Proposition 41Constitutional amendment · Citizen initiative
Spending limits and tax audits
Explain it like I'm 5
New special-tax programs would have to fit under the state spending limit and receive performance checks. Programs that perform worst could be ended.
Yes vote
New special taxes would count toward the state spending limit, and programs funded by them would face required audits and possible elimination for poor performance.
No vote
Current spending-limit and audit rules would remain in place.
The question to ask yourself
Should accountability rules outweigh the risk of limiting future tax-funded programs?
The case for
- Audits could show whether special-tax programs achieve their promised results.
- Counting new tax revenue toward the limit could restrain government growth.
- Ending weak programs could redirect money to programs that work better.
Backed by: California Society of Certified Public Accountants, CalAsian Chamber of Commerce, California Taxpayers Association, Building a Better California
The case against
- Automatic elimination could end services that are important but difficult to measure.
- The rules could make it harder to create or sustain dedicated funding.
- The measure could conflict with the billionaire-tax proposal, depending on how voters approve both measures.
Opposed by: U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders, SEIU United Healthcare Workers West
- Money
- The net fiscal effect is not estimated because it depends on future voter, legislative, and administrative decisions. [Official analysis](https://voterguide.sos.ca.gov/propositions/41/analysis.htm)
- Don't be misled
- It is misleading to describe this as only an audit measure because it also changes the spending limit and can eliminate low-performing programs.