Prop. 62: Would re-structure primary elections so that all state and congressional candidates appear on ballot together, regardless of party affiliation. The two primary-election candidates receiving the most votes would appear on the general election ballot, even if one of the two received a majority of the vote, and even if the two were of the same party. The presidential nominating process would remain unaffected.

Prop 63: Would impose a 1% tax on incomes of over $1 million to fund expanded health services for mentally ill citizens. It would generate approximately $275 million in 2004-05 and increasing amounts every year after. The state and counties would also be subject to additional expenditures for mental health programs, mirroring the amounts raised by the surcharge.

Prop. 64: Would limit an individual’s right to bring class action "unfair business" lawsuits to claims where the individual was actually injured by, and suffered financial/property loss because of, an unfair business practice. It would require the claims to meet procedural requirements for class action lawsuits, and authorizes only the California Attorney General or local government prosecutors to sue on behalf of the general public to enforce unfair business competition laws.

Prop. 65: Would limit state authority to reduce major local tax revenues. Its restrictions would prevent a major component of the 2004-05 budget plan (a $1.3 billion property tax shift in 2004-05 and again in 2005-06) from taking effect unless approved by the state's voters. It would permit the state to modify future local tax revenues for the fiscal benefit of the state with state voter approval.

Prop. 66: Would re-structure the current "Three Strikes" law to require that a felony triggering the second and third "strike" be a violent or serious crime instead of any felony, as under the current law. It would also increase punishments for specified sex crimes against children.

Prop. 67: Would increase the in-state telephone surcharge to fund uncompensated emergency care such as hospital emergency rooms, community clinics and the 911 telephone system. It would also redistribute some existing revenue and change the way that revenue is administered.

Prop. 68: Would require gaming tribes to pay 25% of their "net win" to the state or lose their monopoly on casino-style gambling. If the proposition passes and all tribes do not agree to its rules, casino-style gambling would be open to card clubs and racetracks.

Prop. 69: Proposition 69 would expand California law enforcement's right to collect DNA samples and store genetic information in the California DNA and Forensic Identification Data Base. The program would be funded by additional monetary penalties imposed upon certain court fines and criminal forfeitures. An initial $7 million dollar loan would be authorized to implement the program.

Prop. 70: Would continue the tribal gaming monopoly, tax Indian gaming income at the state corporate tax rate, waive most other state and local taxes and fees on tribal gambling activities, and would require the governor to negotiate new 99-year compacts at a gaming tribe's request.

Prop. 71: Would authorize state bonds to raise $3 billion to create the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine. The Institute would provide funding to California stem cell researchers at universities, medical schools, hospitals and research facilities.

Prop. 72: Would approve the Health Insurance Act of 2003 (SB2) which would require companies with 200 or more employees to buy health insurance for workers and their families by 2006. Firms with 50 to 199 employees would be required to buy coverage for their employees starting in 2007.

Prepared by the staff of the IGS Library. Send comments to igsl@uclink.berkeley.edu.