News

A guide to California Props 1 and 27

With the midterm elections on Tuesday, Californians will vote on propositions to enact changes in abortion care and online gambling.

With the overturn of Roe v. Wade in June, California looked to protect its current rights of allowing women and other individuals the ability to have an abortion in the state’s constitution.

Proposition 1 was introduced on this year’s ballot because, although the California Constitution guarantees a right to privacy, it does not explicitly list access to an abortion as one of those rights, according to CalMatters.

Many Democratic politicians, including California Governor Gavin Newsom (D), are in support of Prop 1. Newsom signed a set of bills into law in September which further protected the rights of those seeking an abortion, such as Assembly Bill 2223, and those who perform abortions, such as Assembly Bill 2626.

Some politicians, such as California State Senator and gubernatorial candidate Brian Dahle (R), wish to rethink the way California handles abortion.

Dahle said the current law on abortion is too extreme and that plans to be a sanctuary state for individuals whose home states make abortions illegal is too costly for California to handle, according to an exclusive Q&A with NBC KCRA 3.

“Californians are already suffering with putting food on the table and the budget is decreasing as we speak with the stock market going down,” Dahle said.

Besides just healthcare, Californian’s will be able to decide of online sports betting will be legalized through Prop 27.

This proposition would legalize online sports betting for those aged 21 and older and would allow it to occur outside of Indian tribal lands. It would also tax 10% on revenue and licensing and would go to fund homelessness programs and Indian tribes that don’t take part in gambling, according to Ballotpedia.

Political figures such as Democratic Senate President Pro Tempore Toni Atkins and Senate Republican Leader Scott Wilk bring up sentiments of how Indian tribes would lose the benefits they gain from betting to out-of-state corporations, according to a press release from “Vote No on 27”.

Prop 27 also faces competition on the ballot in the form of Prop 26, which would allow Indian tribes to have and profit off of sports betting on their land, but not outside of it, from professional sports to amateur events.

If Prop 26 were to pass and 27 doesn’t, Indian tribes would be able to receive money from sports betting and keep it to their lands and communities, while following regulations like funding gambling addiction resources and to a general fund.

But if Prop 27 were to pass and 26 doesn’t, out-of-state corporations like FanDuel and BetMGM, which support from Prop 27, would profit from sports betting.

Comments are closed.

Newsletter

Daily 49er newsletter