Prop 33. Expands local governments' authority to enact rent control on residential property.

"Current state law (the Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act of 1995) generally prevents cities and counties from limiting the initial rental rate that landlords may charge to new tenants in all types of housing, and from limiting rent increases for existing tenants in (1) residential properties that were first occupied after February 1, 1995; (2) single-family homes; and (3) condominiums. This measure would repeal that state law and would prohibit the state from limiting the ability of cities and counties to maintain, enact, or expand residential rent-control ordinances."

This is an interesting one as I'm not sure which side I believe. I guess in the end I'd rather not use state initiatives to repeal existing laws. Let our state government govern.

Voting: NO

Prop 34. Restricts spending of prescription drug revenues by certain health care providers.

"Requires health care providers meeting specified criteria to spend 98% of revenues from federal discount prescription drug program on direct patient care."

Another interesting one in that it restricts how (some) health care providers can spend money from federal drug discount program (it's not direct revenue from the federal government; it's like the feds say some HCPs get drugs at a discount and those HCPs charge payors more than that (which you kind of do since running facilities and such also needs money).

I'm fine if it's state laws regulating how state funds are spent (or revenue derived from state programs and mandates). Less certain about federal money when the federal government didn't attach those restrictions themselves.

Voting: NO

Prop 35. Provides permanent funding for Medi-Cal health care services.

"Makes permanent the existing tax on managed health care insurance plans (currently set to expire in 2026), which, if approved by the federal government, provides revenues to pay for health care services for low-income families with children, seniors, disabled persons, and other Medi-Cal recipients. Requires revenues to be used only for specified Medi-Cal services, including primary and specialty care, emergency care, family planning, mental health, and prescription drugs."

There is no con argument. For the most part California government renews that tax every few years since there is matching Federal funds so I don't think there's a danger of the tax being removed. So I guess the big change in this initiative is how those funds are spent, shifting from more private care to more hospital/clinic care.

Voting: YES

Prop 36. Allows felony charges and increases sentences for certain drug and theft crimes.

"Allows felony charges for possessing certain drugs and for thefts under $950—both currently chargeable only as misdemeanors—with two prior drug or two prior theft convictions, as applicable. Defendants who plead guilty to felony drug possession and complete treatment can have charges dismissed. Increases sentences for other specified drug and theft crimes."

Partially overturns parts of Prop 47 (2014). I'm fairly sure I would have voted No for Prop 47 but it passed and it's only been 10 years so I don't want to re-litigate those arguments.

Voting: NO