![\"Bernie](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/US-NEWS-CALIF-BILLIONAIRE-TAX-SANDERS-LA.JPG\" "\\"Sen.")
<\/p>\n <\/p>\n
Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vermont, speaks at a Los Angeles rally in support of SEIU-UHW West\u2019s proposed wealth tax ballot meaasure. Wealthy critics of the initiative are gathering signatures for their own proposals designed to undermine the tax.<\/p>\n
Jason Armond<\/p>\n
Los Angeles Times<\/p>\n
Every two years, California voters are confronted with a wall of ballot measures ranging from nitty-gritty legal tweaks to sweeping changes to the state Constitution.<\/p>\n
This year is no different. Californians could decide to institute a new wealth tax on billionaires, cap health care executive salaries, curtail unions\u2019 political activities and require voter identification at the polls.<\/p>\n
Ballot measures are no longer a grassroots undertaking. It costs millions of dollars<\/a> just to collect enough signatures to qualify a measure. Firms hiring petition gatherers are advertising payouts between $3 and $10 per signature, and measures need up to 874,641 registered voters to qualify. Many of the 31 measures that have been cleared for circulation won\u2019t make the cut, and others exist to try to force concessions from political opponents or the Legislature.<\/p>\n California voters have historically rejected around 65% of measures, according to data<\/a> analyzed by University of California, San Diego, political science professor Thad Kousser. So, given the costs, why bother?<\/p>\n \u201cIt\u2019s because the stakes are in the billions\u201d of dollars, Kousser said. \u201cA victory in California reverberates across the nation and leads to people emulating that in blue states across the country.\u201d<\/p>\n Here are several major ballot measures to watch:<\/p>\n Taxes<\/p>\n Arguably no measure has inspired more political maneuvering than the 2026 Billionaire Tax Act backed by SEIU United Healthcare Workers West. The proposed constitutional amendment would impose a one-time tax<\/a> on California residents with a net worth over $1 billion. Individuals with a net worth over $1.1 billion would pay a 5% tax, with a sliding scale for those between $1 billion and $1.1 billion.<\/p>\n Most of the revenue \u2014 90% \u2014 would fund health care programs, including Medi-Cal, while 10% would support education and food assistance programs.<\/p>\n The unions supporting the measure say it\u2019s needed to address the Republican megabill signed by President Trump last year, which included provisions that state legislative analysts say could force millions of people off of insurance. Backers warn that without the billionaire tax, dozens of hospitals and emergency departments could also be forced to close.<\/p>\n The billionaires are pushing back. Google co-founder Sergey Brin has dumped $45 million into a campaign committee that\u2019s sponsoring a handful of other ballot measures, including three currently collecting signatures, that seek to counteract the tax in various ways. One would require any new tax<\/a> to abide by rules that steer a portion of state funding to schools rather than another targeted area\u2014in this case, healthcare. Another would require extensive audits<\/a> of any programs slated to receive funding from a \u201cspecial tax initiative.\u201d A third would ban most taxes that apply retroactively<\/a>, including ones that appear on the same ballot\u2013e.g., the billionaire tax.<\/p>\n Brin\u2019s committee, \u201cBuilding a Better California,\u201d has also received multimillion dollar contributions from the CEOs of Doordash, Stripe and Ripple as well as venture capitalists Michael Moritz and L. John Doerr.<\/p>\n Other critics of the measure include Gov. Gavin Newsom, who has started his own committee on the issue, and most of the frontrunners in the race to replace him (Democrat Tom Steyer, whose net worth Forbes estimates at $2.4 billion, has said he\u2019d prefer other mechanisms to tax the rich but would back it if it was the only option). Critics warn the one-time tax could drive wealthy people out of the state, imperilling its long-term finances.<\/p>\n Other major tax and regulation-related ballot measures include:<\/p>\n \u2022 An initiative that would cement a 2012 voter-approved tax<\/a> on high-income Californians ($360,000 in income for single filers, $721,000 for joint filers) that\u2019s currently set to expire in 2031. The funding would continue to go to K-12 schools and community colleges.<\/p>\n \u2022 A proposal to exempt a principal residence from property taxes<\/a> if a homeowner is over the age of 60 and has used the house as a principal residence for five consecutive years.<\/p>\n Unions and businesses<\/p>\n Brin\u2019s committee is also supporting a proposal from the California Chamber of Commerce to overhaul of the California Environmental Quality Act, a significant law that requires environmental review and public input on new development and infrastructure projects. CEQA critics say it\u2019s often used to delay new housing and other developments, contributing to the state\u2019s housing crisis and high cost of living.<\/p>\n The ballot measure would impose new deadlines on reviews of a broad range of \u201cspecial projects\u201d including housing, hospitals, water treatment facilities and transit infrastructure.<\/p>\n The measure would give government officials one year to approve or deny applications. It would limit the timeline for court reviews and reduce public agencies\u2019 current obligations to consider alternative projects. Its backers include the California Building Industry Association, Edison International and Brin\u2019s committee, which has so far contributed $5 million.<\/p>\n The ballot measure expands major CEQA exemptions Newsom signed into law last year<\/a> focused more narrowly on housing projects. Those changes were widely opposed by environmental groups, who are lining up against the latest CEQA overhaul.<\/p>\n Elizabeth Reid-Wainscoat, a policy specialist at the Center for Biodiversity, said the measure would \u201cerode\u201d CEQA and damage California\u2019s environment, calling it a \u201chandout to tech billionaires who want to profit at the expense of Californians.\u201d<\/p>\n In other cases, unions and business interests are battling with dueling signature campaigns.<\/p>\n The California Association of Hospitals and Health Systems is financing a measure that would limit health care unions from funding ballot measures, arguing in its filing<\/a> that the unions often use the ballot process for what it calls \u201ccorrupt purposes\u201d like leverage in negotiations with health care providers.<\/p>\n The measure would require the health care unions to get sign-off from a majority of their members before contributing more than $1 million to a statewide ballot campaign.<\/p>\n The SEIU-UHW West \u2014 the group backing the billionaire tax \u2014 is sponsoring another proposal that would cap hospitals and medical entities from paying executives more than $450,000 in total annual compensation, with annual adjustments tied to inflation. In its filing, the union argues current executive pay is<\/a> \u201cexcessive, unnecessary, and inconsistent with the corporations\u2019 charitable purposes.\u201d<\/p>\n Uber and trial attorneys<\/p>\n Uber is driving a controversial ballot measure that aims to cut into the pocketbooks of trial attorneys who represent people hurt in car accidents involving the ride-share company\u2019s drivers<\/p>\n The measure would cap the contingency fees those attorneys can charge their clients, as well as the amount of medical expenses someone can ask for in a lawsuit.<\/p>\n The ride-share company says it\u2019s pushing back against predatory \u201cbillboard attorneys\u201d who lure accident victims in through prolific advertising and then put them through medical procedures they don\u2019t need and take the better part of any legal settlements. The company has put $32.5 million so far into a campaign committee to make its case to voters.<\/p>\n Trial attorneys also have deep pockets, setting up an expensive political brawl. So far, committees backed by the attorneys have put together more than $50 million to oppose Uber\u2019s measure and advance their own countermeasures.<\/p>\n The Uber-backed campaign is playing to recent high profile instances of corruption among trial attorneys, such as allegations that a Los Angeles firm paid people to file fabricated sexual assault claims and the embezzlement case against famed trial attorney Thomas Girardi.<\/p>\n But trial attorney advocacy organizations, and academic legal experts who don\u2019t have a dog in the fight, say those attacks obscure the high stakes for consumers writ large. Capping the attorney fees, even slightly, will upset the incentive for attorneys to take cases on a contingency basis \u2014 where the person hurt by an Uber driver isn\u2019t required to pay expensive hourly fees just to bring a case, experts say. The measure could \u201cdecimate people\u2019s ability to retain legal representation,\u201d one Stanford professor told The Sacramento Bee in December<\/a>.<\/p>\n Elections<\/p>\n California voters would need to produce government-issued ID<\/a> when they go to vote under a ballot measure spearheaded by Assemblymember Carl DeMaio, R-Valley Center. Voters sending in a mail-in ballot would need to provide the last four digits of a government-issued ID number, like a driver\u2019s license. The measure would also require election officials to use government data to verify the citizenship of people on their voter rolls and publish annual reports listing the percentage of people who\u2019ve been confirmed that way.<\/p>\n DeMaio says his group has already collected more than enough signatures to appear on the ballot and is bullish on the odds of it passing, citing polling showing a majority of voters support the concept.<\/p>\n There are a number of other election measures that are so far unfunded and therefore unlikely to gather enough signatures.<\/p>\n DeMaio is also the author of a measure that would prevent any legislator who voted in favor of last year\u2019s mid-decade redistricting ballot measure, Proposition 50, from holding office for the next decade.<\/p>\n Another proposal, from a Democratic congressional hopeful, would require the California attorney general to sue any U.S. president who attempts to serve a third term, and, if a federal court finds the president ineligible to serve, attempt to arrest and detain them under existing state law.<\/p>\n Then there\u2019s a proposal that lays the groundwork for a 2028 vote on a weighty question: Should California leave the United States and become a free and independent country?\u201d<\/p>\n A \u201cyes\u201d vote would constitute an \u201cexpression of the will of the people of California.\u201d Not much would immediately change aside from the removal of U.S. flags from state-managed property. It would, however, create a very California institution: a commission to further study the issue.<\/p>\n This story was originally published March 21, 2026 at 5:00 AM.<\/p>\n Related Stories from Sacramento Bee<\/p>\n![\"Rocklin](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/SAC_6416_HA_250701_MedicaidCuts.JPG\" "\\"SAC_6416_HA_250701_MedicaidCuts.JPG\\"")
Rocklin nurses rally against the Republican megabill outside Rep. Kevin Kiley\u2019s district office last year. Proponents of the wealth tax say it\u2019s needed to avoid deep cuts to health care in California. HECTOR AMEZCUA hamezcua@sacbee.com <\/p>\n![\"A](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/VILLAGE-FARMS-FILE-3.jpg\" "\\"VILLAGE-FARMS-FILE-3.jpg\\"")
A construction worker installs electrical conduit at The Cannery housing development in Davis in 2015. CEQA\u2019s critics say it\u2019s used to delay and add costs to new housing and infrastructure, while its backers argue it helps protect California\u2019s environment and community health. Manny Crisostomo Sacramento Bee file <\/p>\n![\"Assemblymember](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/SAC_9785_Redistricting_HA_250821.JPG\" "\\"SAC_9785_Redistricting_HA_250821.JPG\\"")
Assemblymember Carl DeMaio, pictured at a rally last year, is behind efforts to require voter ID at the polls and another measure that seeks to punish lawmakers who voted for mid-decade redistricting. HECTOR AMEZCUA hamezcua@sacbee.com <\/p>\n
![\"Profile](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/SAC_9987_BenPaviour_HA_260224.jpg\")