California early voting has begun, and with it comes a lengthy list of ballot measures for Californians to weigh in on. All registered California voters will see 14 statewide propositions on their ballots. These measures range from allowing public campaign financing for candidates to creating low-cost mortgages for would-be homebuyers.

USC students and South Central voters should keep an eye on Prop. 1, Prop. 3, Prop. 40, Prop. 44 and Prop. 39, as they may have the most direct impact.

Prop. 1: Funding low-income and veteran housing

Prop. 1 will let the state borrow $11.25 billion through bonds to build and maintain affordable housing programs. That price is made up of a $10 billion bond for various housing programs and a $1.25 billion fund repaid by veterans’ home loan payments, according to the Legislative Analyst’s Office.

The $10 billion will fund housing initiatives such as Affordable Multifamily Housing Programs, low- and moderate-income homeownership programs and infrastructure programs to support affordable housing.

If this vote passed, it would represent the largest public investment in affordable housing in California history and could benefit residents of South Central who are veterans, senior citizens, low- and middle-income families, people with disabilities, students, people experiencing homelessness and more.

Prop. 2: Increase “rainy day” fund

Prop. 2, if passed, would exempt funds from the short-term Gann limit. These exclusions include deposits into the short-term reserve and the rainy day fund — a mandatory state savings account funded by tax revenues. It raises the rainy day fund’s current cap of 10% to up to 20% of general tax revenue.

This measure would let lawmakers save the extra revenue California brings in and put it into reserves like the rainy day fund, dividing it among schools and tax rebates — refunds and payouts the government gives to taxpayers. This provides leaders a way to avoid triggering taxpayer rebates in future budget surpluses.

As the Los Angeles Times put it, if California’s spending limit is $400 billion a year, and the state makes $410 billion, Prop. 2 would allow lawmakers to deposit the extra $10 billion in the rainy day fund and direct the money to funding for schools, state infrastructure or to local governments, instead of returning the money to taxpayers.

Prop. 3: Permanent high-income tax

Prop. 3 would make a temporary state income tax for high earners — currently set to expire in 2031 — permanent. The tax was first enacted in 2012 amid a budget crisis and extended until 2031 in 2016. It applies to individuals with annual incomes over $371,000 and to joint incomes over $742,000.

If passed, the tax rates for the top 2% of earners in California would remain the same, and if rejected, they would fall from 10.3% to 9.3% on their annual incomes. The measure would bring in between $5 billion and $15 billion each year, according to the Legislative Analyst’s Office.

The money from these taxes would go toward education, with 89% going to K-12 schools in California, such as schools in the Los Angeles Unified School District.

Prop. 4: Public funding of political campaigns

Prop. 4 would allow all state and local governments to create public campaign funds for candidates. The measure would repeal a 1988 ban on public campaign funding.

“The increasing costs of political campaigns can force candidates to rely on large contributions from wealthy donors and special interests, which can give those wealthy donors and special interests disproportionate influence over governmental decisions,” the official ballot states.

Under the new proposition, candidates would have to follow strict criteria and expenditure limits. The measure aims to broaden the pool of candidates without being tied to a singular interest, group or person.

Prop. 5: Changes to recall elections

Prop. 5 would modify how recall elections — a special voting process for citizens to remove an elected official from office before their term ends — are conducted and would separate the right to vote on a recall from the election of a successor. Under current California law, when an elected official is recalled in California, the election for their replacement occurs at the same time.

The ballot measure would automatically appoint the lieutenant governor to replace the recalled governor until the end of the term.

Prop. 37: Low-cost mortgages for homebuyers

Under Prop. 37, the California Housing Finance Agency would be able to borrow up to $25 billion to assist homeowners in purchasing new houses and condos. The loans would let the agency support a homebuyer with up to 17% of the purchase price of a newly constructed home priced below $1.5 million.

The state would not use taxpayer money, but rather pay back investors through interest and loan payments from programs administered by CalHFA. Eligible homebuyers must be California residents and have a household income no more than double the average income level in their area.

Prop. 38 Immunology research

Prop. 38 would authorize California to issue $8.4 billion in bonds to largely fund immunological research into topics like fighting cancer, heart disease and Alzheimer’s, as well as other diseases treated through immunotherapies. Half of the money would be distributed to the University of California system, and the other half to select public universities and nonprofits.

California would have an increased cost of $500 million to $600 million annually to repay the bond over 20 years, according to the Legislative Analyst’s Office.

Prop. 39: Voter Identification Requirements

Prop. 39 would require voters to show government-issued identification at polls and order election officials to verify that registered voters are U.S. citizens. This applies to mail-in voting too, requiring voters to include the last four digits of their driver’s license number on their mail-in ballot.

Under current California law, identification is required for people to register to vote, but not to vote at polling centers or through mail-in ballots.

This proposition comes after calls from President Trump in January 2025 to endorse a CA Voter ID as a “condition” for continued federal funding to the state.

Prop. 40: The Billionaire Tax

This measure would require California residents whose net worths exceed $1 billion — around 200 people — to pay a one-time 5% income tax. The money from this tax will primarily support healthcare, with some money reserved for food assistance and education.

Prop. 41 and Prop. 42 would block a billionaire’s tax. If all three propositions pass, whichever earns the most votes will go into effect. That means even if the billionaire tax is passed, it could be nullified.

Prop. 41: Audit to block billionaire tax

If Prop. 41 is passed, it would make it difficult to pass new special taxes by requiring the California auditor to review any special tax proposal, such as Prop. 40, before it is shared with voters. The proposition requires the auditor to examine whether the programs funded by these special taxes are achieving their goals, how to cut their costs by at least 10% and more.

The measure, also called the Improving Transparency, Effectiveness and Efficiency in California Government Act, would require an audit of new or higher taxes enacted after Jan. 1, 2026 every four years.

Prop. 42: Tax ban on personal property

Prop. 42, the Retirement and Personal Savings Protection Act, aims to protect retirement and personal savings. The measure would prohibit new taxes on certain assets such as investment accounts, personal property and business interests. Like Prop. 41, Prop. 42 can nullify Prop. 40 if it receives more in-favor votes and would prevent a future billionaire’s tax if it passes.

Prop. 43: Voting thresholds for special tax measures

Prop. 43 would clarify that any new local special tax on the ballot must earn at least two-thirds of the vote rather than a simple majority. Local taxes used for a specific purpose normally require a two-thirds threshold for approval, but California has recently allowed special taxes — local taxes where the money raised is for a specific purpose — proposed by citizens to pass using a simple majority vote.

If passed, this measure would go into effect on Jan. 1.

Prop. 44: More clinic funding on patient care

Prop. 44 would require federally qualified health centers and community clinics that serve low-income patients to spend 90% of their annual revenue on patient care. If their spending on non-healthcare and administrative functions exceeds 10% of total revenue, the clinics would have to pay a penalty equal to the amount they overspent.

Many healthcare organizations and providers oppose the bill, claiming it may subject already strained clinics to heavy fees. Supporters argue it will help cap healthcare executives’ salaries.

Prop. 45: Faster environmental reviews

Prop. 45 aims to rebuild the current process for reviewing projects deemed “essential” for housing, transportation, educational facilities, internet access, water, health, wildfire mitigation and clean energy. It would speed up the process by imposing stricter deadlines on environmental reviews, permits and court challenges.

There will be a 365-day limit on environmental reviews for projects such as infrastructure for roads and bridges, housing and schools, as well as a 270-day requirement for courts to rule on lawsuits related to the environmental review law.

According to the L.A. Times, opponents of Prop. 45 consist of over 300 environmental, housing, civil rights, labor, party, faith and climate organizations, such as the California Federation of Labor Unions.