Hello, friends and enemies! I don’t know about you, but I can’t wait for this election to end. This has to be the most ridiculous election of my life so far, but there’s nothing to do but persevere. Please remember that, even if you feel disillusioned by the presidential race, it’s important to vote! Even if you skip voting for the president, make sure to vote on local elections and issues, which will have a much bigger impact on your day-to-day life.
¿Buscas la versión en español? Está aquí.
Reminders and Resources for California Voters
- Everyone in California will get a ballot in the mail this election! You do not have to go to a polling place if you don’t want to.
- Register to vote. The last day to register is Monday, October 21. You can still register after October 21, but you need to use the same-day voter registration form.
- Check your voter status online: https://voterstatus.sos.ca.gov/
- Ballot drop-off locations open Tuesday, October 8. See where you can vote or drop off your paper ballot: https://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/polling-place
- Remember to sign your ballot envelope!
Disclaimer: I am not an expert on politics or government. I’m just a person who’s good at reading and looking things up. If you trust my judgment, you can vote how I vote. You can also use my guide as a starting point for your own research.
Quick Reference
This table summarizes how I’m planning to vote in this election. I explain my choices below!
| Position/Proposition | My Vote |
| President of the United States | Claudia de la Cruz |
| United States Senate: Full Term | Adam Schiff |
| United States Senate: Partial/Unexpired Term | Adam Schiff |
| Proposition 2 | Yes |
| Proposition 3 | Yes |
| Proposition 4 | Yes |
| Proposition 5 | Yes |
| Proposition 6 | Yes |
| Proposition 32 | Yes |
| Proposition 33 | Yes |
| Proposition 34 | No |
| Proposition 35 | Yes |
| Proposition 36 | No |
| United States House of Representatives: District 7 | Doris Matsui |
| California State Assembly District 10 | Stephanie Nguyen |
| Mayor of Elk Grove | Bobbie Singh-Allen |
| Elk Gove City Council Member, District 1 | Darren Suen |
| Elk Grove Unified School District Measure N | Yes |
Party-nominated offices
President of the United States
My vote: Claudia de la Cruz
I have felt fraught about this choice for months. I’m sure it goes without saying that I am deeply opposed to Trump, especially now that Project 2025 (which I wrote a little bit about in this post) has built up around him. We already know what a Trump presidency looks like and we rejected it in 2020. There is no reason to vote for that man.
What I’m conflicted about is whether I should vote for Kamala Harris. I think it’s insane that Dick Cheney endorsed her and she feels “honored” by that (which I also discussed previously). She’s being wildly conservative on immigration. She is firm in her support of Israel, even though the country is now attacking Lebanon. I do think some of her domestic policies like support for first-time home buyers and restoring the Child Tax Credit are good. But then, she says things like “I will not ban fracking,” and she wants to give the police even more money. Fifteen years ago, this would have been a Republican platform! I am worried that not voting for Harris will result in another Trump presidency. As much as I do not support Harris, I fully believe that Trump will be much worse.
Given that I live in California and there is essentially zero chance that this state will vote for Trump, I have decided to vote for a third-party presidential candidate. I am not sure that I would make this same choice if I lived in a more electorally contentious state. Claudia de la Cruz is the candidate the Peace and Freedom party backs (that’s the party I’m registered with). She’s a socialist, she supports Palestine and immediately ending aid to Israel, she wants to gut the military budget, and transform our society to avoid the worst effects of climate change. I don’t think she has any chance of winning, but she is the kind of person I would want to be president, so she’s who I’m voting for.
Here are some brief thoughts on the other candidates:
- Jill Stein: In 2016, Russia used Jill Stein as a spoiler candidate to pull votes away from Hillary Clinton.
- Robert F. Kennedy Jr.: Maybe lets not vote for the guy who had a parasitic worm in his brain and who is anti-vaccines. I will say again that anyone who thinks vaccines cause autism is suggesting they would rather let autistic people die of preventable disease than live and be autistic. As an autistic person, I find this deeply offensive.
- Chase Oliver: I think libertarians are ridiculous. This article basically sums up my feelings: Libertarianism “ejects any responsibility for our mutual right to life, where we are all created approximately equal. It would put freedom and property rights ahead of our basic needs, rather than the other way around.”
Voter-nominated offices
United States Senate: Full Term and Partial/Unexpired Term
My vote: Adam Schiff
You may remember from the primary election that we have this confusing situation with the full term and partial/unexpired term senate seats. Both of these votes are for the same position. One of our California senators is Alex Padilla who will serve until 2029. We are voting to fill Diane Feinstein’s position. After her death last year, Governor Newsom appointed Laphonza Butler to her seat. Butler is not seeking election to the Senate. Voting for the Partial/Unexpired Term is picking a senator to finish the rest of Feinstein’s original senate term, which ends in January 2025. The Full Term position is our regularly scheduled senate election for the term starting in 2025. You could vote for different people for each of these positions, but that would not be super helpful because you’d have a senator coming in for two months then a new senator taking over in January.
I am voting for Schiff because I’m not voting for a Republican whose only skill is playing baseball. However, Schiff was not at all my first choice for this senate seat. He was one of the very few Democrats to vote to support the Republican’s standalone bill to give Israel $17.6 billion back in February. His strategy for winning the primary was underhanded in my opinion. The way California’s primary system is structured, thanks to the Top Two Candidates Open Primary Act, means that we could have had two Democrats running for the senate seat instead of a Democrat and a Republican. However, as the LA Times explains, “In an effort to box Porter out, Schiff and his allies staged what amounted to a free advertising campaign for Garvey, running political ads across the state calling the former Dodgers and Padres first baseman ‘too conservative for California’ — focusing conservative voters’ attention on him — and framing the election as a two-man race.” So, now we have Schiff v. Garvey and no second Democratic candidate to push the race to the left.
All that said, I do think Schiff has some decent policy in his platform, even though his whole image is kind of focused on being an anti-Trump guy (who will he be if [when?] Trump loses in November?). He wants California to build more housing to alleviate the homelessness crisis and he wants to end subsidies for fossil fuels, which I think is great. Still, I wish I were voting for Katie Porter or Barbara Lee for our senator.
Propositions
Proposition 2
AUTHORIZES BONDS FOR PUBLIC SCHOOL AND COMMUNITY COLLEGE FACILITIES. LEGISLATIVE STATUTE.
My vote: Yes
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, I am always going to vote for education. This proposition “authorizes $10 billion in general obligation bonds for repair, upgrade, and construction of facilities”, and this includes funds “for improvement of health and safety conditions.” Yes, it costs money, but it’s not a tax increase, it’s being paid for through the state issuing bonds. If we’re going to make kids go to school every day, the least we can do is make sure the environment is in good shape. The text of the law cites a study that 40 percent of classrooms are 50 or more years old and that “Research on school building conditions and student outcomes finds a consistent relationship between poor facilities and poor performance by students,” so this stuff is important. The funds will go to things like purchasing air conditioning (very important in our increasingly hot world), identifying and getting rid of asbestos, and more. The last time voters authorized a school bond like this was in 2016, and that money has been spent.
Proposition 3
CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO MARRIAGE. LEGISLATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT
My vote: Yes
This one is easy. It doesn’t cost any money and it codifies the right to same-sex marriage in our state constitution. A “yes” vote means that the state will update the constitution from “Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California” to “The right to marry is a fundamental right.” Allowing other people to get married doesn’t hurt you even if you don’t personally want to get gay married! Please note that, despite what the opponents of this proposition may say, it will not change the laws about the age at which people can get married.
Proposition 4
AUTHORIZES BONDS FOR SAFE DRINKING WATER, WILDFIRE PREVENTION, AND PROTECTING COMMUNITIES AND NATURAL LANDS FROM CLIMATE RISKS. LEGISLATIVE STATUTE.
My vote: Yes
Call me crazy, but safe drinking water and wild fire protection seem like some of the most important things for the government to spend money on. This is another bond measure, which means we won’t pay through it directly with a tax increase, but the state will issue bonds to fund it. According to the LA Times, “$3.8 billion would be allocated to water projects, including those that provide for safe drinking water, recycle wastewater, store groundwater and control flooding. An additional $1.5 billion would be spent on wildfire protection, and $1.2 billion would go toward protecting the coast from sea level rise.” Considering how we’re already seeing increased effects of climate change in the form of more frequent and stronger fires, longer droughts, and rising sea levels, I think it’s important to vote yes on this proposition so California can do what it can to keep us safe.
Proposition 5
ALLOWS LOCAL BONDS FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE WITH 55% VOTER APPROVAL. LEGISLATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.
My vote: Yes
Approving proposition 5 makes it possible for local bond proposals to pass with a 55 percent vote, instead of a two-thirds vote for certain types of projects, including low-income housing and parks. For local school construction bonds, we have already lowered the approval threshold to 55 percent. It seems like the main opposition to this proposition is on the grounds that taxes could increase because local governments could issue bonds (and the government has to eventually pay the bonds back). At this point, I think we need to try whatever we can do get more affordable housing, so I am voting yes on this.
Proposition 6
ELIMINATES CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISION ALLOWING INVOLUNTARY SERVITUDE FOR INCARCERATED PERSONS. LEGISLATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.
My vote: Yes
Even though slavery is generally illegal, the California constitution states that “Involuntary servitude is prohibited except to punish crime.” This means that people in prison can be forced to work, and for incredibly low wages. As of 2017, California prisoners could, at most, make 95 cents per hour. Prison wages have been stagnant for 40 years. These low wages are propping up lots of American companies, as AP News reported earlier this year, “The goods these prisoners produce wind up in the supply chains of a dizzying array of products found in most American kitchens, from Frosted Flakes cereal and Ball Park hot dogs to Gold Medal flour, Coca-Cola and Riceland rice. They are on the shelves of virtually every supermarket in the country, including Kroger, Target, Aldi and Whole Foods.” It’s hard not to see forced, low-wage prison labor as a way for corporations to evade hiring non-incarcerated workers and paying them a normal wage. At the risk of sounding like a conspiracy theorist, I must point out the Supreme Court ruling from earlier this year that effectively criminalized homelessness. It seems like an excuse to put homeless people in prison and make them work instead of finding ways to make housing more accessible. I think making forced prison labor illegal removes some of that incentive.
Proposition 32
RAISES MINIMUM WAGE. INITIATIVE STATUTE.
My vote: Yes
Given that “corporate profits accounted for about 53% of inflation during last year’s second and third quarters” and corporate profits increased $132.5 billion in quarter two this year, I think corporations can afford to pay higher wages. The wage increase will be phased in over two years, and depend on how many employees a company has: “For employers with 26 or more employees, to $17 immediately, $18 on January 1, 2025. For employers with 25 or fewer employees, to $17 on January 1, 2025, $18 on January 1, 2026.” Studies show that you would need to make $47 an hour to afford a two-bedroom rental in California, so, raising the minimum wage to $18 is the bare minimum. According to the text of the law, if federal minimum wage “had increased at the rate of productivity growth since 1960, it would be $24 right now.”
Proposition 33
EXPANDS LOCAL GOVERNMENTS’ AUTHORITY TO ENACT RENT CONTROL ON RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY. INITIATIVE STATUTE.
My vote: Yes
This is not the first ballot initiative to attempt to repeal the Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act of 1995, which prevents municipalities from enacting rent control. Proposition 21 in 2020 would have repealed some of the Costa-Hawkins Act, and 2018’s proposition 10 would have repealed it entirely, but voters rejected both. Despite rising rents, we keep voting against rent control measures. I assume this has a lot to do with how much money the real estate industry has spent to oppose it. For the current election cycle, as of the end of September, this proposition was on the one that had inspired the most spending, with $37.7 million spent in favor and $75.1 million against. There is no reason we shouldn’t have rent control! The voter information guide says that the fiscal impact of passing this would be a “reduction in local property tax revenues of at least tens of millions of dollars,” but that’s imaginary money. We would lose the potential for increased property tax revenues because rent might not go up as much. We’re not losing money, we just wouldn’t be gaining more money. There’s a difference.
Proposition 34
RESTRICTS SPENDING OF PRESCRIPTION DRUG REVENUES BY CERTAIN HEALTH CARE PROVIDERS. INITIATIVE STATUTE.
My vote: No
This proposition is all about election drama. It is an effort by the California Apartment Association, who is sponsoring the legislation, to limit the AIDS Healthcare Foundation’s political spending. The LA Times explains this better than I can:
The measure is sponsored by the California Apartment Assn., which has tangled with the AIDS Healthcare Foundation for years over its efforts to enable stricter rent control laws through ballot initiatives.
The AIDS Healthcare Foundation takes in $2 billion a year, mostly from its chain of pharmacies and clinics. Its foray into housing has drawn criticism that it has strayed from its mission of helping those living with HIV or AIDS.
In recent years, the healthcare foundation has spent more than $300 million to fund rent control initiatives and buy apartment buildings across the country, including in and around Skid Row, saying it could address chronic homelessness where others failed.
As of the end of September, proponents of this proposition have spent just under $30 million, with the California Apartment Association “contributing nearly all of the supporting funds.”
Proposition 35
PROVIDES PERMANENT FUNDING FOR MEDI-CAL HEALTH CARE SERVICES. INITIATIVE STATUTE.
My vote: Yes
This proposition has literally no opponents and no one has spent any money to oppose it. It would make permanent a tax on managed health care insurance plans (like Kaiser) that is currently set to expire in 2026. This will increase funding to certain types of medical services (there’s a handy chart here showing how the funding allocations would change).
Proposition 36
ALLOWS FELONY CHARGES AND INCREASES SENTENCES FOR CERTAIN DRUG AND THEFT CRIMES. INITIATIVE STATUTE.
My vote: No
Proposition 36 would charge “an offender with two prior convictions for theft with a felony, regardless of the value of the stolen property,” according to the text of the proposed law, and make certain drug-related crimes into felonies. Currently, $950 worth of theft counts as a misdemeanor, but Proposition 36 would mean that if someone stole $900 worth of goods and had two prior convictions, they would be a felon.
This legislation seems to be a reaction to the moral panic about shoplifting, but “there’s little data to suggest that there’s a nationwide problem in need of an immediate response from city councils or state legislatures.” Walmart “is proposition 36’s biggest supporter with $3.5 million in contributions. Other top donors include retailers such as Home Depot and Target with $1 million each and 7-Eleven and associated committees with more than $600,000.” So this sounds to me like retailers are mad about shoplifting and are trying to make the punishment more serious.
A 2014 report from the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation found that the three-year recidivism rate (the number of people who are arrested again within three years) for felons was in the 60 to 70 percent range from 2002 through 2009. In comparison, the nationwide recidivism rate (which includes misdemeanors and felonies) is a little over 40 percent. The length of incarceration is also related to an increase in recidivism, and with felons serving longer sentences, which suggests that classifying more crimes as felonies would result in higher rates of recidivism. Our prisons are already overcrowded. This is a bad reason to make it worse.
Local Candidates and Issues
United States House of Representatives: District 7
My vote: Doris Matsui
As I wrote in this year’s primary election voter guide, Doris Matsui is 79 years old. At what point are these people going to retire? I certainly wouldn’t be signing up for another term at her age. I also still think it’s dismissive of her to not bother putting a statement in the voter information guide. In general, she does vote in ways I agree with. However, she keeps voting to send more money to Israel. This country’s support for Israel is unconscionable at this point, but what am I going to do, vote for a Republican who will support Israel and make things worse for me here in the U.S.?
California State Assembly District 10
My vote: Stephanie Nguyen
Stephanie Nguyen is our incumbent assembly member. She seems like she’s doing a good job. I’m on her mailing list and I always see her doing local events that seem like she is genuinely connecting with people, like announcing she’ll be going for a walk in a certain area and that people are welcome to join her to discuss issues. I think that’s cool. Her opponent, Republican Vinaya Singh, has a website with the slogan “Make California great again,” which seems a very unsubtle way to broadcast a love for Trump and his destructive policies. No thanks.
Mayor of Elk Grove
My vote: Bobbie Singh-Allen
I really wish we had local press here in Elk Grove because I honestly have no idea how Singh-Allen has been as our mayor. The only thing I know that she’s done is put up the rainbow flag at city hall during pride month (which, yay), but that’s not exactly substantive. Most of the news I could find about her was from the Sac Bee coverage of the 2020 election, which is not particularly relevant now. I’d like to know how much of a role she played in rejecting affordable housing, which led to the state suing (and subsequently settling with) the city. We also know she supports Proposition 36, which I don’t appreciate. Still, I think local elections come down to quality of life issues and I know I can’t expect actual leftism in a local municipal government, especially for a city with mixed demographics like Elk Grove.
As to Singh-Allen’s challengers, I think Brian Pastor is a 5G conspiracy theorist. His website has a question-and-answer section and one of the questions is “What are your opinions on 5g technology and our internet services infrastructure?” He writes, “We have to consider the science when it comes to high-frequency telecommunication technology and its impact on our health. I’ll push to prevent 5g deployment near residential areas, keeping the broadcasting range at least 1200 feet away from homes and playgrounds.” However, per the FDA, “there is no consistent or credible scientific evidence of health problems caused by the exposure to radio frequency energy emitted by cell phones.” As for Lynn Wheat, all I could find was this 12-year-old youtube video. I’m not really sure what her deal is and her website says it’s “launching soon.” There’s not a lot of time left, Lynn!
Elk Gove City Council Member, District 1
My vote: Darren Suen
Darren Suen is running unopposed and has been on the city council since 2014. So, I guess he’s got my vote.
Elk Grove Unified School District Measure N
To repair, modernize, and construct classrooms, labs, school
My vote: Yes
I don’t have kids, but I still believe that making sure kids can get a good education is one of the most important functions of society. The funding for this will come from property taxes, “Facility improvements and upgrades will be funded through property tax assessments. Measure N will levy a yearly fee of $34 per $100,000 assessed value,” which is honestly not that much. I’m willing to shell out an extra $100 per year for schools.
Share This Post!
You made it to the end! I invite you to share this post if you found it useful. Please leave a comment if you think I missed something important. Thanks for voting!
1 Comment
Comments are closed.