• Alex Padilla

    Reelect US Senator Alex Padilla to keep California on the right track for progress.

    Sen. Alex Padilla’s track record and policy positions demonstrate that he will continue to be a progressive voice for the constituents of California and will govern effectively in the best interest of this diverse state.

    Progressive endorsements: Sen. Padilla has the endorsement of many progressive groups, including California Environmental Voters, Equality California, NARAL Pro-Choice California, Giffords PAC, and many labor unions. He is also endorsed by a broad coalition of federal and local elected officials, including Senator Elizabeth Warren, Rep. Karen Bass, Rep. Katie Porter, Governor Gavin Newsom, Attorney General Rob Bonta, and many California mayors.

    Top issues: Voter protections, economic growth, police reform, immigration, environmental protections, education, consumer and worker protections, homelessness and housing, and water conservation.

    Priority bills: This year, Sen. Padilla’s priorities for California have included 50 bills about environmental and water protections, the economy, immigration, and child welfare. Of these, nearly all are currently in committee or referred to committee. In his brief time in the Senate, Sen. Padilla has signed on as a sponsor of the Green New Deal and Medicare for All, and has been a strong supporter of President Biden’s Build Back Better agenda. He has also secured federal funding for housing, infrastructure, education, and employment projects in Southern California, and over $11 million for statewide health-care facilities and mental-health services.

    Committee leadership/membership: Sen. Padilla currently serves on five committees, including Judiciary, Budget, and Environment and Public Works. He serves as chair of the Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, and Border Safety.

    Governance and community leadership experience: Sen. Padilla was appointed to the Senate by Governor Gavin Newsom in January 2021, which will make this his first general-election campaign for the seat. He was previously elected to serve as the California’s secretary of state in 2014, winning his 2018 reelection bid over Republican Mark Meuser by 29 points.

    Prior to his appointment, Sen. Padilla served Californians in several elected roles, including two terms each on the Los Angeles City Council, in the state Senate, and as the California secretary of state. Sen. Padilla is a longtime supporter of environmental justice, and credits his parents with introducing him to activism around this issue in the Los Angeles community where he was raised. Sen. Padilla has also been a longtime supporter of voting rights and democratic protections, which was the cornerstone of his work as secretary of state. In the Senate, he co-authored the Freedom to Vote Act, and was a strong supporter of the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act.

    Other background: Sen. Padilla, a longtime public official, is from the San Fernando Valley. He grew up in a tough and underserved neighborhood of Los Angeles, and his public service was inspired by his community and his parents, who engaged him in the organizing process at a young age.
     

    The Race

    Primary election results: The June 2022 results to fill the last few months of the current term had ten candidates, and the results included incumbent Sen. Alex Padilla (D), 55%; Mark Meuser (R), 22%; James Bradley (R), 7%; and Jon Elist (R), 6%.

    The June 2022 results to seat the next full six-year term had 27 candidates, and the results included Sen. Alex Padilla (D), 54%; Mark Meuser (R), 15%; Cordie Williams (R), 7%; Jon Elist (R), 4%; Chuck Smith (R), 4%; James Bradley (R), 3%; and Douglas Howard Pierce (D), 2%.

    Sen. Alex Padilla and Mark Meuser will compete in a run-off in the November 8 general election in both the current-term and next-term races.

    Candidate fundraising and pledges: Sen. Padilla’s campaign has raised $10.6 million and is not funded by police interests. His problematic donors include Mortgage Bankers Association PAC, Google LLC, FedEx Corporation PAC, Edison International PAC, and Comcast Corporation. He has also received donations from defense contractors, including Employees of Northrop Grumman Corporation PAC and Lockheed Martin Employees’ PAC.

    Opposing candidate: Republican Mark Meuser

    Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Meuser’s campaign has raised $495,000 and is funded almost entirely by individual donors.
     

    The District

    State: California is the most populous state in the United States, and includes 58 counties and 331 million residents.

    Voter registration: Of the 22 million registered voters in the state, 47% are Democrat, 24% are Republican, and 23% have no party preference. Democrats have held the lieutenant governor seat since 2011.

    District demographics: 39% Latino, 16% Asian, and 7% Black

    Recent election results: California voted for Joe Biden for president in 2020 by 29 points and Gavin Newsom for governor in 2018 by 24 points.
     

    The Position

    Members of the Senate represent and advocate for the needs of their state constituency and share legislative responsibility with the House of Representatives. They are responsible for creating, debating, and voting on legislation that addresses issues of national importance. Senators have the exclusive responsibility of providing advice and consent to the executive branch on treaties, and on the nomination and approval of cabinet secretaries, ambassadors, and federal judges. The Senate also has the sole authority to bring and try an impeachment of a high official, up to and including removal from office with a two-thirds majority vote.

    Each state, regardless of population, is represented by two senators. Senate elections are statewide, and senators are elected to serve a six-year term. There is no term limit for this position.

    Alex Padilla

    Reelect US Senator Alex Padilla to keep California on the right track for progress.

    Sen. Alex Padilla’s track record and policy positions demonstrate that he will continue to be a progressive voice for the constituents of California and will govern effectively in the best interest of this diverse state.

    Progressive endorsements: Sen. Padilla has the endorsement of many progressive groups, including California Environmental Voters, Equality California, NARAL Pro-Choice California, Giffords PAC, and many labor unions. He is also endorsed by a broad coalition of federal and local elected officials, including Senator Elizabeth Warren, Rep. Karen Bass, Rep. Katie Porter, Governor Gavin Newsom, Attorney General Rob Bonta, and many California mayors.

    Top issues: Voter protections, economic growth, police reform, immigration, environmental protections, education, consumer and worker protections, homelessness and housing, and water conservation.

    Priority bills: This year, Sen. Padilla’s priorities for California have included 50 bills about environmental and water protections, the economy, immigration, and child welfare. Of these, nearly all are currently in committee or referred to committee. In his brief time in the Senate, Sen. Padilla has signed on as a sponsor of the Green New Deal and Medicare for All, and has been a strong supporter of President Biden’s Build Back Better agenda. He has also secured federal funding for housing, infrastructure, education, and employment projects in Southern California, and over $11 million for statewide health-care facilities and mental-health services.

    Committee leadership/membership: Sen. Padilla currently serves on five committees, including Judiciary, Budget, and Environment and Public Works. He serves as chair of the Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, and Border Safety.

    Governance and community leadership experience: Sen. Padilla was appointed to the Senate by Governor Gavin Newsom in January 2021, which will make this his first general-election campaign for the seat. He was previously elected to serve as the California’s secretary of state in 2014, winning his 2018 reelection bid over Republican Mark Meuser by 29 points.

    Prior to his appointment, Sen. Padilla served Californians in several elected roles, including two terms each on the Los Angeles City Council, in the state Senate, and as the California secretary of state. Sen. Padilla is a longtime supporter of environmental justice, and credits his parents with introducing him to activism around this issue in the Los Angeles community where he was raised. Sen. Padilla has also been a longtime supporter of voting rights and democratic protections, which was the cornerstone of his work as secretary of state. In the Senate, he co-authored the Freedom to Vote Act, and was a strong supporter of the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act.

    Other background: Sen. Padilla, a longtime public official, is from the San Fernando Valley. He grew up in a tough and underserved neighborhood of Los Angeles, and his public service was inspired by his community and his parents, who engaged him in the organizing process at a young age.
     

    The Race

    Primary election results: The June 2022 results to fill the last few months of the current term had ten candidates, and the results included incumbent Sen. Alex Padilla (D), 55%; Mark Meuser (R), 22%; James Bradley (R), 7%; and Jon Elist (R), 6%.

    The June 2022 results to seat the next full six-year term had 27 candidates, and the results included Sen. Alex Padilla (D), 54%; Mark Meuser (R), 15%; Cordie Williams (R), 7%; Jon Elist (R), 4%; Chuck Smith (R), 4%; James Bradley (R), 3%; and Douglas Howard Pierce (D), 2%.

    Sen. Alex Padilla and Mark Meuser will compete in a run-off in the November 8 general election in both the current-term and next-term races.

    Candidate fundraising and pledges: Sen. Padilla’s campaign has raised $10.6 million and is not funded by police interests. His problematic donors include Mortgage Bankers Association PAC, Google LLC, FedEx Corporation PAC, Edison International PAC, and Comcast Corporation. He has also received donations from defense contractors, including Employees of Northrop Grumman Corporation PAC and Lockheed Martin Employees’ PAC.

    Opposing candidate: Republican Mark Meuser

    Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Meuser’s campaign has raised $495,000 and is funded almost entirely by individual donors.
     

    The District

    State: California is the most populous state in the United States, and includes 58 counties and 331 million residents.

    Voter registration: Of the 22 million registered voters in the state, 47% are Democrat, 24% are Republican, and 23% have no party preference. Democrats have held the lieutenant governor seat since 2011.

    District demographics: 39% Latino, 16% Asian, and 7% Black

    Recent election results: California voted for Joe Biden for president in 2020 by 29 points and Gavin Newsom for governor in 2018 by 24 points.
     

    The Position

    Members of the Senate represent and advocate for the needs of their state constituency and share legislative responsibility with the House of Representatives. They are responsible for creating, debating, and voting on legislation that addresses issues of national importance. Senators have the exclusive responsibility of providing advice and consent to the executive branch on treaties, and on the nomination and approval of cabinet secretaries, ambassadors, and federal judges. The Senate also has the sole authority to bring and try an impeachment of a high official, up to and including removal from office with a two-thirds majority vote.

    Each state, regardless of population, is represented by two senators. Senate elections are statewide, and senators are elected to serve a six-year term. There is no term limit for this position.

    Alex Padilla

    Reelect US Senator Alex Padilla to keep California on the right track for progress.

    Sen. Alex Padilla’s track record and policy positions demonstrate that he will continue to be a progressive voice for the constituents of California and will govern effectively in the best interest of this diverse state.

    Progressive endorsements: Sen. Padilla has the endorsement of many progressive groups, including California Environmental Voters, Equality California, NARAL Pro-Choice California, Giffords PAC, and many labor unions. He is also endorsed by a broad coalition of federal and local elected officials, including Senator Elizabeth Warren, Rep. Karen Bass, Rep. Katie Porter, Governor Gavin Newsom, Attorney General Rob Bonta, and many California mayors.

    Top issues: Voter protections, economic growth, police reform, immigration, environmental protections, education, consumer and worker protections, homelessness and housing, and water conservation.

    Priority bills: This year, Sen. Padilla’s priorities for California have included 50 bills about environmental and water protections, the economy, immigration, and child welfare. Of these, nearly all are currently in committee or referred to committee. In his brief time in the Senate, Sen. Padilla has signed on as a sponsor of the Green New Deal and Medicare for All, and has been a strong supporter of President Biden’s Build Back Better agenda. He has also secured federal funding for housing, infrastructure, education, and employment projects in Southern California, and over $11 million for statewide health-care facilities and mental-health services.

    Committee leadership/membership: Sen. Padilla currently serves on five committees, including Judiciary, Budget, and Environment and Public Works. He serves as chair of the Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, and Border Safety.

    Governance and community leadership experience: Sen. Padilla was appointed to the Senate by Governor Gavin Newsom in January 2021, which will make this his first general-election campaign for the seat. He was previously elected to serve as the California’s secretary of state in 2014, winning his 2018 reelection bid over Republican Mark Meuser by 29 points.

    Prior to his appointment, Sen. Padilla served Californians in several elected roles, including two terms each on the Los Angeles City Council, in the state Senate, and as the California secretary of state. Sen. Padilla is a longtime supporter of environmental justice, and credits his parents with introducing him to activism around this issue in the Los Angeles community where he was raised. Sen. Padilla has also been a longtime supporter of voting rights and democratic protections, which was the cornerstone of his work as secretary of state. In the Senate, he co-authored the Freedom to Vote Act, and was a strong supporter of the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act.

    Other background: Sen. Padilla, a longtime public official, is from the San Fernando Valley. He grew up in a tough and underserved neighborhood of Los Angeles, and his public service was inspired by his community and his parents, who engaged him in the organizing process at a young age.
     

    The Race

    Primary election results: The June 2022 results to fill the last few months of the current term had ten candidates, and the results included incumbent Sen. Alex Padilla (D), 55%; Mark Meuser (R), 22%; James Bradley (R), 7%; and Jon Elist (R), 6%.

    The June 2022 results to seat the next full six-year term had 27 candidates, and the results included Sen. Alex Padilla (D), 54%; Mark Meuser (R), 15%; Cordie Williams (R), 7%; Jon Elist (R), 4%; Chuck Smith (R), 4%; James Bradley (R), 3%; and Douglas Howard Pierce (D), 2%.

    Sen. Alex Padilla and Mark Meuser will compete in a run-off in the November 8 general election in both the current-term and next-term races.

    Candidate fundraising and pledges: Sen. Padilla’s campaign has raised $10.6 million and is not funded by police interests. His problematic donors include Mortgage Bankers Association PAC, Google LLC, FedEx Corporation PAC, Edison International PAC, and Comcast Corporation. He has also received donations from defense contractors, including Employees of Northrop Grumman Corporation PAC and Lockheed Martin Employees’ PAC.

    Opposing candidate: Republican Mark Meuser

    Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Meuser’s campaign has raised $495,000 and is funded almost entirely by individual donors.
     

    The District

    State: California is the most populous state in the United States, and includes 58 counties and 331 million residents.

    Voter registration: Of the 22 million registered voters in the state, 47% are Democrat, 24% are Republican, and 23% have no party preference. Democrats have held the lieutenant governor seat since 2011.

    District demographics: 39% Latino, 16% Asian, and 7% Black

    Recent election results: California voted for Joe Biden for president in 2020 by 29 points and Gavin Newsom for governor in 2018 by 24 points.
     

    The Position

    Members of the Senate represent and advocate for the needs of their state constituency and share legislative responsibility with the House of Representatives. They are responsible for creating, debating, and voting on legislation that addresses issues of national importance. Senators have the exclusive responsibility of providing advice and consent to the executive branch on treaties, and on the nomination and approval of cabinet secretaries, ambassadors, and federal judges. The Senate also has the sole authority to bring and try an impeachment of a high official, up to and including removal from office with a two-thirds majority vote.

    Each state, regardless of population, is represented by two senators. Senate elections are statewide, and senators are elected to serve a six-year term. There is no term limit for this position.

Congress

Depending on where you live, you may have one of the below congressional districts on your ballot.

  • Stephen Houlahan

    Elect Stephen Houlahan to put CD-48 on the right track for progress.

    Houlahan’s policy positions demonstrate that he will be a more representative voice for the constituents of CD-48 and will govern effectively in the best interest of this diverse district.

    Stephen Houlahan

    Elect Stephen Houlahan to put CD-48 on the right track for progress.

    Houlahan’s policy positions demonstrate that he will be a more representative voice for the constituents of CD-48 and will govern effectively in the best interest of this diverse district.

    Stephen Houlahan

    Elect Stephen Houlahan to put CD-48 on the right track for progress.

    Houlahan’s policy positions demonstrate that he will be a more representative voice for the constituents of CD-48 and will govern effectively in the best interest of this diverse district.

  • Scott Peters

    Reelect Congressional Representative Scott Peters to keep CD-50 on the right track for progress.

    Scott Peters

    Reelect Congressional Representative Scott Peters to keep CD-50 on the right track for progress.

    Scott Peters

    Reelect Congressional Representative Scott Peters to keep CD-50 on the right track for progress.

  • Sara Jacobs

    Reelect Congressional Representative Sara Jacobs to keep CD-51 on the right track for progress.

    Sara Jacobs

    Reelect Congressional Representative Sara Jacobs to keep CD-51 on the right track for progress.

    Sara Jacobs

    Reelect Congressional Representative Sara Jacobs to keep CD-51 on the right track for progress.

  • Juan Vargas

    Reelect Congressional Representative Juan Vargas to keep CD-52 on the right track for progress.

    Juan Vargas

    Reelect Congressional Representative Juan Vargas to keep CD-52 on the right track for progress.

    Juan Vargas

    Reelect Congressional Representative Juan Vargas to keep CD-52 on the right track for progress.

State Assembly

Depending on where you live, you may have one of the below State Assembly races on your ballot.

No Recommendation

Member of the State Assembly - No Recommendation - 75th

Based on our analysis, the two Republican incumbents have distinct visions for the district. We recommend that you choose the candidate who best aligns to your values in this race.

Progressive endorsements: Assm. Marie Waldron has received endorsements from problematic stakeholders, including the California Correctional Peace Officers Association and the California Real Estate Political Action Committee. Assm. Randy Voepel has received endorsements from problematic stakeholders, including the San Diego Deputy Sheriffs’ Association.

Key initiatives: As a member of the Assembly, Assm. Waldron has successfully helped enact a law that increases medical provider reimbursement rates for Medi-Cal providers who use medication-assisted treatment for opioid addiction.

Assm. Voepel has successfully voted to expand grant programs to reduce college debt as a member of the Assembly.

Governance and community leadership experience: Assm. Waldron has served in Assembly District 75 since 2012, when she was elected with 63% of the vote. In 2020, she won her reelection against a challenger by 9 points. Assm. Waldron scores a lifetime score of 3 out of 100 on Courage Score, our annual analysis of legislators’ progressive voting records. She has opposed nearly every progressive bill that made it to a vote, but has supported rehabilitation in prisons. Prior to her election to the assembly, Assm. Waldron was an Escondido City Council member. She has been a longtime supporter of ending government regulations of businesses.

Assm. Voepel has served in Assembly District 71 since 2016, when he was elected with 66% of the vote. In 2020, he won his reelection against a challenger by 19 points. Assm. Voepel scores a lifetime score of 3 out of 100 on Courage Score, our annual analysis of legislators’ progressive voting records. He has opposed nearly every progressive bill that made it to a vote. Prior to his election to the Assembly, Assm. Voepel was a Santee City Council member and later the mayor. He has been a longtime supporter of law enforcement.

The Race

Primary election results: The June 2022 results included Marie Waldron (R), 64%; and Randy Voepel (R), 37%. Waldron and Voepel will compete in a run-off in the November 8 general election. The Republican incumbents were redistricted into the same district in 2021.

Candidate fundraising and pledges: Assm. Waldron’s campaign has raised $510,518 and is funded by corporate PACs, real estate money, police money, and fossil fuel money.

Candidate fundraising and pledges: Assm. Voepel’s campaign has raised $67,786 and is funded by corporate PACs, real estate money, police money, and fossil fuel money.

The District

Counties in district: California’s 75th Assembly District includes parts of San Diego County.

Voter registration: 29% Democrat, 41% Republican, and 22% No Party Preference. Republicans have held this district since at least 2012. After the 2021 redistricting process, AD-75 is 2% less Republican than it was during the 2020 general election cycle.

District demographics: 17% Latino, 7% Asian, and 3% Black.

Recent election results: AD-75 voted for Trump for president in 2020 by 14 points and Cox for governor in 2018 by 22 points.

The Position

State assemblymembers represent and advocate for the needs of their district constituents at the California State Capitol. They are responsible for creating, debating, and voting on legislation that addresses issues within their district.

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 or Assembly. This term, Democrats currently hold a three-quarters supermajority of 60 seats in the California State Assembly, while Republicans hold 19 seats and one seat is held by an Independent.

Member of the State Assembly - No Recommendation - 75th

Based on our analysis, the two Republican incumbents have distinct visions for the district. We recommend that you choose the candidate who best aligns to your values in this race.

Progressive endorsements: Assm. Marie Waldron has received endorsements from problematic stakeholders, including the California Correctional Peace Officers Association and the California Real Estate Political Action Committee. Assm. Randy Voepel has received endorsements from problematic stakeholders, including the San Diego Deputy Sheriffs’ Association.

Key initiatives: As a member of the Assembly, Assm. Waldron has successfully helped enact a law that increases medical provider reimbursement rates for Medi-Cal providers who use medication-assisted treatment for opioid addiction.

Assm. Voepel has successfully voted to expand grant programs to reduce college debt as a member of the Assembly.

Governance and community leadership experience: Assm. Waldron has served in Assembly District 75 since 2012, when she was elected with 63% of the vote. In 2020, she won her reelection against a challenger by 9 points. Assm. Waldron scores a lifetime score of 3 out of 100 on Courage Score, our annual analysis of legislators’ progressive voting records. She has opposed nearly every progressive bill that made it to a vote, but has supported rehabilitation in prisons. Prior to her election to the assembly, Assm. Waldron was an Escondido City Council member. She has been a longtime supporter of ending government regulations of businesses.

Assm. Voepel has served in Assembly District 71 since 2016, when he was elected with 66% of the vote. In 2020, he won his reelection against a challenger by 19 points. Assm. Voepel scores a lifetime score of 3 out of 100 on Courage Score, our annual analysis of legislators’ progressive voting records. He has opposed nearly every progressive bill that made it to a vote. Prior to his election to the Assembly, Assm. Voepel was a Santee City Council member and later the mayor. He has been a longtime supporter of law enforcement.

The Race

Primary election results: The June 2022 results included Marie Waldron (R), 64%; and Randy Voepel (R), 37%. Waldron and Voepel will compete in a run-off in the November 8 general election. The Republican incumbents were redistricted into the same district in 2021.

Candidate fundraising and pledges: Assm. Waldron’s campaign has raised $510,518 and is funded by corporate PACs, real estate money, police money, and fossil fuel money.

Candidate fundraising and pledges: Assm. Voepel’s campaign has raised $67,786 and is funded by corporate PACs, real estate money, police money, and fossil fuel money.

The District

Counties in district: California’s 75th Assembly District includes parts of San Diego County.

Voter registration: 29% Democrat, 41% Republican, and 22% No Party Preference. Republicans have held this district since at least 2012. After the 2021 redistricting process, AD-75 is 2% less Republican than it was during the 2020 general election cycle.

District demographics: 17% Latino, 7% Asian, and 3% Black.

Recent election results: AD-75 voted for Trump for president in 2020 by 14 points and Cox for governor in 2018 by 22 points.

The Position

State assemblymembers represent and advocate for the needs of their district constituents at the California State Capitol. They are responsible for creating, debating, and voting on legislation that addresses issues within their district.

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 or Assembly. This term, Democrats currently hold a three-quarters supermajority of 60 seats in the California State Assembly, while Republicans hold 19 seats and one seat is held by an Independent.

  • Brian Maienschein

    Reelect Assemblymember Maienschein to keep AD-76 on the right track for progress.

    Assm. Maienschein’s track record and policy positions demonstrate that he should continue to be held accountable for his votes by the constituents of AD-76 and should govern effectively in the best interest of this diverse district.

    Progressive endorsements: Assm. Maienschein has the endorsement of a few progressive groups, including Planned Parenthood and California Teachers Association. He has also received endorsements from problematic stakeholders, including the California Police Chiefs Association.

    Top issues: Health care and crime prevention

    Priority bills: This year, Assm. Maienschein’s priorities for AD-76 have included 39 bills about housing, crime, and health care. Of these, 22 have been successfully chaptered into law. He has sponsored and passed legislation to add child endangerment and elder abuse to the list of crimes that prompt a ten-year ban on possessing firearms. He scores a Lifetime CS of 30 out of 100 on Courage Score, our annual analysis of legislators’ progressive voting records. Based on our Courage Score analysis, Assm. Maienschein has supported few progressive bills that made it to a vote. Assm. Maienschein has not supported many criminal-justice reforms, consumer and patient protections, single-use plastic bans, the setting of environmental goals, or tenant protections.

    Committee leadership/membership: Assm. Maienschein currently serves on three standing committees and six select committees, including the Health Committee and the Judiciary Committee.

    Governance and community leadership experience: Assm. Maienschein has served in this assembly seat since 2012, when he was elected, as a Republican, with over 60% of the vote. In 2019, shortly after he narrowly won reelection by 600 votes in 2018 over a Democrat, he left the Republican Party and joined the Democratic Party. He won his reelection as a Democrat against a Republican challenger by 10 points in 2020.

    Prior to his election to the Assembly, Assm. Maienschein was San Diego’s homelessness commissioner. Assm. Maienschein has been a longtime supporter of mental-health and animal rights.

    Other background: Assm. Maienschein, a former city councilmember, is from San Diego. He teaches election law at the San Diego University School of Law.
     

    The Race

    Primary election results: The June 2022 results included Maienschein (D), 49.9%; Kristie Bruce-Lane (R), 28.1%; and June Yang Cutter (R), 22%. Maienschein and Bruce-Lane will compete in a run-off in the November 8 general election.

    Candidate fundraising and pledges: Assm. Maienschein’s campaign has raised $783,954.70.

    Opposing candidate: Republican Kristie Bruce-Lane

    Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Bruce-Lane’s campaign has raised $519,649 and is funded by primarily individual donors.
     

    The District

    Counties in district: California’s 76th Assembly District includes parts of San Diego County.

    Voter registration: 37.2% Democrat, 30.8% Republican, and 25.6% No Party Preference. Democrats have held this district since 2019, when Maienschein switched from the Republican to the Democratic Party. Since the 2021 redistricting process, AD-76 is 3% more Republican than it was during the 2020 general election cycle.

    District demographics: 22% Latino, 15.4% Asian, and 2.8% Black.

    Recent election results: AD-76 voted for Biden for president in 2020 by 23.20 points and Newsom for governor in 2018 by 1.7 points.
     

    The Position

    State assemblymembers represent and advocate for the needs of their district constituents at the California State Capitol. They are responsible for creating, debating, and voting on legislation that addresses issues within their district.

    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 or Assembly. This term, Democrats currently hold a three-quarters supermajority of 60 seats in the California State Assembly, while Republicans hold 19 seats and one seat is held by an Independent.

    Brian Maienschein

    Reelect Assemblymember Maienschein to keep AD-76 on the right track for progress.

    Assm. Maienschein’s track record and policy positions demonstrate that he should continue to be held accountable for his votes by the constituents of AD-76 and should govern effectively in the best interest of this diverse district.

    Progressive endorsements: Assm. Maienschein has the endorsement of a few progressive groups, including Planned Parenthood and California Teachers Association. He has also received endorsements from problematic stakeholders, including the California Police Chiefs Association.

    Top issues: Health care and crime prevention

    Priority bills: This year, Assm. Maienschein’s priorities for AD-76 have included 39 bills about housing, crime, and health care. Of these, 22 have been successfully chaptered into law. He has sponsored and passed legislation to add child endangerment and elder abuse to the list of crimes that prompt a ten-year ban on possessing firearms. He scores a Lifetime CS of 30 out of 100 on Courage Score, our annual analysis of legislators’ progressive voting records. Based on our Courage Score analysis, Assm. Maienschein has supported few progressive bills that made it to a vote. Assm. Maienschein has not supported many criminal-justice reforms, consumer and patient protections, single-use plastic bans, the setting of environmental goals, or tenant protections.

    Committee leadership/membership: Assm. Maienschein currently serves on three standing committees and six select committees, including the Health Committee and the Judiciary Committee.

    Governance and community leadership experience: Assm. Maienschein has served in this assembly seat since 2012, when he was elected, as a Republican, with over 60% of the vote. In 2019, shortly after he narrowly won reelection by 600 votes in 2018 over a Democrat, he left the Republican Party and joined the Democratic Party. He won his reelection as a Democrat against a Republican challenger by 10 points in 2020.

    Prior to his election to the Assembly, Assm. Maienschein was San Diego’s homelessness commissioner. Assm. Maienschein has been a longtime supporter of mental-health and animal rights.

    Other background: Assm. Maienschein, a former city councilmember, is from San Diego. He teaches election law at the San Diego University School of Law.
     

    The Race

    Primary election results: The June 2022 results included Maienschein (D), 49.9%; Kristie Bruce-Lane (R), 28.1%; and June Yang Cutter (R), 22%. Maienschein and Bruce-Lane will compete in a run-off in the November 8 general election.

    Candidate fundraising and pledges: Assm. Maienschein’s campaign has raised $783,954.70.

    Opposing candidate: Republican Kristie Bruce-Lane

    Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Bruce-Lane’s campaign has raised $519,649 and is funded by primarily individual donors.
     

    The District

    Counties in district: California’s 76th Assembly District includes parts of San Diego County.

    Voter registration: 37.2% Democrat, 30.8% Republican, and 25.6% No Party Preference. Democrats have held this district since 2019, when Maienschein switched from the Republican to the Democratic Party. Since the 2021 redistricting process, AD-76 is 3% more Republican than it was during the 2020 general election cycle.

    District demographics: 22% Latino, 15.4% Asian, and 2.8% Black.

    Recent election results: AD-76 voted for Biden for president in 2020 by 23.20 points and Newsom for governor in 2018 by 1.7 points.
     

    The Position

    State assemblymembers represent and advocate for the needs of their district constituents at the California State Capitol. They are responsible for creating, debating, and voting on legislation that addresses issues within their district.

    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 or Assembly. This term, Democrats currently hold a three-quarters supermajority of 60 seats in the California State Assembly, while Republicans hold 19 seats and one seat is held by an Independent.

    Brian Maienschein

    Reelect Assemblymember Maienschein to keep AD-76 on the right track for progress.

    Assm. Maienschein’s track record and policy positions demonstrate that he should continue to be held accountable for his votes by the constituents of AD-76 and should govern effectively in the best interest of this diverse district.

    Progressive endorsements: Assm. Maienschein has the endorsement of a few progressive groups, including Planned Parenthood and California Teachers Association. He has also received endorsements from problematic stakeholders, including the California Police Chiefs Association.

    Top issues: Health care and crime prevention

    Priority bills: This year, Assm. Maienschein’s priorities for AD-76 have included 39 bills about housing, crime, and health care. Of these, 22 have been successfully chaptered into law. He has sponsored and passed legislation to add child endangerment and elder abuse to the list of crimes that prompt a ten-year ban on possessing firearms. He scores a Lifetime CS of 30 out of 100 on Courage Score, our annual analysis of legislators’ progressive voting records. Based on our Courage Score analysis, Assm. Maienschein has supported few progressive bills that made it to a vote. Assm. Maienschein has not supported many criminal-justice reforms, consumer and patient protections, single-use plastic bans, the setting of environmental goals, or tenant protections.

    Committee leadership/membership: Assm. Maienschein currently serves on three standing committees and six select committees, including the Health Committee and the Judiciary Committee.

    Governance and community leadership experience: Assm. Maienschein has served in this assembly seat since 2012, when he was elected, as a Republican, with over 60% of the vote. In 2019, shortly after he narrowly won reelection by 600 votes in 2018 over a Democrat, he left the Republican Party and joined the Democratic Party. He won his reelection as a Democrat against a Republican challenger by 10 points in 2020.

    Prior to his election to the Assembly, Assm. Maienschein was San Diego’s homelessness commissioner. Assm. Maienschein has been a longtime supporter of mental-health and animal rights.

    Other background: Assm. Maienschein, a former city councilmember, is from San Diego. He teaches election law at the San Diego University School of Law.
     

    The Race

    Primary election results: The June 2022 results included Maienschein (D), 49.9%; Kristie Bruce-Lane (R), 28.1%; and June Yang Cutter (R), 22%. Maienschein and Bruce-Lane will compete in a run-off in the November 8 general election.

    Candidate fundraising and pledges: Assm. Maienschein’s campaign has raised $783,954.70.

    Opposing candidate: Republican Kristie Bruce-Lane

    Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Bruce-Lane’s campaign has raised $519,649 and is funded by primarily individual donors.
     

    The District

    Counties in district: California’s 76th Assembly District includes parts of San Diego County.

    Voter registration: 37.2% Democrat, 30.8% Republican, and 25.6% No Party Preference. Democrats have held this district since 2019, when Maienschein switched from the Republican to the Democratic Party. Since the 2021 redistricting process, AD-76 is 3% more Republican than it was during the 2020 general election cycle.

    District demographics: 22% Latino, 15.4% Asian, and 2.8% Black.

    Recent election results: AD-76 voted for Biden for president in 2020 by 23.20 points and Newsom for governor in 2018 by 1.7 points.
     

    The Position

    State assemblymembers represent and advocate for the needs of their district constituents at the California State Capitol. They are responsible for creating, debating, and voting on legislation that addresses issues within their district.

    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 or Assembly. This term, Democrats currently hold a three-quarters supermajority of 60 seats in the California State Assembly, while Republicans hold 19 seats and one seat is held by an Independent.

  • Tasha Boerner-Horvath

    Reelect Assemblymember Tasha Boerner-Horvath to keep AD-77 on track for progress. 

    Assm. Tasha Boerner-Horvath’s track record and policy positions demonstrate that she will continue to be a champion for the constituents of AD-77. While she has opposed some significant progressive legislation during her time in the assembly, our analysis shows that she will govern effectively in the best interest of this diverse district if she is subjected to increased community accountability.

    Progressive endorsements: Assm. Boerner-Horvath has the endorsement of a few progressive groups, including California Federation of Teachers and Everytown for Gun Safety. 

    Top issues: Climate and public lands protection, education, public safety and emergency response, economic and job growth, veteran’s services, homelessness and housing, and public transparency.

    Priority bills: This year, Assm. Boerner-Horvath’s priorities for her current district, AD-76, have included 44 bills about climate and coastal protections, transportation, housing, and education. Of these, four have been vetoed, seven have died, and 18 have been chaptered into law. She has sponsored and passed legislation that aims to establish research standards for coastal landslides, to increase the permitting of starter-home construction, and to increase the availability of electric vehicle charging stations.  She scores a Lifetime CS of 53 out of 100 on Courage Score, our annual analysis of legislators’ progressive voting records. Based on our Courage Score analysis, Assm. Boerner-Horvath has supported very few progressive bills that made it to a vote. She has generally opposed criminal-justice reform, including failing to vote on making the California Racial Justice Act retroactive, regulating the use of sentence enhancements, expunging and sealing records of those who have completed their sentence, and protecting individuals who are eligible for prison release from being transferred to immigration detention. She also failed to vote for several COVID-19 protections, including guaranteed bereavement leave, protection from eviction and foreclosure, and protection from layoff. Assm. Boerner-Horvath has also voted against a public banking option, and has received F ratings from many progressive organizations, including California Environmental Voters, Equality California, Planned Parenthood, and California Environmental Justice Alliance.

    Committee leadership/membership: Assm. Boerner-Horvath currently sits on five committees, including serving as chair of the Assembly Arts, Entertainment, Sports, Tourism, and Internet Media Committee. She also serves as chair of the select committee on Sea Level Rise and the California Economy.

    Governance and community leadership experience: Assm. Boerner-Horvath has served in the Assembly since 2018, when she was elected with over 54% of the vote. In 2020, she won her reelection against a Republican challenger by 12 points.

    Prior to her election to the Assembly, Assm. Boerner-Horvath was a member of the Encinitas City Council. She also brought her leadership to her work as a marketing communications and strategic-planning professional with several global companies. She has served in local leadership as a member of a PTA board, and a safe-routes advocate for a local pedestrian and cycling option. 

    Other background: Assm. Boerner-Horvath, a marketing professional, is from Encinitas, where her family has lived for four generations. She also lived in Europe for twelve years.

    The Race

    Primary election results: The June 2022 results included incumbent Assm. Tasha Boerner-Horvath (D), 61%; and Dan Downey (R), 39%. Assm. Tasha Boerner-Horvath and Dan Downey will compete in a run-off in the November 8 general election. 

    Candidate fundraising and pledges: Assm. Boerner-Horvath’s campaign has raised $643,000 and is funded by police, real estate, fossil fuel, and corporate PAC interests. Her problematic donors include Amazon.com, Sempra Energy, California Real Estate PAC, and California Correctional Peace Officers’ Association PAC.

    Opposing candidate: Republican Dan Downey

    Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Downey’s campaign has raised $8,900 and is funded almost entirely by individual donors.
     

    The District

    Counties in district: California’s 77th Assembly District includes parts of San Diego County.

    Voter registration: 42% Democrat, 26% Republican, and 25% No Party Preference. Republicans held this seat until 2020 when incumbent Assm. Brian Maienschein changed his party affiliation from Republican to Democrat. Since the 2021 redistricting process, AD-77 is 8% more Democratic than it was during the 2020 general election cycle.

    District demographics: 12% Latino, 9% Asian, and 3% Black

    Recent election results: AD-77 voted for Joe Biden for president in 2020 by 32 points and Gavin Newsom for governor in 2018 by 21 points.

    The Position

    State assemblymembers represent and advocate for the needs of their district constituents at the California State Capitol. They are responsible for creating, debating, and voting on legislation that addresses issues within their district.

    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 or Assembly. This term, Democrats currently hold a three-quarters supermajority of 60 seats in the California State Assembly, while Republicans hold 19 seats and one seat is held by an Independent.
     

    Tasha Boerner-Horvath

    Reelect Assemblymember Tasha Boerner-Horvath to keep AD-77 on track for progress. 

    Assm. Tasha Boerner-Horvath’s track record and policy positions demonstrate that she will continue to be a champion for the constituents of AD-77. While she has opposed some significant progressive legislation during her time in the assembly, our analysis shows that she will govern effectively in the best interest of this diverse district if she is subjected to increased community accountability.

    Progressive endorsements: Assm. Boerner-Horvath has the endorsement of a few progressive groups, including California Federation of Teachers and Everytown for Gun Safety. 

    Top issues: Climate and public lands protection, education, public safety and emergency response, economic and job growth, veteran’s services, homelessness and housing, and public transparency.

    Priority bills: This year, Assm. Boerner-Horvath’s priorities for her current district, AD-76, have included 44 bills about climate and coastal protections, transportation, housing, and education. Of these, four have been vetoed, seven have died, and 18 have been chaptered into law. She has sponsored and passed legislation that aims to establish research standards for coastal landslides, to increase the permitting of starter-home construction, and to increase the availability of electric vehicle charging stations.  She scores a Lifetime CS of 53 out of 100 on Courage Score, our annual analysis of legislators’ progressive voting records. Based on our Courage Score analysis, Assm. Boerner-Horvath has supported very few progressive bills that made it to a vote. She has generally opposed criminal-justice reform, including failing to vote on making the California Racial Justice Act retroactive, regulating the use of sentence enhancements, expunging and sealing records of those who have completed their sentence, and protecting individuals who are eligible for prison release from being transferred to immigration detention. She also failed to vote for several COVID-19 protections, including guaranteed bereavement leave, protection from eviction and foreclosure, and protection from layoff. Assm. Boerner-Horvath has also voted against a public banking option, and has received F ratings from many progressive organizations, including California Environmental Voters, Equality California, Planned Parenthood, and California Environmental Justice Alliance.

    Committee leadership/membership: Assm. Boerner-Horvath currently sits on five committees, including serving as chair of the Assembly Arts, Entertainment, Sports, Tourism, and Internet Media Committee. She also serves as chair of the select committee on Sea Level Rise and the California Economy.

    Governance and community leadership experience: Assm. Boerner-Horvath has served in the Assembly since 2018, when she was elected with over 54% of the vote. In 2020, she won her reelection against a Republican challenger by 12 points.

    Prior to her election to the Assembly, Assm. Boerner-Horvath was a member of the Encinitas City Council. She also brought her leadership to her work as a marketing communications and strategic-planning professional with several global companies. She has served in local leadership as a member of a PTA board, and a safe-routes advocate for a local pedestrian and cycling option. 

    Other background: Assm. Boerner-Horvath, a marketing professional, is from Encinitas, where her family has lived for four generations. She also lived in Europe for twelve years.

    The Race

    Primary election results: The June 2022 results included incumbent Assm. Tasha Boerner-Horvath (D), 61%; and Dan Downey (R), 39%. Assm. Tasha Boerner-Horvath and Dan Downey will compete in a run-off in the November 8 general election. 

    Candidate fundraising and pledges: Assm. Boerner-Horvath’s campaign has raised $643,000 and is funded by police, real estate, fossil fuel, and corporate PAC interests. Her problematic donors include Amazon.com, Sempra Energy, California Real Estate PAC, and California Correctional Peace Officers’ Association PAC.

    Opposing candidate: Republican Dan Downey

    Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Downey’s campaign has raised $8,900 and is funded almost entirely by individual donors.
     

    The District

    Counties in district: California’s 77th Assembly District includes parts of San Diego County.

    Voter registration: 42% Democrat, 26% Republican, and 25% No Party Preference. Republicans held this seat until 2020 when incumbent Assm. Brian Maienschein changed his party affiliation from Republican to Democrat. Since the 2021 redistricting process, AD-77 is 8% more Democratic than it was during the 2020 general election cycle.

    District demographics: 12% Latino, 9% Asian, and 3% Black

    Recent election results: AD-77 voted for Joe Biden for president in 2020 by 32 points and Gavin Newsom for governor in 2018 by 21 points.

    The Position

    State assemblymembers represent and advocate for the needs of their district constituents at the California State Capitol. They are responsible for creating, debating, and voting on legislation that addresses issues within their district.

    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 or Assembly. This term, Democrats currently hold a three-quarters supermajority of 60 seats in the California State Assembly, while Republicans hold 19 seats and one seat is held by an Independent.
     

    Tasha Boerner-Horvath

    Reelect Assemblymember Tasha Boerner-Horvath to keep AD-77 on track for progress. 

    Assm. Tasha Boerner-Horvath’s track record and policy positions demonstrate that she will continue to be a champion for the constituents of AD-77. While she has opposed some significant progressive legislation during her time in the assembly, our analysis shows that she will govern effectively in the best interest of this diverse district if she is subjected to increased community accountability.

    Progressive endorsements: Assm. Boerner-Horvath has the endorsement of a few progressive groups, including California Federation of Teachers and Everytown for Gun Safety. 

    Top issues: Climate and public lands protection, education, public safety and emergency response, economic and job growth, veteran’s services, homelessness and housing, and public transparency.

    Priority bills: This year, Assm. Boerner-Horvath’s priorities for her current district, AD-76, have included 44 bills about climate and coastal protections, transportation, housing, and education. Of these, four have been vetoed, seven have died, and 18 have been chaptered into law. She has sponsored and passed legislation that aims to establish research standards for coastal landslides, to increase the permitting of starter-home construction, and to increase the availability of electric vehicle charging stations.  She scores a Lifetime CS of 53 out of 100 on Courage Score, our annual analysis of legislators’ progressive voting records. Based on our Courage Score analysis, Assm. Boerner-Horvath has supported very few progressive bills that made it to a vote. She has generally opposed criminal-justice reform, including failing to vote on making the California Racial Justice Act retroactive, regulating the use of sentence enhancements, expunging and sealing records of those who have completed their sentence, and protecting individuals who are eligible for prison release from being transferred to immigration detention. She also failed to vote for several COVID-19 protections, including guaranteed bereavement leave, protection from eviction and foreclosure, and protection from layoff. Assm. Boerner-Horvath has also voted against a public banking option, and has received F ratings from many progressive organizations, including California Environmental Voters, Equality California, Planned Parenthood, and California Environmental Justice Alliance.

    Committee leadership/membership: Assm. Boerner-Horvath currently sits on five committees, including serving as chair of the Assembly Arts, Entertainment, Sports, Tourism, and Internet Media Committee. She also serves as chair of the select committee on Sea Level Rise and the California Economy.

    Governance and community leadership experience: Assm. Boerner-Horvath has served in the Assembly since 2018, when she was elected with over 54% of the vote. In 2020, she won her reelection against a Republican challenger by 12 points.

    Prior to her election to the Assembly, Assm. Boerner-Horvath was a member of the Encinitas City Council. She also brought her leadership to her work as a marketing communications and strategic-planning professional with several global companies. She has served in local leadership as a member of a PTA board, and a safe-routes advocate for a local pedestrian and cycling option. 

    Other background: Assm. Boerner-Horvath, a marketing professional, is from Encinitas, where her family has lived for four generations. She also lived in Europe for twelve years.

    The Race

    Primary election results: The June 2022 results included incumbent Assm. Tasha Boerner-Horvath (D), 61%; and Dan Downey (R), 39%. Assm. Tasha Boerner-Horvath and Dan Downey will compete in a run-off in the November 8 general election. 

    Candidate fundraising and pledges: Assm. Boerner-Horvath’s campaign has raised $643,000 and is funded by police, real estate, fossil fuel, and corporate PAC interests. Her problematic donors include Amazon.com, Sempra Energy, California Real Estate PAC, and California Correctional Peace Officers’ Association PAC.

    Opposing candidate: Republican Dan Downey

    Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Downey’s campaign has raised $8,900 and is funded almost entirely by individual donors.
     

    The District

    Counties in district: California’s 77th Assembly District includes parts of San Diego County.

    Voter registration: 42% Democrat, 26% Republican, and 25% No Party Preference. Republicans held this seat until 2020 when incumbent Assm. Brian Maienschein changed his party affiliation from Republican to Democrat. Since the 2021 redistricting process, AD-77 is 8% more Democratic than it was during the 2020 general election cycle.

    District demographics: 12% Latino, 9% Asian, and 3% Black

    Recent election results: AD-77 voted for Joe Biden for president in 2020 by 32 points and Gavin Newsom for governor in 2018 by 21 points.

    The Position

    State assemblymembers represent and advocate for the needs of their district constituents at the California State Capitol. They are responsible for creating, debating, and voting on legislation that addresses issues within their district.

    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 or Assembly. This term, Democrats currently hold a three-quarters supermajority of 60 seats in the California State Assembly, while Republicans hold 19 seats and one seat is held by an Independent.
     

  • Chris Ward

    Reelect Assemblymember Chris Ward to keep AD-78 on the right track for progress.

    Assm. Chris Ward’s track record and policy positions demonstrate that he will continue to be a progressive voice for the constituents of AD-78 and will govern effectively in the best interest of this diverse district.

    Progressive endorsements: Assm. Ward has the endorsement of many progressive groups in the district, including Planned Parenthood, California Environmental Justice Alliance Action, YIMBY California, and Equality California, as well as labor unions, like SEIU, IBEW, National Union of Healthcare Workers, and several California teachers’ unions.

    Top issues: Increased environmental protections, and a “housing first” approach to the housing crisis.

    Priority bills: This year, Assm. Ward’s priorities for AD-78 have included 33 bills about education, transportation and infrastructure, conservation, and housing, of which 22 have successfully passed the Assembly. He has sponsored and passed legislation to protect coastal lands, improve San Diego transportation, increase access to affordable housing, impose steeper taxes on real estate developers, and expand services offered by educational institutions. He scores a 100 out of 100 on Courage Score, our annual analysis of legislators’ progressive voting records. Based on our Courage Score analysis, Assm. Ward has supported almost all of the progressive bills that made it to a vote.

    Committee leadership/membership: Assm. Ward currently sits on five committees, including the Emergency Management; Housing and Community Development; Labor and Employment; Transportation; and Water, Parks, and Wildlife Committees.

    Governance and community leadership experience: Assm. Ward has served in this assembly seat since 2020, when he was elected with over 55% of the vote against a Democratic challenger.

    Prior to his election to the State Assembly, Assm. Ward served on the San Diego City Council, and also previously worked as chief of staff to Democratic State Senator Marty Block and as an environmental planner. He is an advocate for conservation and environmental protections, and has written several Assembly bills to strengthen public transit, make renewable energy more accessible, and improve California’s response to climate change. As a city councilmember, he helped ban styrofoam and single-use plastics. Ward is also a supporter of “housing first” strategies to address the housing crisis, and chairs the San Diego County Regional Task Force on the Homeless. Assm. Ward is one of only four openly LGBTQIA+ members of the Assembly. While on the city council, he drafted San Diego’s Equal Pay Ordinance, and served on the board of two organizations focused on supporting and advocating for the LGBTQIA+ community: the San Diego LGBT Center and the San Diego Human Dignity Foundation.

    Other background: Assm. Chris Ward is from Germany and moved to San Diego as an adult. He earned his bachelor’s degree from Johns Hopkins, and his master’s in public policy and urban planning at Harvard.
     

    The Race

    Primary election results: The June 2022 results included Chris Ward (D), 68%; and Eric Gonzales (R), 32%. Assm. Ward and Eric Gonzales will compete in a run-off in the November 8 general election.

    Candidate fundraising and pledges: Assm. Ward’s campaign has raised $613,300 and is not funded by police money, although he has accepted donations from the correctional officers professional association. He has also accepted donations from the fossil fuel industry and corporate PACs, including more than $50,000 from the pharmaceutical industry and $20,000 from the insurance industry. He has also received more than $30,000 from the real estate sector.

    Opposing candidate: Republican Eric Gonzales

    Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Gonzales’ campaign has not filed any fundraising receipts for the current election cycle.
     

    The District

    Counties in district: California’s 78th Assembly District includes parts of San Diego County.

    Voter registration: 47% Democrat, 22% Republican, and 24% No Party Preference. Democrats typically hold this district. Since the 2021 redistricting process, AD-78 is 3% less Democratic than it was during the 2020 general election cycle.

    District demographics: 18% Latino, 16% Asian, and 6% Black.

    Recent election results: AD-78 voted for Joe Biden for president in 2020 by 39 points and Gavin Newsom for governor in 2018 by 32 points.
     

    The Position

    State assemblymembers represent and advocate for the needs of their district constituents at the California State Capitol. They are responsible for creating, debating, and voting on legislation that addresses issues within their district.

    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 or Assembly. This term, Democrats currently hold a three-quarters supermajority of 60 seats in the California State Assembly, while Republicans hold 19 seats and one seat is held by an Independent.

    Chris Ward

    Reelect Assemblymember Chris Ward to keep AD-78 on the right track for progress.

    Assm. Chris Ward’s track record and policy positions demonstrate that he will continue to be a progressive voice for the constituents of AD-78 and will govern effectively in the best interest of this diverse district.

    Progressive endorsements: Assm. Ward has the endorsement of many progressive groups in the district, including Planned Parenthood, California Environmental Justice Alliance Action, YIMBY California, and Equality California, as well as labor unions, like SEIU, IBEW, National Union of Healthcare Workers, and several California teachers’ unions.

    Top issues: Increased environmental protections, and a “housing first” approach to the housing crisis.

    Priority bills: This year, Assm. Ward’s priorities for AD-78 have included 33 bills about education, transportation and infrastructure, conservation, and housing, of which 22 have successfully passed the Assembly. He has sponsored and passed legislation to protect coastal lands, improve San Diego transportation, increase access to affordable housing, impose steeper taxes on real estate developers, and expand services offered by educational institutions. He scores a 100 out of 100 on Courage Score, our annual analysis of legislators’ progressive voting records. Based on our Courage Score analysis, Assm. Ward has supported almost all of the progressive bills that made it to a vote.

    Committee leadership/membership: Assm. Ward currently sits on five committees, including the Emergency Management; Housing and Community Development; Labor and Employment; Transportation; and Water, Parks, and Wildlife Committees.

    Governance and community leadership experience: Assm. Ward has served in this assembly seat since 2020, when he was elected with over 55% of the vote against a Democratic challenger.

    Prior to his election to the State Assembly, Assm. Ward served on the San Diego City Council, and also previously worked as chief of staff to Democratic State Senator Marty Block and as an environmental planner. He is an advocate for conservation and environmental protections, and has written several Assembly bills to strengthen public transit, make renewable energy more accessible, and improve California’s response to climate change. As a city councilmember, he helped ban styrofoam and single-use plastics. Ward is also a supporter of “housing first” strategies to address the housing crisis, and chairs the San Diego County Regional Task Force on the Homeless. Assm. Ward is one of only four openly LGBTQIA+ members of the Assembly. While on the city council, he drafted San Diego’s Equal Pay Ordinance, and served on the board of two organizations focused on supporting and advocating for the LGBTQIA+ community: the San Diego LGBT Center and the San Diego Human Dignity Foundation.

    Other background: Assm. Chris Ward is from Germany and moved to San Diego as an adult. He earned his bachelor’s degree from Johns Hopkins, and his master’s in public policy and urban planning at Harvard.
     

    The Race

    Primary election results: The June 2022 results included Chris Ward (D), 68%; and Eric Gonzales (R), 32%. Assm. Ward and Eric Gonzales will compete in a run-off in the November 8 general election.

    Candidate fundraising and pledges: Assm. Ward’s campaign has raised $613,300 and is not funded by police money, although he has accepted donations from the correctional officers professional association. He has also accepted donations from the fossil fuel industry and corporate PACs, including more than $50,000 from the pharmaceutical industry and $20,000 from the insurance industry. He has also received more than $30,000 from the real estate sector.

    Opposing candidate: Republican Eric Gonzales

    Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Gonzales’ campaign has not filed any fundraising receipts for the current election cycle.
     

    The District

    Counties in district: California’s 78th Assembly District includes parts of San Diego County.

    Voter registration: 47% Democrat, 22% Republican, and 24% No Party Preference. Democrats typically hold this district. Since the 2021 redistricting process, AD-78 is 3% less Democratic than it was during the 2020 general election cycle.

    District demographics: 18% Latino, 16% Asian, and 6% Black.

    Recent election results: AD-78 voted for Joe Biden for president in 2020 by 39 points and Gavin Newsom for governor in 2018 by 32 points.
     

    The Position

    State assemblymembers represent and advocate for the needs of their district constituents at the California State Capitol. They are responsible for creating, debating, and voting on legislation that addresses issues within their district.

    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 or Assembly. This term, Democrats currently hold a three-quarters supermajority of 60 seats in the California State Assembly, while Republicans hold 19 seats and one seat is held by an Independent.

    Chris Ward

    Reelect Assemblymember Chris Ward to keep AD-78 on the right track for progress.

    Assm. Chris Ward’s track record and policy positions demonstrate that he will continue to be a progressive voice for the constituents of AD-78 and will govern effectively in the best interest of this diverse district.

    Progressive endorsements: Assm. Ward has the endorsement of many progressive groups in the district, including Planned Parenthood, California Environmental Justice Alliance Action, YIMBY California, and Equality California, as well as labor unions, like SEIU, IBEW, National Union of Healthcare Workers, and several California teachers’ unions.

    Top issues: Increased environmental protections, and a “housing first” approach to the housing crisis.

    Priority bills: This year, Assm. Ward’s priorities for AD-78 have included 33 bills about education, transportation and infrastructure, conservation, and housing, of which 22 have successfully passed the Assembly. He has sponsored and passed legislation to protect coastal lands, improve San Diego transportation, increase access to affordable housing, impose steeper taxes on real estate developers, and expand services offered by educational institutions. He scores a 100 out of 100 on Courage Score, our annual analysis of legislators’ progressive voting records. Based on our Courage Score analysis, Assm. Ward has supported almost all of the progressive bills that made it to a vote.

    Committee leadership/membership: Assm. Ward currently sits on five committees, including the Emergency Management; Housing and Community Development; Labor and Employment; Transportation; and Water, Parks, and Wildlife Committees.

    Governance and community leadership experience: Assm. Ward has served in this assembly seat since 2020, when he was elected with over 55% of the vote against a Democratic challenger.

    Prior to his election to the State Assembly, Assm. Ward served on the San Diego City Council, and also previously worked as chief of staff to Democratic State Senator Marty Block and as an environmental planner. He is an advocate for conservation and environmental protections, and has written several Assembly bills to strengthen public transit, make renewable energy more accessible, and improve California’s response to climate change. As a city councilmember, he helped ban styrofoam and single-use plastics. Ward is also a supporter of “housing first” strategies to address the housing crisis, and chairs the San Diego County Regional Task Force on the Homeless. Assm. Ward is one of only four openly LGBTQIA+ members of the Assembly. While on the city council, he drafted San Diego’s Equal Pay Ordinance, and served on the board of two organizations focused on supporting and advocating for the LGBTQIA+ community: the San Diego LGBT Center and the San Diego Human Dignity Foundation.

    Other background: Assm. Chris Ward is from Germany and moved to San Diego as an adult. He earned his bachelor’s degree from Johns Hopkins, and his master’s in public policy and urban planning at Harvard.
     

    The Race

    Primary election results: The June 2022 results included Chris Ward (D), 68%; and Eric Gonzales (R), 32%. Assm. Ward and Eric Gonzales will compete in a run-off in the November 8 general election.

    Candidate fundraising and pledges: Assm. Ward’s campaign has raised $613,300 and is not funded by police money, although he has accepted donations from the correctional officers professional association. He has also accepted donations from the fossil fuel industry and corporate PACs, including more than $50,000 from the pharmaceutical industry and $20,000 from the insurance industry. He has also received more than $30,000 from the real estate sector.

    Opposing candidate: Republican Eric Gonzales

    Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Gonzales’ campaign has not filed any fundraising receipts for the current election cycle.
     

    The District

    Counties in district: California’s 78th Assembly District includes parts of San Diego County.

    Voter registration: 47% Democrat, 22% Republican, and 24% No Party Preference. Democrats typically hold this district. Since the 2021 redistricting process, AD-78 is 3% less Democratic than it was during the 2020 general election cycle.

    District demographics: 18% Latino, 16% Asian, and 6% Black.

    Recent election results: AD-78 voted for Joe Biden for president in 2020 by 39 points and Gavin Newsom for governor in 2018 by 32 points.
     

    The Position

    State assemblymembers represent and advocate for the needs of their district constituents at the California State Capitol. They are responsible for creating, debating, and voting on legislation that addresses issues within their district.

    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 or Assembly. This term, Democrats currently hold a three-quarters supermajority of 60 seats in the California State Assembly, while Republicans hold 19 seats and one seat is held by an Independent.

  • Akilah Weber

    Reelect Assemblymember Akilah Weber to keep AD-79 on the right track for progress.

    Assm. Akilah Weber’s track record and policy positions demonstrate that she will continue to be a progressive voice for the constituents of AD-79 and will govern effectively in the best interest of this diverse district.

    Progressive endorsements: Assm. Weber has the endorsement of many progressive groups in the district, including Equality California, NARAL Pro-Choice California, Planned Parenthood; labor unions, like United Domestic Workers, National Nurses United, IBEW, and SEIU; and publications, such as the San Diego Union Tribune. She is also endorsed by a broad set of federal, state, and local elected officials, including San Diego Todd Gloria, State Treasurer Fiona Ma, and State Senate President pro Tempore Toni Atkins.

    Top issues: Public health, education, reproductive justice, economic recovery, environment, and justice and civil rights.

    Priority bills: This year, Assm. Weber’s priorities for AD-79 have included 22 bills about healthcare, MediCal, education, gender-based violence, justice reform, and reproductive rights. Of these, 13 have successfully been passed by the Assembly. She has sponsored and passed legislation that increase incentives for doctors providing care to low-income individuals; improve health care, including mental health, for such vulnerable populations as survivors of domestic abuse and elder abuse, and incarcerated persons; expand coverage of abortion, reproductive health, and home care; increase educational-data reporting; and increase COVID-19 vaccinations and future pandemic preparedness. She scores a 96 out of 100 on Courage Score, our annual analysis of legislators’ progressive voting records. Based on our Courage Score analysis, Assm. Weber has supported the most progressive bills that made it to a vote.

    Committee leadership/membership: Assm. Weber currently sits on five committees, including the Committees on Appropriations, Business and Professions, Communications and Conveyance, Higher Education, and Legislative Ethics.

    Governance and community leadership experience: Assm. Weber has served in this assembly seat since 2021, winning her special election with over 60% of the vote after the former Assembly member in the seat, Weber’s mother, Dr. Shirley Weber, was appointed California Secretary of State.

    Prior to her election to the State Assembly, Assm. Weber worked as an ob/gyn, a medical director, a professor of medicine, and a city councilmember in La Mesa. Weber is a longtime supporter of comprehensive reproductive healthcare: Weber founded the Pediatric & Adolescent Gynecology Division at Rady’s Children Hospital to ensure that young people have access to reproductive health, and now acts as its director. Weber is also a proponent of criminal legal reform. While serving on the La Mesa City Council, she helped establish a Community Police Oversight Board, and has introduced Assembly bills that improve treatment for arrested and incarcerated individuals with mental-health needs.

    Other background: Assm. Akilah Weber has lived in San Diego her entire life. She earned her bachelor’s degree from Xavier University of Louisiana and her MD from the University of Rochester.
     

    The Race

    Primary election results: The June 2022 results included Akilah Weber (D), 64%; Corbin Sabol (R), 25%; and John Moore (R), 11%. Assm. Weber and Corbin Sabol will compete in a run-off in the November 8 general election.

    Candidate fundraising and pledges: Assm. Weber’s campaign has raised $1,055,050 and is not funded by police money, although she has accepted donations from the correctional officers professional association. She has also accepted donations from corporate PACs, including more than $50,000 from the private insurance industry and over $30,000 from the pharmaceutical industry. She has received over $15,000 from the fossil fuel industry and more than $10,000 from the real estate lobby.

    Opposing candidate: Republican Corbin Sabol

    Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Sabol’s campaign has not committed to refusing donations from the police, and has raised less than $5,000 for the current election cycle.
     

    The District

    Counties in district: California’s 79th Assembly District includes parts of San Diego County.

    Voter registration: 47% Democrat, 21% Republican, and 25% No Party Preference. Democrats typically hold this district. Since the 2021 redistricting process, AD-79 is 2% more Democratic than it was during the 2020 general election cycle.

    District demographics: 33% Latino, 14% Asian, and 15% Black.

    Recent election results: AD-79 voted for Joe Biden for president in 2020 by 33 points and Gavin Newsom for governor in 2018 by 30 points.
     

    The Position

    State assemblymembers represent and advocate for the needs of their district constituents at the California State Capitol. They are responsible for creating, debating, and voting on legislation that addresses issues within their district.

    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 or Assembly. This term, Democrats currently hold a three-quarters supermajority of 60 seats in the California State Assembly, while Republicans hold 19 seats and one seat is held by an Independent.

    Akilah Weber

    Reelect Assemblymember Akilah Weber to keep AD-79 on the right track for progress.

    Assm. Akilah Weber’s track record and policy positions demonstrate that she will continue to be a progressive voice for the constituents of AD-79 and will govern effectively in the best interest of this diverse district.

    Progressive endorsements: Assm. Weber has the endorsement of many progressive groups in the district, including Equality California, NARAL Pro-Choice California, Planned Parenthood; labor unions, like United Domestic Workers, National Nurses United, IBEW, and SEIU; and publications, such as the San Diego Union Tribune. She is also endorsed by a broad set of federal, state, and local elected officials, including San Diego Todd Gloria, State Treasurer Fiona Ma, and State Senate President pro Tempore Toni Atkins.

    Top issues: Public health, education, reproductive justice, economic recovery, environment, and justice and civil rights.

    Priority bills: This year, Assm. Weber’s priorities for AD-79 have included 22 bills about healthcare, MediCal, education, gender-based violence, justice reform, and reproductive rights. Of these, 13 have successfully been passed by the Assembly. She has sponsored and passed legislation that increase incentives for doctors providing care to low-income individuals; improve health care, including mental health, for such vulnerable populations as survivors of domestic abuse and elder abuse, and incarcerated persons; expand coverage of abortion, reproductive health, and home care; increase educational-data reporting; and increase COVID-19 vaccinations and future pandemic preparedness. She scores a 96 out of 100 on Courage Score, our annual analysis of legislators’ progressive voting records. Based on our Courage Score analysis, Assm. Weber has supported the most progressive bills that made it to a vote.

    Committee leadership/membership: Assm. Weber currently sits on five committees, including the Committees on Appropriations, Business and Professions, Communications and Conveyance, Higher Education, and Legislative Ethics.

    Governance and community leadership experience: Assm. Weber has served in this assembly seat since 2021, winning her special election with over 60% of the vote after the former Assembly member in the seat, Weber’s mother, Dr. Shirley Weber, was appointed California Secretary of State.

    Prior to her election to the State Assembly, Assm. Weber worked as an ob/gyn, a medical director, a professor of medicine, and a city councilmember in La Mesa. Weber is a longtime supporter of comprehensive reproductive healthcare: Weber founded the Pediatric & Adolescent Gynecology Division at Rady’s Children Hospital to ensure that young people have access to reproductive health, and now acts as its director. Weber is also a proponent of criminal legal reform. While serving on the La Mesa City Council, she helped establish a Community Police Oversight Board, and has introduced Assembly bills that improve treatment for arrested and incarcerated individuals with mental-health needs.

    Other background: Assm. Akilah Weber has lived in San Diego her entire life. She earned her bachelor’s degree from Xavier University of Louisiana and her MD from the University of Rochester.
     

    The Race

    Primary election results: The June 2022 results included Akilah Weber (D), 64%; Corbin Sabol (R), 25%; and John Moore (R), 11%. Assm. Weber and Corbin Sabol will compete in a run-off in the November 8 general election.

    Candidate fundraising and pledges: Assm. Weber’s campaign has raised $1,055,050 and is not funded by police money, although she has accepted donations from the correctional officers professional association. She has also accepted donations from corporate PACs, including more than $50,000 from the private insurance industry and over $30,000 from the pharmaceutical industry. She has received over $15,000 from the fossil fuel industry and more than $10,000 from the real estate lobby.

    Opposing candidate: Republican Corbin Sabol

    Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Sabol’s campaign has not committed to refusing donations from the police, and has raised less than $5,000 for the current election cycle.
     

    The District

    Counties in district: California’s 79th Assembly District includes parts of San Diego County.

    Voter registration: 47% Democrat, 21% Republican, and 25% No Party Preference. Democrats typically hold this district. Since the 2021 redistricting process, AD-79 is 2% more Democratic than it was during the 2020 general election cycle.

    District demographics: 33% Latino, 14% Asian, and 15% Black.

    Recent election results: AD-79 voted for Joe Biden for president in 2020 by 33 points and Gavin Newsom for governor in 2018 by 30 points.
     

    The Position

    State assemblymembers represent and advocate for the needs of their district constituents at the California State Capitol. They are responsible for creating, debating, and voting on legislation that addresses issues within their district.

    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 or Assembly. This term, Democrats currently hold a three-quarters supermajority of 60 seats in the California State Assembly, while Republicans hold 19 seats and one seat is held by an Independent.

    Akilah Weber

    Reelect Assemblymember Akilah Weber to keep AD-79 on the right track for progress.

    Assm. Akilah Weber’s track record and policy positions demonstrate that she will continue to be a progressive voice for the constituents of AD-79 and will govern effectively in the best interest of this diverse district.

    Progressive endorsements: Assm. Weber has the endorsement of many progressive groups in the district, including Equality California, NARAL Pro-Choice California, Planned Parenthood; labor unions, like United Domestic Workers, National Nurses United, IBEW, and SEIU; and publications, such as the San Diego Union Tribune. She is also endorsed by a broad set of federal, state, and local elected officials, including San Diego Todd Gloria, State Treasurer Fiona Ma, and State Senate President pro Tempore Toni Atkins.

    Top issues: Public health, education, reproductive justice, economic recovery, environment, and justice and civil rights.

    Priority bills: This year, Assm. Weber’s priorities for AD-79 have included 22 bills about healthcare, MediCal, education, gender-based violence, justice reform, and reproductive rights. Of these, 13 have successfully been passed by the Assembly. She has sponsored and passed legislation that increase incentives for doctors providing care to low-income individuals; improve health care, including mental health, for such vulnerable populations as survivors of domestic abuse and elder abuse, and incarcerated persons; expand coverage of abortion, reproductive health, and home care; increase educational-data reporting; and increase COVID-19 vaccinations and future pandemic preparedness. She scores a 96 out of 100 on Courage Score, our annual analysis of legislators’ progressive voting records. Based on our Courage Score analysis, Assm. Weber has supported the most progressive bills that made it to a vote.

    Committee leadership/membership: Assm. Weber currently sits on five committees, including the Committees on Appropriations, Business and Professions, Communications and Conveyance, Higher Education, and Legislative Ethics.

    Governance and community leadership experience: Assm. Weber has served in this assembly seat since 2021, winning her special election with over 60% of the vote after the former Assembly member in the seat, Weber’s mother, Dr. Shirley Weber, was appointed California Secretary of State.

    Prior to her election to the State Assembly, Assm. Weber worked as an ob/gyn, a medical director, a professor of medicine, and a city councilmember in La Mesa. Weber is a longtime supporter of comprehensive reproductive healthcare: Weber founded the Pediatric & Adolescent Gynecology Division at Rady’s Children Hospital to ensure that young people have access to reproductive health, and now acts as its director. Weber is also a proponent of criminal legal reform. While serving on the La Mesa City Council, she helped establish a Community Police Oversight Board, and has introduced Assembly bills that improve treatment for arrested and incarcerated individuals with mental-health needs.

    Other background: Assm. Akilah Weber has lived in San Diego her entire life. She earned her bachelor’s degree from Xavier University of Louisiana and her MD from the University of Rochester.
     

    The Race

    Primary election results: The June 2022 results included Akilah Weber (D), 64%; Corbin Sabol (R), 25%; and John Moore (R), 11%. Assm. Weber and Corbin Sabol will compete in a run-off in the November 8 general election.

    Candidate fundraising and pledges: Assm. Weber’s campaign has raised $1,055,050 and is not funded by police money, although she has accepted donations from the correctional officers professional association. She has also accepted donations from corporate PACs, including more than $50,000 from the private insurance industry and over $30,000 from the pharmaceutical industry. She has received over $15,000 from the fossil fuel industry and more than $10,000 from the real estate lobby.

    Opposing candidate: Republican Corbin Sabol

    Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Sabol’s campaign has not committed to refusing donations from the police, and has raised less than $5,000 for the current election cycle.
     

    The District

    Counties in district: California’s 79th Assembly District includes parts of San Diego County.

    Voter registration: 47% Democrat, 21% Republican, and 25% No Party Preference. Democrats typically hold this district. Since the 2021 redistricting process, AD-79 is 2% more Democratic than it was during the 2020 general election cycle.

    District demographics: 33% Latino, 14% Asian, and 15% Black.

    Recent election results: AD-79 voted for Joe Biden for president in 2020 by 33 points and Gavin Newsom for governor in 2018 by 30 points.
     

    The Position

    State assemblymembers represent and advocate for the needs of their district constituents at the California State Capitol. They are responsible for creating, debating, and voting on legislation that addresses issues within their district.

    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 or Assembly. This term, Democrats currently hold a three-quarters supermajority of 60 seats in the California State Assembly, while Republicans hold 19 seats and one seat is held by an Independent.

No Recommendation

Member of the State Assembly - No Recommendation - 80th

Based on our analysis, the two candidates for this position have distinct visions for the district. We recommend that you choose the candidate who best aligns to your values in this race.

Endorsements: Assemblymember David Alvarez does not have the endorsement of any progressive groups. He has received the endorsement of some elected officials, including Assm. Akilah Weber and State Sen. Toni Atkins. He has also received problematic endorsements from Chula Vista Police Officers Association and Deputy Sheriffs Association of San Diego County. Georgette Gomez has received the endorsement of some progressive groups, including California Labor Federation, Sierra Club, SEIU California, and California Environmental Voters. She has also received the endorsement of many elected leaders, including former Assm. Lorena Gonzalez, San Diego Mayor Todd Gloria, State Senator Scott Wiener, Assm. Ash Kalra, and Assm. Laura Friedman. Both candidates have been endorsed by State Sen. María Elena Durazo.

Key initiatives: Assm. Alvarez was elected to the Assembly in a June 2022 special election, and has not yet sponsored any bills. He currently serves on five standing committees, including Rules, Business and Professions, and Military and Veterans Affairs. He is the chair of the Joint Legislative Audit Subcommittee on the Selection of the state auditor. Through his previous work in local leadership in San Diego, he was able to advocate for funding local arts programming, expanding the public parks system, and preserving a local high school in its original location. Alvarez implements a collaborative approach in his work, which has allowed him to successfully partner with stakeholders in Washington, DC, and Mexico while supporting local projects. He has also used this technique to push local leaders to the left on decisions he disagrees with. In 2016, he was the lone voice of dissent on the San Diego City Council against a twenty-year lease-to-own deal for a downtown building, which Alvarez believed would cost taxpayers millions of dollars more than an outright purchase of the structure. It was later revealed that his concerns were correct, and that the mayor had intentionally pushed the deal through.

As a member of the San Diego City Council, Gomez worked on local initiatives to increase the construction of affordable housing units, and took action against the police union to reduce misconduct and the use of excessive force. During the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic, she supported efforts to establish an eviction moratorium, prevent utility shut-offs, and provide small-business relief. She was the first LGBTQ Latina to serve as President of the city council.

Governance and community leadership experience: Assm. Alvarez has served in this seat since 2022, when he won a special election with over 54% of the vote. Gomez most recently won a 2016 race for San Diego City Council’s 9th District with over 52% of the vote. In 2020, she lost a race for the 53rd congressional district seat to Rep. Sara Jacobs by 19 points.

Notably, these two candidates appeared on the June 2022 ballot twice—in both a special election race and a primary race. While Assm. Alvarez won the largest vote share in the special election to finish the current term through January 2023, Gomez earned 36% of the primary vote, beating Assm. Alvarez and two Republican challengers in the race.

Assm. Alvarez has been involved in local leadership for much of his career, including his eight-year service with the city council, and with San Diego County Regional Airport Authority, San Diego Association of Governments, and Metropolitan Transit System.

Gomez has worked with the Environmental Health Coalition and as chair of the Metropolitan Transit System. She also provided leadership to the Toxic Free Neighborhood Campaign to eliminate lead and pollution from residential areas. Prior to entering public service, she was a counselor for survivors of domestic violence.

Other background: Assm. Alvarez is from the Barrio Logan area of San Diego. Gomez is a first-generation Mexican American and was raised in the Barrio Logan area of San Diego.

The Race

Special election results: Assemblymember Lorena Gonzalez resigned from the AD-80 seat in January, leaving it open through the conclusion of the current term in November. The June 2022 special election results included David Alvarez (D), 54%; and Georgette Gomez (D), 46%. As the winner of this election, Alvarez is now serving the remainder of the term through November 2022.

Primary election results: The June 2022 primary results included Georgette Gomez (D), 36%; David Alvarez (D), 31%; John Garcia (R), 20%; and Lincoln Pickard (R), 12%. Georgette Gomez and David Alvarez will compete in a run-off in the November 8 general election.

Candidate: Democrat Assm. David Alvarez

Candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Assm. Alvarez’s campaign has raised $424,000 and is funded by fossil fuel, police, real estate, and corporate PAC interests. His problematic donors include Phillips 66, the Home Depot Inc., Peace Officers Research Association of California PAC, Chevron, and Berry Petroleum Company.

Candidate: Democrat Georgette Gomez

Candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Gomez’s campaign has raised $268,000 and is not funded by police, real estate, fossil fuel, or corporate PAC donors.

The District

Counties in district: California’s 80th Assembly District includes parts of San Diego County.

Voter registration: 47% Democrat, 20% Republican, and 27% No Party Preference. Democrats typically hold this seat. Since the 2021 redistricting process, AD-80 is 6% less Democratic than it was during the 2020 general election cycle.

District demographics: 56% Latino, 15% Asian, and 6% Black. This district is considered to be one of the strong Latino seats in the California Assembly delegation.

Recent election results: AD-80 voted for Joe Biden for president in 2020 by 33 points and Gavin Newsom for governor in 2018 by 30 points.

The Position

State assemblymembers represent and advocate for the needs of their district constituents at the California State Capitol. They are responsible for creating, debating, and voting on legislation that addresses issues within their district.

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 or Assembly. This term, Democrats currently hold a three-quarters supermajority of 60 seats in the California State Assembly, while Republicans hold 19 seats and one seat is held by an Independent.

Member of the State Assembly - No Recommendation - 80th

Based on our analysis, the two candidates for this position have distinct visions for the district. We recommend that you choose the candidate who best aligns to your values in this race.

Endorsements: Assemblymember David Alvarez does not have the endorsement of any progressive groups. He has received the endorsement of some elected officials, including Assm. Akilah Weber and State Sen. Toni Atkins. He has also received problematic endorsements from Chula Vista Police Officers Association and Deputy Sheriffs Association of San Diego County. Georgette Gomez has received the endorsement of some progressive groups, including California Labor Federation, Sierra Club, SEIU California, and California Environmental Voters. She has also received the endorsement of many elected leaders, including former Assm. Lorena Gonzalez, San Diego Mayor Todd Gloria, State Senator Scott Wiener, Assm. Ash Kalra, and Assm. Laura Friedman. Both candidates have been endorsed by State Sen. María Elena Durazo.

Key initiatives: Assm. Alvarez was elected to the Assembly in a June 2022 special election, and has not yet sponsored any bills. He currently serves on five standing committees, including Rules, Business and Professions, and Military and Veterans Affairs. He is the chair of the Joint Legislative Audit Subcommittee on the Selection of the state auditor. Through his previous work in local leadership in San Diego, he was able to advocate for funding local arts programming, expanding the public parks system, and preserving a local high school in its original location. Alvarez implements a collaborative approach in his work, which has allowed him to successfully partner with stakeholders in Washington, DC, and Mexico while supporting local projects. He has also used this technique to push local leaders to the left on decisions he disagrees with. In 2016, he was the lone voice of dissent on the San Diego City Council against a twenty-year lease-to-own deal for a downtown building, which Alvarez believed would cost taxpayers millions of dollars more than an outright purchase of the structure. It was later revealed that his concerns were correct, and that the mayor had intentionally pushed the deal through.

As a member of the San Diego City Council, Gomez worked on local initiatives to increase the construction of affordable housing units, and took action against the police union to reduce misconduct and the use of excessive force. During the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic, she supported efforts to establish an eviction moratorium, prevent utility shut-offs, and provide small-business relief. She was the first LGBTQ Latina to serve as President of the city council.

Governance and community leadership experience: Assm. Alvarez has served in this seat since 2022, when he won a special election with over 54% of the vote. Gomez most recently won a 2016 race for San Diego City Council’s 9th District with over 52% of the vote. In 2020, she lost a race for the 53rd congressional district seat to Rep. Sara Jacobs by 19 points.

Notably, these two candidates appeared on the June 2022 ballot twice—in both a special election race and a primary race. While Assm. Alvarez won the largest vote share in the special election to finish the current term through January 2023, Gomez earned 36% of the primary vote, beating Assm. Alvarez and two Republican challengers in the race.

Assm. Alvarez has been involved in local leadership for much of his career, including his eight-year service with the city council, and with San Diego County Regional Airport Authority, San Diego Association of Governments, and Metropolitan Transit System.

Gomez has worked with the Environmental Health Coalition and as chair of the Metropolitan Transit System. She also provided leadership to the Toxic Free Neighborhood Campaign to eliminate lead and pollution from residential areas. Prior to entering public service, she was a counselor for survivors of domestic violence.

Other background: Assm. Alvarez is from the Barrio Logan area of San Diego. Gomez is a first-generation Mexican American and was raised in the Barrio Logan area of San Diego.

The Race

Special election results: Assemblymember Lorena Gonzalez resigned from the AD-80 seat in January, leaving it open through the conclusion of the current term in November. The June 2022 special election results included David Alvarez (D), 54%; and Georgette Gomez (D), 46%. As the winner of this election, Alvarez is now serving the remainder of the term through November 2022.

Primary election results: The June 2022 primary results included Georgette Gomez (D), 36%; David Alvarez (D), 31%; John Garcia (R), 20%; and Lincoln Pickard (R), 12%. Georgette Gomez and David Alvarez will compete in a run-off in the November 8 general election.

Candidate: Democrat Assm. David Alvarez

Candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Assm. Alvarez’s campaign has raised $424,000 and is funded by fossil fuel, police, real estate, and corporate PAC interests. His problematic donors include Phillips 66, the Home Depot Inc., Peace Officers Research Association of California PAC, Chevron, and Berry Petroleum Company.

Candidate: Democrat Georgette Gomez

Candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Gomez’s campaign has raised $268,000 and is not funded by police, real estate, fossil fuel, or corporate PAC donors.

The District

Counties in district: California’s 80th Assembly District includes parts of San Diego County.

Voter registration: 47% Democrat, 20% Republican, and 27% No Party Preference. Democrats typically hold this seat. Since the 2021 redistricting process, AD-80 is 6% less Democratic than it was during the 2020 general election cycle.

District demographics: 56% Latino, 15% Asian, and 6% Black. This district is considered to be one of the strong Latino seats in the California Assembly delegation.

Recent election results: AD-80 voted for Joe Biden for president in 2020 by 33 points and Gavin Newsom for governor in 2018 by 30 points.

The Position

State assemblymembers represent and advocate for the needs of their district constituents at the California State Capitol. They are responsible for creating, debating, and voting on legislation that addresses issues within their district.

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 or Assembly. This term, Democrats currently hold a three-quarters supermajority of 60 seats in the California State Assembly, while Republicans hold 19 seats and one seat is held by an Independent.

State Senate

Depending on where you live, you may have one of the below State Senate races on your ballot.

  • Steve Padilla

    Elect Steve Padilla to put SD-18 on the right track for progress.

    Steve Padilla’s track record and policy positions demonstrate that he will be a progressive voice for the constituents of SD-18 and will govern effectively in the best interest of this diverse district.

    Steve Padilla

    Elect Steve Padilla to put SD-18 on the right track for progress.

    Steve Padilla’s track record and policy positions demonstrate that he will be a progressive voice for the constituents of SD-18 and will govern effectively in the best interest of this diverse district.

    Steve Padilla

    Elect Steve Padilla to put SD-18 on the right track for progress.

    Steve Padilla’s track record and policy positions demonstrate that he will be a progressive voice for the constituents of SD-18 and will govern effectively in the best interest of this diverse district.

  • Joseph Rocha

    Courage CA endorses Joseph Rocha for State Senate to put SD-40 on the right track for progress.

    Joseph Rocha

    Courage CA endorses Joseph Rocha for State Senate to put SD-40 on the right track for progress.

    Joseph Rocha

    Courage CA endorses Joseph Rocha for State Senate to put SD-40 on the right track for progress.

  • Endorsed By: Courage California
  • Fiona Ma

    Reelect Treasurer Fiona Ma to keep California on the right track for progress.

    Fiona Ma’s track record and policy positions demonstrate that she will continue to be a champion for Californians and will govern effectively in the best interest of this diverse state.

    Fiona Ma

    Reelect Treasurer Fiona Ma to keep California on the right track for progress.

    Fiona Ma’s track record and policy positions demonstrate that she will continue to be a champion for Californians and will govern effectively in the best interest of this diverse state.

    Fiona Ma

    Reelect Treasurer Fiona Ma to keep California on the right track for progress.

    Fiona Ma’s track record and policy positions demonstrate that she will continue to be a champion for Californians and will govern effectively in the best interest of this diverse state.

  • VOTE YES

    Vote YES on Prop 1

  • Vote YES on Proposition 1 to enshrine abortion rights into the California State Constitution.


    After the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade in June 2022, the California State Legislature moved quickly to place Proposition 1 on the ballot. Although there is a right to privacy in the California State Constitution that has been historically interpreted to cover the right to choose to have an abortion, that right is not explicitly written into the State Constitution. Proposition 1 would amend the State Constitution to enshrine the right to reproductive freedom, including the right to choose to have an abortion and the right to choose or refuse contraception.
     

    Why voting YES on Proposition 1 matters:

    The California state legislature and governorship are currently controlled by Democrats. However, should that change, the reproductive freedom protections currently in place may be threatened. Enshrining the rights to abortion and contraceptives is a critical step Californians can take now to ensure that reproductive freedom remains a right in California, regardless of which party is in power. In order to remove such a protection from the State Constitution, Republicans would need to place another measure on the ballot, whether through the legislature or by citizen referendum, and convince California voters to vote for it.
    The Supremacy Clause of the federal Constitution usually gives federal law precedence over state statutes and constitutions. Although Prop. 1 would probably not be enough to stop a national ban, the courts would first have to strike down the constitutional language.
     

    Top funders of Proposition 1:

    Yes on Prop 1: The top funders of the ballot measure committee supporting Proposition 1 are Planned Parenthood Advocacy Project Los Angeles County, Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California, and M. Quinn Delaney, a wealthy liberal philanthropist and co-founder of the Akonadi Foundation. As of August 1, the Yes on Prop 1 committee has raised $355,112 and spent $79,000 since Jan. 1, 2022. The California Democratic Party has also endorsed Proposition 1.

    No on Prop 1: The recently formed No on Proposition 1 committee has raised $134,798 since August 1, and data has yet to be made available on how the committee has spent its funds. In addition, the California Republican Party came out in opposition to the ballot measure. The California Catholic Conference has also come out in opposition to Proposition 1, with the Archbishop of San Francisco stating that “the California bishops have made defeating Prop. 1 our number one priority for this year.”
     

    Misinformation about Proposition 1 includes:

    The California Catholic Conference claims that Prop. 1 would “over-ride current law” to allow for “taxpayer-funded” abortion care. Prop. 1 simply makes explicit the current, common interpretation of the California State Constitution that already allows for abortion care and state assistance for those seeking to receive such health care. Also, because these rights already exist in California, the proposition would have no direct fiscal effect, meaning it would not create increased costs to taxpayers.

    Vote YES on Proposition 1 to enshrine abortion rights into the California State Constitution.


    After the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade in June 2022, the California State Legislature moved quickly to place Proposition 1 on the ballot. Although there is a right to privacy in the California State Constitution that has been historically interpreted to cover the right to choose to have an abortion, that right is not explicitly written into the State Constitution. Proposition 1 would amend the State Constitution to enshrine the right to reproductive freedom, including the right to choose to have an abortion and the right to choose or refuse contraception.
     

    Why voting YES on Proposition 1 matters:

    The California state legislature and governorship are currently controlled by Democrats. However, should that change, the reproductive freedom protections currently in place may be threatened. Enshrining the rights to abortion and contraceptives is a critical step Californians can take now to ensure that reproductive freedom remains a right in California, regardless of which party is in power. In order to remove such a protection from the State Constitution, Republicans would need to place another measure on the ballot, whether through the legislature or by citizen referendum, and convince California voters to vote for it.
    The Supremacy Clause of the federal Constitution usually gives federal law precedence over state statutes and constitutions. Although Prop. 1 would probably not be enough to stop a national ban, the courts would first have to strike down the constitutional language.
     

    Top funders of Proposition 1:

    Yes on Prop 1: The top funders of the ballot measure committee supporting Proposition 1 are Planned Parenthood Advocacy Project Los Angeles County, Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California, and M. Quinn Delaney, a wealthy liberal philanthropist and co-founder of the Akonadi Foundation. As of August 1, the Yes on Prop 1 committee has raised $355,112 and spent $79,000 since Jan. 1, 2022. The California Democratic Party has also endorsed Proposition 1.

    No on Prop 1: The recently formed No on Proposition 1 committee has raised $134,798 since August 1, and data has yet to be made available on how the committee has spent its funds. In addition, the California Republican Party came out in opposition to the ballot measure. The California Catholic Conference has also come out in opposition to Proposition 1, with the Archbishop of San Francisco stating that “the California bishops have made defeating Prop. 1 our number one priority for this year.”
     

    Misinformation about Proposition 1 includes:

    The California Catholic Conference claims that Prop. 1 would “over-ride current law” to allow for “taxpayer-funded” abortion care. Prop. 1 simply makes explicit the current, common interpretation of the California State Constitution that already allows for abortion care and state assistance for those seeking to receive such health care. Also, because these rights already exist in California, the proposition would have no direct fiscal effect, meaning it would not create increased costs to taxpayers.
  • Endorsed By Courage California
  • No Position

    Vote on Proposition 26

  • Proposition 26 would legalize in-person sports betting at tribal casinos and specific horse tracks.


    California state law currently limits some types of gambling. Prop. 26 would legalize in-person sports betting at tribal casinos and specific privately owned horse tracks. The measure would also require that racetracks pay into a new California Sports Wagering Fund to fund annual state spending on K–12 schools and community colleges, as well as contribute to gambling addiction and mental-health programs, sports betting regulation enforcement costs, and the state’s General Fund.

    After funds from the California Sports Wagering Fund are used for annual minimum required education spending, 70 percent of the remaining funds would be required to go toward the state’s General Fund, 15 percent for gambling addiction and mental-health programs and grants, and the last 15 percent for sports betting and gambling enforcement costs. While the actual fiscal impact of Prop. 26 remains uncertain, state analysts estimate that increases in state revenues from Prop. 26 could reach tens of millions of dollars annually, and enforcement costs are expected to be in the low millions of dollars annually.

    A YES vote on Proposition 26 means:

    If Proposition 26 is approved by voters, tribal casinos could offer in-person sports betting, roulette, and dice games through tribal agreements with the state. Four horse racetracks would be able to offer in-person sports betting; the revenue would pay into a new fund that would go toward public school spending, mental-health programs, sports betting regulation enforcement costs, and the California State General Fund.
     

    A NO vote on Proposition 26 means:

    If Proposition 26 fails, no changes would be made to the enforcement of current state gambling and betting laws.
     

    Top funders of Proposition 26:

    Yes on Prop 26: The top funders of the ballot measure committee simultaneously supporting Proposition 26 and opposing Proposition 27 are the Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria, the Pechanga Band of Indians, and the Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation. As of August 1, the Yes on 26, No on 27 ballot measure committee has raised $60 million and spent $31 million since Jan. 1, 2022. The coalition supporting the ballot measure includes thirty-one tribes and tribal organizations, such as the California Nations Indian Gaming Association. Other organizations supporting Prop. 26 include the Dolores Huerta Community Foundation, Peace Officers Research Association of California, and the American Indian Chamber of Commerce.

    No on Prop 26: The top funders of the ballot measure committee opposing Proposition 26 are the non-tribal cardrooms and cardroom operators at California Commerce Club, Hawaiian Gardens Casino, and Knighted Ventures. As of August 1, the No on 26 committee has raised $17 million and spent $2 million since Jan. 1, 2022. In addition, organizations including the California Republican Party, the Los Angeles County Business Federation, and the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) California also oppose Prop. 26.

    Proposition 26 and Proposition 27:

    Prop. 26 focuses on in-person betting, while Prop. 27 focuses on online betting. If both Props. 26 and 27 pass, they will likely both go into effect, as neither ballot measure technically conflicts with the other. The authors of Prop. 27 explicitly wrote into the measure that “Proposition 27 does not conflict with Proposition 26,” but whether the courts will find that both measures can operate simultaneously remains to be seen. If the courts find that they don't conflict, the two measures will both take full effect. If the courts find that the two measures do conflict with each other, whichever measure receives the most votes in the election will be the one that goes into effect. Opponents of each measure may leverage the issue of potential conflict and voter support in court to defeat one of the measures post-election, should they both be approved by voters.

    So far, the ballot measure committees involved in the Props. 26 and 27 contests have in total raised $218 million and spent $65 million, making the two measures among the most expensive ballot measure contests on record.

    Proposition 26 would legalize in-person sports betting at tribal casinos and specific horse tracks.


    California state law currently limits some types of gambling. Prop. 26 would legalize in-person sports betting at tribal casinos and specific privately owned horse tracks. The measure would also require that racetracks pay into a new California Sports Wagering Fund to fund annual state spending on K–12 schools and community colleges, as well as contribute to gambling addiction and mental-health programs, sports betting regulation enforcement costs, and the state’s General Fund.

    After funds from the California Sports Wagering Fund are used for annual minimum required education spending, 70 percent of the remaining funds would be required to go toward the state’s General Fund, 15 percent for gambling addiction and mental-health programs and grants, and the last 15 percent for sports betting and gambling enforcement costs. While the actual fiscal impact of Prop. 26 remains uncertain, state analysts estimate that increases in state revenues from Prop. 26 could reach tens of millions of dollars annually, and enforcement costs are expected to be in the low millions of dollars annually.

    A YES vote on Proposition 26 means:

    If Proposition 26 is approved by voters, tribal casinos could offer in-person sports betting, roulette, and dice games through tribal agreements with the state. Four horse racetracks would be able to offer in-person sports betting; the revenue would pay into a new fund that would go toward public school spending, mental-health programs, sports betting regulation enforcement costs, and the California State General Fund.
     

    A NO vote on Proposition 26 means:

    If Proposition 26 fails, no changes would be made to the enforcement of current state gambling and betting laws.
     

    Top funders of Proposition 26:

    Yes on Prop 26: The top funders of the ballot measure committee simultaneously supporting Proposition 26 and opposing Proposition 27 are the Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria, the Pechanga Band of Indians, and the Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation. As of August 1, the Yes on 26, No on 27 ballot measure committee has raised $60 million and spent $31 million since Jan. 1, 2022. The coalition supporting the ballot measure includes thirty-one tribes and tribal organizations, such as the California Nations Indian Gaming Association. Other organizations supporting Prop. 26 include the Dolores Huerta Community Foundation, Peace Officers Research Association of California, and the American Indian Chamber of Commerce.

    No on Prop 26: The top funders of the ballot measure committee opposing Proposition 26 are the non-tribal cardrooms and cardroom operators at California Commerce Club, Hawaiian Gardens Casino, and Knighted Ventures. As of August 1, the No on 26 committee has raised $17 million and spent $2 million since Jan. 1, 2022. In addition, organizations including the California Republican Party, the Los Angeles County Business Federation, and the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) California also oppose Prop. 26.

    Proposition 26 and Proposition 27:

    Prop. 26 focuses on in-person betting, while Prop. 27 focuses on online betting. If both Props. 26 and 27 pass, they will likely both go into effect, as neither ballot measure technically conflicts with the other. The authors of Prop. 27 explicitly wrote into the measure that “Proposition 27 does not conflict with Proposition 26,” but whether the courts will find that both measures can operate simultaneously remains to be seen. If the courts find that they don't conflict, the two measures will both take full effect. If the courts find that the two measures do conflict with each other, whichever measure receives the most votes in the election will be the one that goes into effect. Opponents of each measure may leverage the issue of potential conflict and voter support in court to defeat one of the measures post-election, should they both be approved by voters.

    So far, the ballot measure committees involved in the Props. 26 and 27 contests have in total raised $218 million and spent $65 million, making the two measures among the most expensive ballot measure contests on record.
  • VOTE NO

    Vote NO on Proposition 27

  • Vote NO on Proposition 27 to prevent the legalization of online sports betting through large online betting platforms and certified tribes.


    California state law currently limits some types of gambling. Proposition 27 would allow Californians to engage in online sports betting through large online betting companies and certified tribes.

    Prop. 27 would require those offering online sports betting to pay 10 percent of the bets into a new fund that will go first toward paying for regulatory costs, then toward homelessness and gambling addiction programs, then towards tribes. Analysis from the Legislative Analyst's Office estimates that potential revenues for the state from Prop. 27 will likely not exceed $500 million and some will go towards regulatory costs. Those offering online betting would retain 90 percent of the profits, which are estimated to be in the billions.
     

    Why voting NO on Proposition 27 matters:

    A vast majority of the profits generated through Prop. 27 would leave the state of California and benefit large, wealthy corporations. Only a fraction of the bets would be paid to the state. Online gambling remains difficult to regulate, and Prop. 27 is not likely to mitigate the issue of unregulated online sports betting. The measure would make gambling accessible to anyone with a device that connects to the internet, including those who may be more susceptible to developing gambling addictions such as young people.
     

    Top funders of Proposition 27:

    Yes on Prop 27: The top funders of the ballot measure committee supporting Proposition 27 are online betting companies FanDuel, DraftKings, and Penn Interactive Ventures, all three of which are based on the east coast of the U.S. Although the Yes on 27 committee has not reported raising funds this year so far, the committee received $100 million in 2021. As of August 1, the Yes on 27 committee has spent $23 million.

    No on Prop 27: The top funders of the main ballot measure committee opposing Proposition 27 are the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians, Rincon Band of Luiseño Indians, and Pala Casino Spa Resort. On August 1, the committee reported having raised $41 million and spent $32 million since Jan. 1, 2022. There is also a ballot measure committee that is simultaneously supporting Prop. 26 and opposing Prop. 27, which is funded primarily by the Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria, the Pechanga Band of Indians, and the Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation. As of August 1, the Yes on 26, No on 27 ballot measure committee has raised $60 million and spent $31 million since Jan. 1, 2022.

    Both the California Democratic Party and the California Republican Party oppose Prop. 27.

    So far, the ballot measure committees involved in the Props. 26 and 27 contests have in total raised $218 million and spent $65 million, making the two measures among the most expensive ballot measure contests on record.
     

    Misinformation about Proposition 27 includes:


    The proponents of Prop. 27 claim it will provide “hundreds of millions of dollars every year to fund mental health treatment and solutions to homelessness and addiction.” However, while state analysis of the measure’s potential effects estimates that it may produce up to $500 million in revenue, that revenue is first dedicated to covering regulatory and enforcement costs.

    The proponents of Prop. 27 describe their coalition of supporters as primarily including “housing and mental health experts, tribes, and citizens.” Two tribes are currently listed as supporters of Prop. 27: Big Valley Rancheria Band of Pomo Indians and the Middletown Rancheria of Pomo Indians. For comparison purposes, the list of Prop. 26 supporters includes thirty-one tribes and tribal organizations.
     

    Proposition 27 and Proposition 26:


    Prop. 26 focuses on in-person betting, while Prop. 27 focuses on online betting. If both Props. 26 and 27 pass, they will likely both go into effect, as neither ballot measure technically conflicts with the other. The authors of Prop. 27 explicitly wrote into the measure that “Proposition 27 does not conflict with Proposition 26,” but whether the courts will find that both measures can operate simultaneously remains to be seen. If the courts find that they don't conflict, the two measures will both take full effect. If the courts find that the two measures do conflict with each other, whichever measure receives the most votes in the election will be the one that goes into effect. Opponents of each measure may leverage the issue of potential conflict and voter support in court to defeat one of the measures post-election, should they both be approved by voters.

    Vote NO on Proposition 27 to prevent the legalization of online sports betting through large online betting platforms and certified tribes.


    California state law currently limits some types of gambling. Proposition 27 would allow Californians to engage in online sports betting through large online betting companies and certified tribes.

    Prop. 27 would require those offering online sports betting to pay 10 percent of the bets into a new fund that will go first toward paying for regulatory costs, then toward homelessness and gambling addiction programs, then towards tribes. Analysis from the Legislative Analyst's Office estimates that potential revenues for the state from Prop. 27 will likely not exceed $500 million and some will go towards regulatory costs. Those offering online betting would retain 90 percent of the profits, which are estimated to be in the billions.
     

    Why voting NO on Proposition 27 matters:

    A vast majority of the profits generated through Prop. 27 would leave the state of California and benefit large, wealthy corporations. Only a fraction of the bets would be paid to the state. Online gambling remains difficult to regulate, and Prop. 27 is not likely to mitigate the issue of unregulated online sports betting. The measure would make gambling accessible to anyone with a device that connects to the internet, including those who may be more susceptible to developing gambling addictions such as young people.
     

    Top funders of Proposition 27:

    Yes on Prop 27: The top funders of the ballot measure committee supporting Proposition 27 are online betting companies FanDuel, DraftKings, and Penn Interactive Ventures, all three of which are based on the east coast of the U.S. Although the Yes on 27 committee has not reported raising funds this year so far, the committee received $100 million in 2021. As of August 1, the Yes on 27 committee has spent $23 million.

    No on Prop 27: The top funders of the main ballot measure committee opposing Proposition 27 are the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians, Rincon Band of Luiseño Indians, and Pala Casino Spa Resort. On August 1, the committee reported having raised $41 million and spent $32 million since Jan. 1, 2022. There is also a ballot measure committee that is simultaneously supporting Prop. 26 and opposing Prop. 27, which is funded primarily by the Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria, the Pechanga Band of Indians, and the Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation. As of August 1, the Yes on 26, No on 27 ballot measure committee has raised $60 million and spent $31 million since Jan. 1, 2022.

    Both the California Democratic Party and the California Republican Party oppose Prop. 27.

    So far, the ballot measure committees involved in the Props. 26 and 27 contests have in total raised $218 million and spent $65 million, making the two measures among the most expensive ballot measure contests on record.
     

    Misinformation about Proposition 27 includes:


    The proponents of Prop. 27 claim it will provide “hundreds of millions of dollars every year to fund mental health treatment and solutions to homelessness and addiction.” However, while state analysis of the measure’s potential effects estimates that it may produce up to $500 million in revenue, that revenue is first dedicated to covering regulatory and enforcement costs.

    The proponents of Prop. 27 describe their coalition of supporters as primarily including “housing and mental health experts, tribes, and citizens.” Two tribes are currently listed as supporters of Prop. 27: Big Valley Rancheria Band of Pomo Indians and the Middletown Rancheria of Pomo Indians. For comparison purposes, the list of Prop. 26 supporters includes thirty-one tribes and tribal organizations.
     

    Proposition 27 and Proposition 26:


    Prop. 26 focuses on in-person betting, while Prop. 27 focuses on online betting. If both Props. 26 and 27 pass, they will likely both go into effect, as neither ballot measure technically conflicts with the other. The authors of Prop. 27 explicitly wrote into the measure that “Proposition 27 does not conflict with Proposition 26,” but whether the courts will find that both measures can operate simultaneously remains to be seen. If the courts find that they don't conflict, the two measures will both take full effect. If the courts find that the two measures do conflict with each other, whichever measure receives the most votes in the election will be the one that goes into effect. Opponents of each measure may leverage the issue of potential conflict and voter support in court to defeat one of the measures post-election, should they both be approved by voters.
  • VOTE YES

    Vote YES on Proposition 28

  • Vote YES on Proposition 28 to provide additional funding to arts education in public schools.


    California’s PK-12 public school students are disproportionately from low-income households, and the availability of quality arts education remains highly variable across school sites and districts. Proposition 28 would require the state to set aside about $1 billion of its existing annual revenue for arts education, particularly for hiring new arts-education staff in school districts with large shares of low-income students.
     

    Why voting YES on Proposition 28 matters:

    California has over 6 million public school students, and about 60 percent of them are from low-income households. While students in wealthier areas are more likely to enjoy extensive arts programs, students in lower-income neighborhoods are much less likely to have access to quality arts education. Guaranteeing an ongoing source of funding for arts education in California’s public schools is crucial to helping to close this gap in access to quality arts education.

    Since the state’s arts-education requirements are much looser than requirements for other disciplines, such as math or language arts education, all arts education is funded based on the discretion of local school governing boards. Whether a school has arts education programming, whether the district hires arts educators and what those programs look like are ultimately up to who sits on school boards, which currently face intense scrutiny and attention from Republican and other conservative groups.
     

    Top funders of Proposition 28:

    Yes on Prop 28: The top funders of the ballot measure committee supporting Proposition 28 are former Los Angeles Unified School District superintendent Austin Beutner, Fender Musical Instruments, and the California Teachers Association. As of August 1, the Yes on 28 committee has raised $7 million and spent $8 million since Jan. 1, 2022, although the committee also started the year with additional funds raised during the previous reporting period. Numerous notable artists have also come out in support of the measure, including Al Yankovich, Christina Aguilera, Dr. Dre, Jason Momoa, will.i.am, and the Red Hot Chili Peppers.

    No on Prop 28: There are not funders or endorsements in opposition of Proposition 28.
     

    Misinformation about Proposition 28 includes:

    Proposition 28 does not require that a new tax be levied. Instead, it directs the state to set aside a portion of existing annual revenue to fund arts education in public schools.

    Vote YES on Proposition 28 to provide additional funding to arts education in public schools.


    California’s PK-12 public school students are disproportionately from low-income households, and the availability of quality arts education remains highly variable across school sites and districts. Proposition 28 would require the state to set aside about $1 billion of its existing annual revenue for arts education, particularly for hiring new arts-education staff in school districts with large shares of low-income students.
     

    Why voting YES on Proposition 28 matters:

    California has over 6 million public school students, and about 60 percent of them are from low-income households. While students in wealthier areas are more likely to enjoy extensive arts programs, students in lower-income neighborhoods are much less likely to have access to quality arts education. Guaranteeing an ongoing source of funding for arts education in California’s public schools is crucial to helping to close this gap in access to quality arts education.

    Since the state’s arts-education requirements are much looser than requirements for other disciplines, such as math or language arts education, all arts education is funded based on the discretion of local school governing boards. Whether a school has arts education programming, whether the district hires arts educators and what those programs look like are ultimately up to who sits on school boards, which currently face intense scrutiny and attention from Republican and other conservative groups.
     

    Top funders of Proposition 28:

    Yes on Prop 28: The top funders of the ballot measure committee supporting Proposition 28 are former Los Angeles Unified School District superintendent Austin Beutner, Fender Musical Instruments, and the California Teachers Association. As of August 1, the Yes on 28 committee has raised $7 million and spent $8 million since Jan. 1, 2022, although the committee also started the year with additional funds raised during the previous reporting period. Numerous notable artists have also come out in support of the measure, including Al Yankovich, Christina Aguilera, Dr. Dre, Jason Momoa, will.i.am, and the Red Hot Chili Peppers.

    No on Prop 28: There are not funders or endorsements in opposition of Proposition 28.
     

    Misinformation about Proposition 28 includes:

    Proposition 28 does not require that a new tax be levied. Instead, it directs the state to set aside a portion of existing annual revenue to fund arts education in public schools.
  • VOTE YES

    Vote YES on Proposition 29

  • Vote YES on Proposition 29 would help ensure that patients receive safe treatment in dialysis clinics under the care of a trained clinician.



    California’s dialysis treatment industry makes billions in revenue each year, yet a lack of onsite staffing requirements leaves patients vulnerable to complications during the treatment process. Proposition 29 would require each dialysis clinic to have at least one physician, physician assistant, or nurse practitioner onsite at the clinic during the hours that patients are treated. This proposition has appeared on the ballot twice before and was rejected by voters both times after dialysis clinics poured millions of dollars into defeating the measures.
     

    A YES vote on Proposition 29 means:


    Dialysis clinics would be required to have a physician, physician assistant, or nurse practitioner onsite during hours of treatment.
     

    A NO vote on Proposition 29 means:


    No changes would be made to current regulations regarding dialysis clinic staffing.
     

    More information:

    Proposition 29 requires each dialysis clinic to have, at its expense, at least one physician, nurse practitioner, or physician assistant onsite during all the hours that patients receive treatments at that clinic.
    Prop. 29 would require clinics to secure state approval before closing or reducing services, ensuring that patients do not abruptly lose access to treatment. The measure would also require that a clinic disclose information about physicians who own at least 5% of the clinic. There are about 650 dialysis clinics in California, and a vast majority of them are owned or operated by DaVita Inc. and Fresenius Medical Care, who enjoy about $3.5 billion annually in revenue from them. Prop. 29 would increase transparency and accountability in an industry that is dominated by these two large, wealthy corporations.
     

    Top funders of Proposition 29:


    Yes on Prop 29: The measure was placed on the ballot by Service Employees International Union-United Healthcare West. As of August 1, the primary ballot measure committee supporting Proposition 29, also sponsored by SEIU-UHW, has raised $7 million and has spent $7 million since Jan. 1, 2022. In addition, a separate SEIU-UHW committee supporting Prop. 29 has raised and spent $7 million since Jan. 1, 2022. Notable supporters of Proposition 29 include the California Democratic Party and the California Labor Federation.

    No on Prop. 29: The top funders of the ballot measure committee opposing Proposition 29 are DaVita, Fresenius Medical Care, and U.S. Renal Care. As of August 1, the No on 29 committee has raised $36 million and spent $3 million since Jan. 1, 2022. Notable opposition to Proposition 29 includes the California Chamber of Commerce and the California Republican Party.
     

    Misinformation about Proposition 29 includes:


    The California Republican Party claims that Prop. 29 is focused on “unionizing kidney dialysis clinics.” The ballot measure language does not mention unionization. Opponents of Prop. 29 claim it will negatively affect patients’ access to care. However, the measure requires that clinics receive state approval before closing or reducing services, which would prevent clinics from abruptly shuttering or otherwise slashing treatment options.

    Vote YES on Proposition 29 would help ensure that patients receive safe treatment in dialysis clinics under the care of a trained clinician.



    California’s dialysis treatment industry makes billions in revenue each year, yet a lack of onsite staffing requirements leaves patients vulnerable to complications during the treatment process. Proposition 29 would require each dialysis clinic to have at least one physician, physician assistant, or nurse practitioner onsite at the clinic during the hours that patients are treated. This proposition has appeared on the ballot twice before and was rejected by voters both times after dialysis clinics poured millions of dollars into defeating the measures.
     

    A YES vote on Proposition 29 means:


    Dialysis clinics would be required to have a physician, physician assistant, or nurse practitioner onsite during hours of treatment.
     

    A NO vote on Proposition 29 means:


    No changes would be made to current regulations regarding dialysis clinic staffing.
     

    More information:

    Proposition 29 requires each dialysis clinic to have, at its expense, at least one physician, nurse practitioner, or physician assistant onsite during all the hours that patients receive treatments at that clinic.
    Prop. 29 would require clinics to secure state approval before closing or reducing services, ensuring that patients do not abruptly lose access to treatment. The measure would also require that a clinic disclose information about physicians who own at least 5% of the clinic. There are about 650 dialysis clinics in California, and a vast majority of them are owned or operated by DaVita Inc. and Fresenius Medical Care, who enjoy about $3.5 billion annually in revenue from them. Prop. 29 would increase transparency and accountability in an industry that is dominated by these two large, wealthy corporations.
     

    Top funders of Proposition 29:


    Yes on Prop 29: The measure was placed on the ballot by Service Employees International Union-United Healthcare West. As of August 1, the primary ballot measure committee supporting Proposition 29, also sponsored by SEIU-UHW, has raised $7 million and has spent $7 million since Jan. 1, 2022. In addition, a separate SEIU-UHW committee supporting Prop. 29 has raised and spent $7 million since Jan. 1, 2022. Notable supporters of Proposition 29 include the California Democratic Party and the California Labor Federation.

    No on Prop. 29: The top funders of the ballot measure committee opposing Proposition 29 are DaVita, Fresenius Medical Care, and U.S. Renal Care. As of August 1, the No on 29 committee has raised $36 million and spent $3 million since Jan. 1, 2022. Notable opposition to Proposition 29 includes the California Chamber of Commerce and the California Republican Party.
     

    Misinformation about Proposition 29 includes:


    The California Republican Party claims that Prop. 29 is focused on “unionizing kidney dialysis clinics.” The ballot measure language does not mention unionization. Opponents of Prop. 29 claim it will negatively affect patients’ access to care. However, the measure requires that clinics receive state approval before closing or reducing services, which would prevent clinics from abruptly shuttering or otherwise slashing treatment options.
  • VOTE YES

    Vote YES on Prop 30

  • Vote YES on Proposition 30 to fund wildfire prevention, sustain wildfire-fighting resources, and reduce air pollution by expanding access to electric vehicles.


    Californians face health-threatening pollution and deadly wildfires every day. Piecemeal environmental reforms are important for mitigating some of climate change’s devastating effects, but our state must make bold investments if we’re going to make significant progress in our fight against climate change. Proposition 30 would tax the wealthiest Californians to fund wildfire prevention and help slash emissions statewide by expanding electric-vehicle access for all Californians, especially those living in heavily polluted and low-income communities.
     

    Why voting YES on Proposition 30 matters:

    The state’s Air Resources Board has planned and set targets for 100 percent of new cars sold in California to be zero-emissions vehicles by 2035. However, access to electric vehicles remains out of reach for many low- and middle-income Californians. The current average electric-vehicle owner in California is a white homeowner who makes $190,000 a year. Funding electric-vehicle infrastructure and providing rebates, grants, and financial assistance to make electric vehicles affordable is one major way that California can advance its statewide commitment to slashing emissions. At least half of the funds generated by Prop. 30 must be spent on projects that benefit heavily polluted and/or low-income communities.

    Proposition 30 would impose a 1.75% personal income tax increase on the wealthiest Californians—those who make more than $2 million per year—to fund wildfire prevention, wildfire fighting, and electric-vehicle access programs. Forty-five percent of the funding from Prop. 30 would go toward helping families, businesses, and local governments pay for zero-emissions vehicles; 35 percent would go toward installing and operating zero-emissions vehicle charging stations; and 20 percent would go toward wildfire prevention and fighting efforts, with the state being required to prioritize spending to hire, train, and retain firefighters. Per state analysts, Prop. 30 is estimated to increase state funding for electric-vehicle access and infrastructure by $2.8 billion to $4 billion annually, and the measure is also estimated to increase state funding for wildfire prevention and fighting by $700 million to $1 billion annually.

    As Californians are already experiencing, extreme wildfires are expected to increase by 50% worldwide by the end of the century, according to the United Nations, and the U.N. also warns that governments must do much more to address the issue. State analysts stated in a recent report earlier this year that additional wildfire funds are “merited” because of “the worsening pattern of large and severe wildfires in recent years.”
     

    Top funders of Proposition 30:

    The top funders of the main ballot measure committee supporting Proposition 30 are the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Lyft, and Zinc Collective. As of August 1, the Yes on 30 Clean Air California committee has raised $16 million and spent $14 million since Jan. 1, 2022. Other major supporters include the California Democratic Party, California Environmental Voters, the State Building and Construction Trades Council of California, Natural Resources Defense Council, and IE United.

    The recently formed No on 30 campaign has raised $9 million since August 1, 2022, mostly from billionaires Catherine Dean, Mark Heising, and Michael Mortiz. Other notable opposition to Proposition 30 includes the California Chamber of Commerce, Governor Gavin Newsom, the California Teachers Association, and the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association.
     

    Misinformation about Proposition 30 includes:

    The California Chamber of Commerce claims that Proposition 30 is unnecessary because California has the “highest personal income tax rate in the country at 13.3%.” However, only Californians making over $1 million a year are taxed at that rate, and the average household income in 2020 dollars in California is $78,672.

    The California Teachers Association opposes Proposition 30 because funds raised from the measure would be exempt from a requirement that half of any new state revenues go to public education. Prop. 30 does not affect the current school-funding formula.

    The Yes on 30 committee does receive major funding from Lyft. The state requires ride-sharing companies to use more zero-emissions vehicles to provide ride-sharing services, so increasing the number of electric vehicles driven by Californians generally could indirectly help companies like Lyft reach their zero-emissions vehicle goals as mandated by the state. However, the ballot measure itself was written by environmental organizations, including California Environmental Voters, and the ballot measure language makes no mention of rideshare companies.

    Vote YES on Proposition 30 to fund wildfire prevention, sustain wildfire-fighting resources, and reduce air pollution by expanding access to electric vehicles.


    Californians face health-threatening pollution and deadly wildfires every day. Piecemeal environmental reforms are important for mitigating some of climate change’s devastating effects, but our state must make bold investments if we’re going to make significant progress in our fight against climate change. Proposition 30 would tax the wealthiest Californians to fund wildfire prevention and help slash emissions statewide by expanding electric-vehicle access for all Californians, especially those living in heavily polluted and low-income communities.
     

    Why voting YES on Proposition 30 matters:

    The state’s Air Resources Board has planned and set targets for 100 percent of new cars sold in California to be zero-emissions vehicles by 2035. However, access to electric vehicles remains out of reach for many low- and middle-income Californians. The current average electric-vehicle owner in California is a white homeowner who makes $190,000 a year. Funding electric-vehicle infrastructure and providing rebates, grants, and financial assistance to make electric vehicles affordable is one major way that California can advance its statewide commitment to slashing emissions. At least half of the funds generated by Prop. 30 must be spent on projects that benefit heavily polluted and/or low-income communities.

    Proposition 30 would impose a 1.75% personal income tax increase on the wealthiest Californians—those who make more than $2 million per year—to fund wildfire prevention, wildfire fighting, and electric-vehicle access programs. Forty-five percent of the funding from Prop. 30 would go toward helping families, businesses, and local governments pay for zero-emissions vehicles; 35 percent would go toward installing and operating zero-emissions vehicle charging stations; and 20 percent would go toward wildfire prevention and fighting efforts, with the state being required to prioritize spending to hire, train, and retain firefighters. Per state analysts, Prop. 30 is estimated to increase state funding for electric-vehicle access and infrastructure by $2.8 billion to $4 billion annually, and the measure is also estimated to increase state funding for wildfire prevention and fighting by $700 million to $1 billion annually.

    As Californians are already experiencing, extreme wildfires are expected to increase by 50% worldwide by the end of the century, according to the United Nations, and the U.N. also warns that governments must do much more to address the issue. State analysts stated in a recent report earlier this year that additional wildfire funds are “merited” because of “the worsening pattern of large and severe wildfires in recent years.”
     

    Top funders of Proposition 30:

    The top funders of the main ballot measure committee supporting Proposition 30 are the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Lyft, and Zinc Collective. As of August 1, the Yes on 30 Clean Air California committee has raised $16 million and spent $14 million since Jan. 1, 2022. Other major supporters include the California Democratic Party, California Environmental Voters, the State Building and Construction Trades Council of California, Natural Resources Defense Council, and IE United.

    The recently formed No on 30 campaign has raised $9 million since August 1, 2022, mostly from billionaires Catherine Dean, Mark Heising, and Michael Mortiz. Other notable opposition to Proposition 30 includes the California Chamber of Commerce, Governor Gavin Newsom, the California Teachers Association, and the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association.
     

    Misinformation about Proposition 30 includes:

    The California Chamber of Commerce claims that Proposition 30 is unnecessary because California has the “highest personal income tax rate in the country at 13.3%.” However, only Californians making over $1 million a year are taxed at that rate, and the average household income in 2020 dollars in California is $78,672.

    The California Teachers Association opposes Proposition 30 because funds raised from the measure would be exempt from a requirement that half of any new state revenues go to public education. Prop. 30 does not affect the current school-funding formula.

    The Yes on 30 committee does receive major funding from Lyft. The state requires ride-sharing companies to use more zero-emissions vehicles to provide ride-sharing services, so increasing the number of electric vehicles driven by Californians generally could indirectly help companies like Lyft reach their zero-emissions vehicle goals as mandated by the state. However, the ballot measure itself was written by environmental organizations, including California Environmental Voters, and the ballot measure language makes no mention of rideshare companies.
  • Endorsed By Courage California
  • VOTE YES

    Vote YES on Proposition 31

  • Vote YES on Proposition 31 to uphold the current state law banning the sale and marketing of flavored tobacco products.


    In 2020, California’s state legislators passed a bipartisan bill to end the sale and marketing of candy-flavored tobacco products. The law is intended to help curb youth tobacco use. Now tobacco corporations are spending millions to stop the law from going into effect. Prop. 31 would uphold the law, ensure that it goes into effect, and penalize candy-flavored tobacco product sales in California with a $250 fine against stores per violation.

    Why voting YES on Proposition 31 matters:

    Candy-flavored tobacco products are especially appealing to children and young adults. A 2021 CDC survey found that over 70% of middle- and high-school students were exposed to tobacco ads, and 80% who use tobacco use flavored tobacco. According to a report from the Department of Health and Human Services, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, youth who use flavorings such as fruit or candy flavoring vape more compared to those who use “traditional” flavors of tobacco. Passing Prop. 31 and upholding the ban on the sale of candy-flavored tobacco products is critical for reducing youth tobacco use.

    The California State Legislature passed SB 793 in 2020 to end the sale and marketing of candy-flavored tobacco products in the state. By placing Prop. 31 on the ballot, the tobacco industry has effectively been able to use its wealth and resources to keep SB 793 from taking effect for two years. Now tobacco companies like Philip Morris are spending millions against the measure to further delay and ultimately overturn the ban.

    Top funders of Proposition 31:


    The top funders of the ballot measure committee supporting Proposition 31 are Michael Bloomberg, Kaiser Foundation Health Plan, Inc. and the Hospitals, and the California Teachers Association Issues PAC. As of August 1, the Yes on 31 committee has raised $3 million and spent $2 million since Jan. 1, 2022. Other supporters include the American Lung Association and Governor Gavin Newsom.

    The top funders of the ballot measure committee opposition Proposition 31 are tobacco companies R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company, Philip Morris USA, and ITG Brands. As of August 1, the No on 31 committee has raised $15 million and spent $743,566 since Jan. 1, 2022. The California Republican Party is also opposed to Prop. 31.
     

    Misinformation about Proposition 31 includes:

    Tobacco companies claim that Prop. 31 is discriminatory because it criminalizes the sale of menthol cigarettes “preferred” by people of color. However, tobacco companies have been systematically targeting Black youth for decades with candy-flavored tobacco products. The share of Black Americans who smoke using minty menthols has dramatically increased since the 1950s because of tobacco corporations’ predatory marketing in Black communities.

    Vote YES on Proposition 31 to uphold the current state law banning the sale and marketing of flavored tobacco products.


    In 2020, California’s state legislators passed a bipartisan bill to end the sale and marketing of candy-flavored tobacco products. The law is intended to help curb youth tobacco use. Now tobacco corporations are spending millions to stop the law from going into effect. Prop. 31 would uphold the law, ensure that it goes into effect, and penalize candy-flavored tobacco product sales in California with a $250 fine against stores per violation.

    Why voting YES on Proposition 31 matters:

    Candy-flavored tobacco products are especially appealing to children and young adults. A 2021 CDC survey found that over 70% of middle- and high-school students were exposed to tobacco ads, and 80% who use tobacco use flavored tobacco. According to a report from the Department of Health and Human Services, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, youth who use flavorings such as fruit or candy flavoring vape more compared to those who use “traditional” flavors of tobacco. Passing Prop. 31 and upholding the ban on the sale of candy-flavored tobacco products is critical for reducing youth tobacco use.

    The California State Legislature passed SB 793 in 2020 to end the sale and marketing of candy-flavored tobacco products in the state. By placing Prop. 31 on the ballot, the tobacco industry has effectively been able to use its wealth and resources to keep SB 793 from taking effect for two years. Now tobacco companies like Philip Morris are spending millions against the measure to further delay and ultimately overturn the ban.

    Top funders of Proposition 31:


    The top funders of the ballot measure committee supporting Proposition 31 are Michael Bloomberg, Kaiser Foundation Health Plan, Inc. and the Hospitals, and the California Teachers Association Issues PAC. As of August 1, the Yes on 31 committee has raised $3 million and spent $2 million since Jan. 1, 2022. Other supporters include the American Lung Association and Governor Gavin Newsom.

    The top funders of the ballot measure committee opposition Proposition 31 are tobacco companies R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company, Philip Morris USA, and ITG Brands. As of August 1, the No on 31 committee has raised $15 million and spent $743,566 since Jan. 1, 2022. The California Republican Party is also opposed to Prop. 31.
     

    Misinformation about Proposition 31 includes:

    Tobacco companies claim that Prop. 31 is discriminatory because it criminalizes the sale of menthol cigarettes “preferred” by people of color. However, tobacco companies have been systematically targeting Black youth for decades with candy-flavored tobacco products. The share of Black Americans who smoke using minty menthols has dramatically increased since the 1950s because of tobacco corporations’ predatory marketing in Black communities.
  • Endorsed By Courage California

Depending on where you live, you may have the below city district races on your ballot.

  • Kent Lee

    Elect Kent Lee for San Diego City Council to put San Diego on the right track for progress.

    Kent Lee

    Elect Kent Lee for San Diego City Council to put San Diego on the right track for progress.

    Kent Lee

    Elect Kent Lee for San Diego City Council to put San Diego on the right track for progress.