities contain all the services the community needs, including on-site behavioral-health treatment for senior citizens and people with disabilities.
Melendrez has also worked as a gang intervention counselor and vocational rehabilitation counselor, founded the Riverside Arts Academy, established the Youth Opportunity Center, and assisted with funding the Centro De Ninos Child Care Center. To help promote local businesses in his city, he created the Shop Local Shop Small Riverside YouTube channel, interviewing business owners and employees about their experiences and services.
For his strong record in the community and long service on the city council, Andy Melendrez is, according to our analysis, the strongest choice for representative leadership in office.
Last updated: 2023-04-05
Elect Andy Melendrez as mayor to push Riverside in the right direction.
About the Position
The Riverside mayor is elected at large in March of U.S. Presidential election years. A runoff election, if required, is held the following November. Riverside uses a council-manager form of government.
About the City
Riverside is Riverside County’s most populous city. The mayor’s office of Riverside oversees the needs of an estimated 303,569 people and manages an estimated budget of $354 million annually. Demographic data reveals a notable Latinx population, about 49 percent.
About the Race
In the March 3 race, challenger Andy Melendrez led challenger Patricia Lock Dawson by a margin of 7.7 percent. Melendrez’s campaign has raised $168,343 in 2020 and has not committed to any campaign finance pledges. Dawson’s campaign has raised $153,215 and has also not committed to any campaign finance pledges. According to campaign materials, Dawson’s top priorities involve funding and relying on law enforcement and church institutions to address the issue of homelessness.
About the Candidate
Andy Melendrez, a four-term Riverside City Council member, is a lifelong resident, having been born in Casa Blanca. According to campaign materials, he is running for election to continue his improvements to public parks, push for transit-oriented development, establish two affordable housing unit complexes, and continue the planning for a new Canyon Crossing Medical Hospital, Medical Clinics, and housing.
As a city council member, Andy Melendrez brought the Transitional Aged Youth Center to Ward 2, a drop-in organization where at-risk youth can safely access treatment services. He brought the Small Business Administration and Inland Empire Small Business Development Center together to offer community training for local citizens wanting to start their own business, making licensing more readily available through community funding. Affordable housing projects in his district were vetted with the neighborhood, ensuring that the facilities contain all the services the community needs, including on-site behavioral-health treatment for senior citizens and people with disabilities.
Melendrez has also worked as a gang intervention counselor and vocational rehabilitation counselor, founded the Riverside Arts Academy, established the Youth Opportunity Center, and assisted with funding the Centro De Ninos Child Care Center. To help promote local businesses in his city, he created the Shop Local Shop Small Riverside YouTube channel, interviewing business owners and employees about their experiences and services.
For his strong record in the community and long service on the city council, Andy Melendrez is, according to our analysis, the strongest choice for representative leadership in office.
Last updated: 2023-04-05
City District Races
Depending on where you live, you may have the below city district races on your ballot.
City of Corona, District 3
Elect Meg E’amato to Corona City Council to push Corona in the right direction.
About the Position
Incorporated cities in California are generally governed by a five-person 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 Corona serve four-year terms, and are currently not bound by term limits. The passage of Measure Y, which is on the November ballot, would institute a three-term, or 12-year, lifetime limit for all city councilmembers.
About the District
Corona is Riverside County’s third-most populous city, and includes a population that is 43 percent Latinx, 36 white white, 10 percent Asian, and 6 percent Black. The Corona City Council oversees the needs of 152,374 people and manages an estimated budget of $343 million annually. Corona is managed by council-manager structured government. Corona’s District 3 includes the central portion of the city and a population of over 30,000 residents.
About the Race
There are three candidates running for the District 3 seat, including incumbent Councilmember Jason B. Scott and challenger Meg E’amato. There are no publicly available campaign filings for either candidate. Scott is endorsed by the Corona Police Officers’ Association, Riverside Sheriffs’ Association, and five retired law-enforcement leaders from Corona.
About the Candidate
Meg E’amato, a public school teacher, has lived in Corona for 40 years. According to campaign materials, E’amato is running for election to revitalize the District 3 community by creating interconnection between local schools, small businesses, and green spaces through strategic partnerships.
E’amato’s priorities for Corona this term include reinvesting in small businesses, building partnerships to improve local parks, and bringing accountability and transparency to the city council.
E’amato is a career educator, having been a teacher in the Corona-Norco Unified School District for 22 years. She grew up in Corona, and sees the intersection between education, homelessness, transportation, and public investment. She will use her term in the city council to build revitalizing partnerships that nurture areas of longtime disinvestment in District 3. She is a longtime supporter of the value of education, and is a member of the LGBTQIA+ community.
E’amato is endorsed by some progressive groups in the district, including Equality California and National Organization for Women’s Riverside County. According to our analysis, Meg E’amato is the strongest choice for equitable and representative leadership in office.
Last updated: 2023-04-05
Elect Meg E’amato to Corona City Council to push Corona in the right direction.
About the Position
Incorporated cities in California are generally governed by a five-person 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 Corona serve four-year terms, and are currently not bound by term limits. The passage of Measure Y, which is on the November ballot, would institute a three-term, or 12-year, lifetime limit for all city councilmembers.
About the District
Corona is Riverside County’s third-most populous city, and includes a population that is 43 percent Latinx, 36 white white, 10 percent Asian, and 6 percent Black. The Corona City Council oversees the needs of 152,374 people and manages an estimated budget of $343 million annually. Corona is managed by council-manager structured government. Corona’s District 3 includes the central portion of the city and a population of over 30,000 residents.
About the Race
There are three candidates running for the District 3 seat, including incumbent Councilmember Jason B. Scott and challenger Meg E’amato. There are no publicly available campaign filings for either candidate. Scott is endorsed by the Corona Police Officers’ Association, Riverside Sheriffs’ Association, and five retired law-enforcement leaders from Corona.
About the Candidate
Meg E’amato, a public school teacher, has lived in Corona for 40 years. According to campaign materials, E’amato is running for election to revitalize the District 3 community by creating interconnection between local schools, small businesses, and green spaces through strategic partnerships.
E’amato’s priorities for Corona this term include reinvesting in small businesses, building partnerships to improve local parks, and bringing accountability and transparency to the city council.
E’amato is a career educator, having been a teacher in the Corona-Norco Unified School District for 22 years. She grew up in Corona, and sees the intersection between education, homelessness, transportation, and public investment. She will use her term in the city council to build revitalizing partnerships that nurture areas of longtime disinvestment in District 3. She is a longtime supporter of the value of education, and is a member of the LGBTQIA+ community.
E’amato is endorsed by some progressive groups in the district, including Equality California and National Organization for Women’s Riverside County. According to our analysis, Meg E’amato is the strongest choice for equitable and representative leadership in office.
Last updated: 2023-04-05
Elect Meg E’amato to Corona City Council to push Corona in the right direction.
About the Position
Incorporated cities in California are generally governed by a five-person 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 Corona serve four-year terms, and are currently not bound by term limits. The passage of Measure Y, which is on the November ballot, would institute a three-term, or 12-year, lifetime limit for all city councilmembers.
About the District
Corona is Riverside County’s third-most populous city, and includes a population that is 43 percent Latinx, 36 white white, 10 percent Asian, and 6 percent Black. The Corona City Council oversees the needs of 152,374 people and manages an estimated budget of $343 million annually. Corona is managed by council-manager structured government. Corona’s District 3 includes the central portion of the city and a population of over 30,000 residents.
About the Race
There are three candidates running for the District 3 seat, including incumbent Councilmember Jason B. Scott and challenger Meg E’amato. There are no publicly available campaign filings for either candidate. Scott is endorsed by the Corona Police Officers’ Association, Riverside Sheriffs’ Association, and five retired law-enforcement leaders from Corona.
About the Candidate
Meg E’amato, a public school teacher, has lived in Corona for 40 years. According to campaign materials, E’amato is running for election to revitalize the District 3 community by creating interconnection between local schools, small businesses, and green spaces through strategic partnerships.
E’amato’s priorities for Corona this term include reinvesting in small businesses, building partnerships to improve local parks, and bringing accountability and transparency to the city council.
E’amato is a career educator, having been a teacher in the Corona-Norco Unified School District for 22 years. She grew up in Corona, and sees the intersection between education, homelessness, transportation, and public investment. She will use her term in the city council to build revitalizing partnerships that nurture areas of longtime disinvestment in District 3. She is a longtime supporter of the value of education, and is a member of the LGBTQIA+ community.
E’amato is endorsed by some progressive groups in the district, including Equality California and National Organization for Women’s Riverside County. According to our analysis, Meg E’amato is the strongest choice for equitable and representative leadership in office.
Last updated: 2023-04-05
City of Hemet, District 1
Elect City Council Member DeniAntionette Mazingo to push Hemet in the right direction.
About the Position
Incorporated cities in California are generally governed by a five-person 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 council members in Hemet are elected to serve four-year staggered terms.
About the District
Hemet is an incorporated city located in Riverside County. Hemet City Council oversees the needs of over 85,000 people and manages an estimated budget of over $48 million annually. The city is managed by a mayor-council structured government. Hemet’s District 1 is a working-class, rural district with a majority white population.
About the Race
Mazingo’s campaign has raised over $61,000 and is primarily funded through individual contributions, as well as the California Nurses Association and California Teachers Association. Her campaign is not funded by any corporate, fossil fuel, or law-enforcement money.
About the Candidate
DeniAntionette Mazingo is a practicing attorney and active community member from Hemet, California. According to campaign materials, Mazingo is running for office to advocate for seniors, single parents, veterans, children, and the LGBTQIA+ community. She wants to improve the quality of life for citizens of Hemet by creating jobs, affordable housing, and environmental protections.
Mazingo’s priorities for Hemet include creating affordable housing and increasing access to public transit, in order to decrease the city's homeless rates. She is also committed to increasing vocational-technical programs to increase job opportunities for young adults.
Mazingo has served her community in a variety of positions. Through her role as Third District commissioner for the Riverside County Commission for Women, she has brought awareness to issues of human trafficking. As a member of Soroptimist International, Mazingo has helped host the Soroptomist Girl Power Conference to provide young girls with educational opportunities. Her additional roles include national president of Las Amigas Incorporated, president of Ladies of Charity for San Bernardino Diocese, member of the Hemet Woman’s Club, member of Rotary International, and a lifetime member of the National Council of Negro Women. Through her work as an attorney, Mazingo provides pro bono services, and is a longtime supporter of causes that support low-income communities of color.
DeniAntionette Mazingo is endorsed by the California Nurses Association, American Association of University Women, and the Riverside County Democratic Party. She has also received endorsements from notable individuals, including CA State Controller Betty Yee and Assemblymember Jose Medina. According to our analysis, DeniAntionette Mazingo is the strongest choice for equitable and representative leadership in office.
Last updated: 2023-04-05
Elect City Council Member DeniAntionette Mazingo to push Hemet in the right direction.
About the Position
Incorporated cities in California are generally governed by a five-person 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 council members in Hemet are elected to serve four-year staggered terms.
About the District
Hemet is an incorporated city located in Riverside County. Hemet City Council oversees the needs of over 85,000 people and manages an estimated budget of over $48 million annually. The city is managed by a mayor-council structured government. Hemet’s District 1 is a working-class, rural district with a majority white population.
About the Race
Mazingo’s campaign has raised over $61,000 and is primarily funded through individual contributions, as well as the California Nurses Association and California Teachers Association. Her campaign is not funded by any corporate, fossil fuel, or law-enforcement money.
About the Candidate
DeniAntionette Mazingo is a practicing attorney and active community member from Hemet, California. According to campaign materials, Mazingo is running for office to advocate for seniors, single parents, veterans, children, and the LGBTQIA+ community. She wants to improve the quality of life for citizens of Hemet by creating jobs, affordable housing, and environmental protections.
Mazingo’s priorities for Hemet include creating affordable housing and increasing access to public transit, in order to decrease the city's homeless rates. She is also committed to increasing vocational-technical programs to increase job opportunities for young adults.
Mazingo has served her community in a variety of positions. Through her role as Third District commissioner for the Riverside County Commission for Women, she has brought awareness to issues of human trafficking. As a member of Soroptimist International, Mazingo has helped host the Soroptomist Girl Power Conference to provide young girls with educational opportunities. Her additional roles include national president of Las Amigas Incorporated, president of Ladies of Charity for San Bernardino Diocese, member of the Hemet Woman’s Club, member of Rotary International, and a lifetime member of the National Council of Negro Women. Through her work as an attorney, Mazingo provides pro bono services, and is a longtime supporter of causes that support low-income communities of color.
DeniAntionette Mazingo is endorsed by the California Nurses Association, American Association of University Women, and the Riverside County Democratic Party. She has also received endorsements from notable individuals, including CA State Controller Betty Yee and Assemblymember Jose Medina. According to our analysis, DeniAntionette Mazingo is the strongest choice for equitable and representative leadership in office.
Last updated: 2023-04-05
Endorsed By: California Nurses Association
Elect City Council Member DeniAntionette Mazingo to push Hemet in the right direction.
About the Position
Incorporated cities in California are generally governed by a five-person 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 council members in Hemet are elected to serve four-year staggered terms.
About the District
Hemet is an incorporated city located in Riverside County. Hemet City Council oversees the needs of over 85,000 people and manages an estimated budget of over $48 million annually. The city is managed by a mayor-council structured government. Hemet’s District 1 is a working-class, rural district with a majority white population.
About the Race
Mazingo’s campaign has raised over $61,000 and is primarily funded through individual contributions, as well as the California Nurses Association and California Teachers Association. Her campaign is not funded by any corporate, fossil fuel, or law-enforcement money.
About the Candidate
DeniAntionette Mazingo is a practicing attorney and active community member from Hemet, California. According to campaign materials, Mazingo is running for office to advocate for seniors, single parents, veterans, children, and the LGBTQIA+ community. She wants to improve the quality of life for citizens of Hemet by creating jobs, affordable housing, and environmental protections.
Mazingo’s priorities for Hemet include creating affordable housing and increasing access to public transit, in order to decrease the city's homeless rates. She is also committed to increasing vocational-technical programs to increase job opportunities for young adults.
Mazingo has served her community in a variety of positions. Through her role as Third District commissioner for the Riverside County Commission for Women, she has brought awareness to issues of human trafficking. As a member of Soroptimist International, Mazingo has helped host the Soroptomist Girl Power Conference to provide young girls with educational opportunities. Her additional roles include national president of Las Amigas Incorporated, president of Ladies of Charity for San Bernardino Diocese, member of the Hemet Woman’s Club, member of Rotary International, and a lifetime member of the National Council of Negro Women. Through her work as an attorney, Mazingo provides pro bono services, and is a longtime supporter of causes that support low-income communities of color.
DeniAntionette Mazingo is endorsed by the California Nurses Association, American Association of University Women, and the Riverside County Democratic Party. She has also received endorsements from notable individuals, including CA State Controller Betty Yee and Assemblymember Jose Medina. According to our analysis, DeniAntionette Mazingo is the strongest choice for equitable and representative leadership in office.
Last updated: 2023-04-05
Endorsed By: California Nurses Association
Based on our analysis, there is no competitive progressive candidate to recommend for your vote in this race.
About the Position
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.
About the District
California's 58th Assembly District includes parts of Los Angeles County and the cities of Montebello and Norwalk. Democrats typically hold this district. The most recent election results show 72.5 percent of AD-58 voted for Clinton for president in 2016 and 71 percent of the district voted for Newsom for governor in 2018.
About the Race
In the March 3 primary election, Green Party challenger Margaret Villa trailed Democratic incumbent Cristina Garcia by a margin of 54.6 percent. Villa’s campaign has raised $700, entirely from individual donors. While Villa has not received corporate PAC, fossil fuel, or police money, she has not officially pledged to refuse such funds. Garcia has raised $387,506.98, is also not committed to any campaign finance pledges, and is backed by Clorox Co., Edison International, the California Correctional Peace Officers Association, and numerous real estate/property development interests.
About the Candidates (presented in alphabetical order, with no implied preference)