Prop 33 and other ballot measures lead to big spending before Election Day

The 10 proposals on the ballot in California this year are responsible for a spending spree. Campaigns are spending more than $300 million to get their message to voters.

By far the biggest fundraising event this year was opposition to Proposition 33, which would allow cities and counties to impose strict rent caps on all types of housing. As of Oct. 19, the end of the campaign finance reporting period, the No on 33 main committee had raised $77 million, mostly from the California Apartment Association.

Since then, the Apartment Association has pumped an additional $11.5 million into its committee's coffers, and “No on Prop. 33” ads are still running on television and streaming services, warning that housing costs are rising could, hoping to persuade those who have not yet filled out their ballots.

Those ballots, which may still be hanging on the kitchen tables of many of California's 22 million registered voters, contain several pages dedicated to the proposals that made it through the Golden State's complex, century-old process of direct democracy.

“We're asking Californians to make decisions on pretty complex issues,” said Melissa Michelson, a political science professor at Menlo College.

“Political scientists will tell you that direct democracy is very popular,” Michelson said, “but it’s not necessarily a good way to do politics because you can only vote yes or no.”

Ten proposals is an average number that appears on the ballot, but this year's measures are an uphill battle “that is overshadowed by the presidential race because it is so contentious,” said Shaun Bowler, a political science professor at UC Riverside .

“These policy proposals need to make their voices heard above all the noise of the presidential election — and boy, is that hard,” Bowler said.

Total spending on this year's proposals falls short of the record $357 million raised by online gambling companies and tribal casinos for two measures that would have legalized sports betting in the Golden State in 2022.

Previously, Proposition 22 was the state's most expensive proposal — when Uber, Lyft and DoorDash spent more than $200 million in 2020 to push back a state law that would treat their drivers as employees.

At the end of October, the California Secretary of State reported that just over 6 million votes had already been cast.

While the opposition's spending was twice as high, Proposition 33 also triggered the second-most “yes” spending: as of October 19, nearly $42 million had been spent in support of the proposal.

Proposition 35 received the most “yes” spending of any measure, with over $50 million and no significant opposition spending. The proposal would establish a permanent tax to help fund health services provided by Medi-Cal, the state's Medicaid program that provides health care to low-income Californians.

All in all, “it’s an unimaginably large sum,” Bowler said. “But the job of these campaigns is to get (their message) across to voters … and there will be 20 million voters.”

Some of the more complex or specific proposals need to do more to communicate with voters, and that's where Bowler says support from environmental groups or local unions helps people decide.

On the other hand, some proposals, like Proposal 3, are simpler – and involve less expense.

Proposition 3 would repeal 2008's Proposition 8, which defined marriage as between a man and a woman. Since same-sex marriage was legalized in California in 2013 and nationwide in 2015, it has been more of a symbolic proposal, spending less money because people already know how they feel.

“If you've already made up your mind and it's a pretty clear-cut issue, it doesn't matter how many ads you get,” Michelson said.