# Proposition 2: Increases State's Rainy Day Fund

*measure · California statewide proposition* — November 3, 2026 General Election (2026-11-03), Los Angeles County, California

Research pack generated 2026-10-30T23:52:30+00:00 by ballotscope. Summaries are LLM-generated from the linked originals and may contain errors; check the originals before relying on anything. Sources span 2026-06-25 to 2026-10-23.

## Overview (as of 2026-10-28, from 16 sources)

Proposition 2 is a legislative constitutional amendment (ACA 20, the "Save for California's Future Act") that the Legislature placed on the November 3, 2026 ballot  [Proposition 2 Text of Proposed Laws (ACA 20); Proposition 2 Official Title and Summary and Analysis by the Legislative Analyst]. It would raise the cap on the state's main rainy day fund, the Budget Stabilization Account, from 10 to 20 percent of General Fund taxes, and require larger set-asides when capital gains revenue is very high  [Proposition 2: Increases State's Rainy Day Fund (LAO ballot analysis); Proposition 2 Official Title and Summary and Analysis by the Legislative Analyst; Proposition 2 Text of Proposed Laws (ACA 20)]. It would also extend required extra debt payments from 2030 to 2040 and allow them to go to more purposes, including school obligations, internal borrowing, and federal unemployment insurance loans  [Proposition 2: Increases State's Rainy Day Fund (LAO ballot analysis); Should Voters Approve Proposition 2? How California's Rainy Day Fund Would Be Updated; Proposition 2 Text of Proposed Laws (ACA 20)]. It would change how rainy day fund deposits, and surplus holding account deposits up to 10 percent of General Fund taxes, count under the state appropriations (Gann) limit: deposits would count only when withdrawn  [Proposition 2: Increases State's Rainy Day Fund (LAO ballot analysis); Should Voters Approve Proposition 2? How California's Rainy Day Fund Would Be Updated; Proposition 2 Text of Proposed Laws (ACA 20)]. And it would let the Governor's May budget revision serve as a budget emergency proclamation  [Should Voters Approve Proposition 2? How California's Rainy Day Fund Would Be Updated; Proposition 2 Text of Proposed Laws (ACA 20)]. The Legislative Analyst's Office estimates that state budget reserves would be higher and that the state might make more debt payments, without giving a dollar figure  [Proposition 2: Increases State's Rainy Day Fund (LAO ballot analysis); Proposition 2 Official Title and Summary and Analysis by the Legislative Analyst; Proposition 2 — Increases State's Rainy Day Fund (GrowSF voter guide)]. Supporters, including Gov. Gavin Newsom, the California Democratic Party, firefighters, hospitals and business groups, say a bigger reserve protects services from California's volatile revenue  [Proposition 2 Arguments and Rebuttals; Proposition 2: Rainy day fund (CalMatters 2026 Voter Guide); Commentary: rainy day fund California proposition (Jesse Gabriel); Proposition 2 would let California boost the rainy day fund]. Opponents, led by Republican legislators and Reform California, say excluding deposits from the spending limit makes taxpayer rebates less likely and creates a "slush fund"  [Proposition 2 Arguments and Rebuttals; Proposition 2: Rainy day fund (CalMatters 2026 Voter Guide); Prop 2 rainy day fund]. A separate criticism, from David Crane in September 2026, is that the measure leaves the withdrawal rules essentially unchanged  [Opinion: Newsom's rainy day fund, Prop 2; California Proposition 2 explained]. The nonpartisan California Budget & Policy Center takes no position; it explains the trade-offs and argues the measure misses some opportunities  [Should Voters Approve Proposition 2? How California's Rainy Day Fund Would Be Updated]. The most recent coverage is CalMatters' October 23, 2026 explainer  [California Proposition 2 explained].

### Record highlights
- The Legislature passed ACA 20 on June 25, 2026, Senate 29-2 and Assembly 59-8, placing it on the ballot as Proposition 2 (Resolution Chapter 130, Statutes of 2026). [Proposition 2 Official Title and Summary and Analysis by the Legislative Analyst; Proposition 2 — Increases State's Rainy Day Fund (GrowSF voter guide); Proposition 2 Text of Proposed Laws (ACA 20); Senator Hurtado Champions ACA 20 to Strengthen California's Rainy Day Fund]
- CalMatters reports that Assemblymember Josh Hoover was the only Republican lawmaker to vote for the measure; KQED similarly says only one Republican in the Legislature supported placing it on the ballot. [California Proposition 2 explained; Proposition 2 would let California boost the rainy day fund]
- The measure amends Article XVI, Sections 20 and 22 of the California Constitution; its new reserve and spending-limit rules begin in the 2027-28 fiscal year. [Proposition 2 Text of Proposed Laws (ACA 20)]
- Voters created the Budget Stabilization Account with Prop. 58 in 2004 and reformed it with Prop. 2 in 2014, which nearly 70 percent of voters approved. [California Proposition 2 explained; Should Voters Approve Proposition 2? How California's Rainy Day Fund Would Be Updated]
- Governor Newsom issued a budget emergency proclamation on June 27, 2025, after the Legislature had passed the budget, according to the Budget Center. [Should Voters Approve Proposition 2? How California's Rainy Day Fund Would Be Updated]
- According to David Crane, the 2024-25 and 2025-26 budgets withdrew $4.9 billion and $7.1 billion from the rainy day fund, while the 2018-19 budget deposited $4.4 billion. [Opinion: Newsom's rainy day fund, Prop 2]

### Stated positions
- Supporters listed by guides include Gov. Gavin Newsom, the California Democratic Party and legislative Democrats; the official argument in favor is signed by the California Professional Firefighters, Assembly Budget Chair Jesse Gabriel, and the Los Angeles Area Chamber of Commerce. [Proposition 2: Rainy day fund (CalMatters 2026 Voter Guide); Proposition 2 would raise limit on rainy day fund deposits; Proposition 2: rainy day fund (LAist voter guide); Proposition 2 Arguments and Rebuttals; Proposition 2: Increases State's Rainy Day Fund. Legislative Constitutional Amendment. (Official Voter Information Guide)]
- Opponents listed by guides are Reform California and legislative Republicans; the official argument against is signed by Assemblymember David Tangipa, Senator Steven Choi, and Reform California chairman Carl DeMaio. [Proposition 2: Rainy day fund (CalMatters 2026 Voter Guide); Proposition 2 would raise limit on rainy day fund deposits; Proposition 2: rainy day fund (LAist voter guide); Proposition 2 Arguments and Rebuttals]
- Republican Assemblymember Josh Hoover co-wrote an October 2026 commentary with Gabriel supporting the measure. [Commentary: rainy day fund California proposition (Jesse Gabriel); California Proposition 2 explained]
- Senator Melissa Hurtado, who describes herself as an author of ACA 20, issued a supporting statement on June 25, 2026. [Senator Hurtado Champions ACA 20 to Strengthen California's Rainy Day Fund]
- GrowSF recommends a "weak yes" (last updated September 8, 2026). [Proposition 2 — Increases State's Rainy Day Fund (GrowSF voter guide)]
- David Crane of Govern for California urged in September 2026 that the measure be rejected and replaced with one that limits withdrawals. [Opinion: Newsom's rainy day fund, Prop 2]
- The California Budget & Policy Center says it does not endorse or oppose ballot measures. [Should Voters Approve Proposition 2? How California's Rainy Day Fund Would Be Updated]
- CalMatters lists editorial endorsements from The Sacramento Bee, The San Diego Union-Tribune and The Orange County Register, but the stored page does not show which side each took. [Proposition 2: Rainy day fund (CalMatters 2026 Voter Guide)]

### Where sources disagree
- The Secretary of State's online page lists "Opponents: None submitted," while the official voter guide prints an argument against signed by Tangipa, Choi and DeMaio, and the same page names Tangipa as the contact against. [Proposition 2: Increases State's Rainy Day Fund. Legislative Constitutional Amendment. (Official Voter Information Guide); Proposition 2 Arguments and Rebuttals]
- The official argument in favor says Republicans and Democrats in the Legislature support the measure; CalMatters and KQED report that only one Republican lawmaker (Josh Hoover) voted for it. The official tally was Senate 29-2 and Assembly 59-8. [Proposition 2 Arguments and Rebuttals; California Proposition 2 explained; Proposition 2 would let California boost the rainy day fund; Proposition 2 Official Title and Summary and Analysis by the Legislative Analyst]
- Some short guides say deposits "would not count" toward the Gann limit. The LAO, the Budget Center and the measure text say they would count when withdrawn. [Proposition 2 would raise limit on rainy day fund deposits; Proposition 2: rainy day fund (LAist voter guide); Proposition 2: Increases State's Rainy Day Fund (LAO ballot analysis); Should Voters Approve Proposition 2? How California's Rainy Day Fund Would Be Updated; Proposition 2 Text of Proposed Laws (ACA 20)]
- Crane and CalMatters describe the withdrawal rules as unchanged. The Budget Center notes that the definition of a budget emergency and the withdrawal limits stay the same, but that the measure adds a new way to declare an emergency through the May Revision. [Opinion: Newsom's rainy day fund, Prop 2; California Proposition 2 explained; Should Voters Approve Proposition 2? How California's Rainy Day Fund Would Be Updated]

### Gaps
- No campaign finance figures: the guides' contribution tables did not come through, and KQED reported little spending on either side as of late September 2026.
- No newspaper editorial board texts were collected; CalMatters lists three without showing their positions.
- No dollar estimate of how much reserves or debt payments would change; the LAO gives none.
- Opposition material is mostly the official ballot argument plus one op-ed (Crane); no Reform California or taxpayer-group publication of its own was collected, and no Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association position was found.
- The stored measure text lacks strikeout and italic formatting, so the exact deletions must be checked in the formatted PDF.
- No official legislative bill history or roll-call records were collected; one press release (Assemblymember Gabriel's) failed to fetch (SSL error).

### Arguments for / praise
- California's revenue is volatile and tied to the stock market; a bigger reserve lets the state save in booms and avoid deep cuts or tax increases in downturns. — *Jesse Gabriel, Josh Hoover, California Professional Firefighters, Scott Graves (California Budget & Policy Center), CalMatters (summarizing supporters)* [Commentary: rainy day fund California proposition (Jesse Gabriel); Proposition 2 Arguments and Rebuttals; Prop 2 rainy day fund; Proposition 2: Rainy day fund (CalMatters 2026 Voter Guide)]
- The measure forces the state to bank more of revenue spikes rather than commit them to ongoing spending, and gives Sacramento no new money to spend. — *Signers of the official argument in favor and rebuttal* [Proposition 2 Arguments and Rebuttals]
- The reforms follow the Legislative Analyst's Office's recommendation that the state save more, and have bipartisan support. — *Jesse Gabriel, Josh Hoover, Signers of the official argument in favor* [Commentary: rainy day fund California proposition (Jesse Gabriel); Proposition 2 Arguments and Rebuttals; California Proposition 2 explained]
- The spending-limit change removes a barrier to building reserves in strong revenue years, when saving would otherwise push the state over the Gann limit. — *California Budget & Policy Center* [Should Voters Approve Proposition 2? How California's Rainy Day Fund Would Be Updated]
- The 'rebate' opponents cite relies on an old accounting rule that rewards spending instead of saving. — *Linda Darling-Hammond, Carmela Coyle, Francisco J. Silva (rebuttal signers)* [Proposition 2 Arguments and Rebuttals]
- Saving more protects schools, health care, public safety and other services from federal cuts and revenue declines. — *Senator Melissa Hurtado, Signers of the official argument in favor* [Senator Hurtado Champions ACA 20 to Strengthen California's Rainy Day Fund; Proposition 2 Arguments and Rebuttals]

### Arguments against / criticism
- Excluding reserve deposits from the voter-approved spending limit makes constitutionally required taxpayer rebates less likely. — *David Tangipa, Steven Choi, Carl DeMaio, Reform California, Legislative Republicans* [Proposition 2 Arguments and Rebuttals; Proposition 2: Rainy day fund (CalMatters 2026 Voter Guide); Prop 2 rainy day fund; Proposition 2 would let California boost the rainy day fund]
- The reserve would be a "slush fund" that politicians can raid, and a bigger reserve gives state leaders more to spend. — *Signers of the official argument against, Asm. Joe Patterson, Republican lawmakers* [Proposition 2 Arguments and Rebuttals; Proposition 2 would let California boost the rainy day fund; California Proposition 2 explained]
- The measure leaves the withdrawal rules essentially unchanged, so a future governor could still draw down reserves whenever revenue falls short of the prior three years' spending. — *David Crane* [Opinion: Newsom's rainy day fund, Prop 2; California Proposition 2 explained]
- Backers voted to suspend more than $5 billion in required reserve deposits within 24 hours of placing the measure on the ballot, which opponents say shows a lack of discipline. — *Signers of the official argument against and rebuttal* [Proposition 2 Arguments and Rebuttals]
- The measure provides no new dollars for health care, education or public safety. — *Signers of the official argument against and rebuttal* [Proposition 2 Arguments and Rebuttals; Proposition 2: Increases State's Rainy Day Fund. Legislative Constitutional Amendment. (Official Voter Information Guide)]
- Using set-aside funds for federal unemployment insurance loans would shift a cost now borne by businesses to the state and crowd out pension and retiree health payments; required debt payments also stay unsuspendable for ten more years. — *California Budget & Policy Center* [Should Voters Approve Proposition 2? How California's Rainy Day Fund Would Be Updated]

## Text analysis (as of 2026-10-28)

Coverage: Full Text of Proposed Laws for Proposition 2 (ACA 20, Resolution Chapter 130, Statutes of 2026), voter guide pages 106-109: the findings and declarations ("First"), amended Article XVI Section 20 ("Second"), and amended Article XVI Section 22 ("Third"). The text is complete, but the stored plain-text version loses the strikeout and italic formatting that marks deleted and added words, so old and new wording appear side by side (for example "10 20 percent"). Where a finding depends on which words are deleted, this is noted.

Drafting quality: **adequate**. The measure is a technical amendment to an existing, formula-heavy constitutional section, and it mostly follows that section's structure, numbering and defined terms. The main changes (a 20 percent cap, a 150 percent capital gains tier, a 2039-40 end date for required debt payments, new allowable debt uses, a Gann limit exclusion for two reserves, and a May Revision path to a budget emergency) are stated precisely, and a transition clause addresses existing balances. Weaknesses: the new rule that withdrawn funds count against the limit only if they "were not counted previously" gives no method for telling which dollars in a commingled account were counted; several new debt categories are defined by cross-reference to statutes (the Government Code holding account "or any successor", the Education Code, the Medical Providers Interim Payment Fund) without freezing those statutes as of a date, unlike the infrastructure definition the section keeps; and the interaction between the 150 percent multiplier and the Proposition 98 calculation is not spelled out. These leave real choices to future budget acts and the Department of Finance. The rating would be easier to confirm against the formatted PDF showing deletions.

- **special clause** (high, Art. XVI, Sec. 20(i)): This overrides, for rainy day fund deposits, the state appropriations (Gann) limit rule that money is counted when it is appropriated. Deposits would no longer use up room under the limit in the year they are made, and the money would be counted when withdrawn. Because the limit determines when excess revenue must be split between schools and taxpayer rebates, this changes when, and whether, that requirement is triggered. Using a later constitutional amendment to adjust Article XIII B is a legitimate route; the point is that the effect reaches beyond reserves. — "Notwithstanding Section 5 of Article XIII B, for the 2027–28 fiscal year and each fiscal year thereafter, transfers to the Budget Stabilization Account shall not constitute “appropriations subject to limitation” for purposes of Article XIII B." [Proposition 2 Text of Proposed Laws (ACA 20)]
- **ambiguity** (medium, Art. XVI, Sec. 20(i)): The account will hold a mix of pre-2027-28 balances (already counted at deposit) and later deposits (not counted). The text gives no ordering or tracing rule for deciding whether a given withdrawal comes from counted or uncounted money. The choice affects how much a withdrawal adds to the limit in a given year. The same wording appears for the holding account in Sec. 20(j). — "funds withdrawn or transferred from the Budget Stabilization Account that were not counted previously as “appropriations subject to limitation” for purposes of Article XIII B shall constitute “appropriations subject to limitation”" [Proposition 2 Text of Proposed Laws (ACA 20)]
- **expansive language** (medium, Art. XVI, Sec. 20(j)): The constitutional exclusion from the spending limit attaches to an account created by statute, "or any successor" to it. The Legislature can change that account's rules (such as how long money stays in it) by ordinary statute, and the text does not define what counts as a successor. The exclusion is capped at 10 percent of General Fund proceeds of taxes for the year, but within that cap, the account's terms are left to statute. — "the Projected Surplus Temporary Holding Account established in Section 16418.7 of the Government Code, or any successor to that account, shall be an added responsible budgeting technique to counter tax revenue volatility" [Proposition 2 Text of Proposed Laws (ACA 20)]
- **ambiguity** (medium, Art. XVI, Sec. 20(b)(1)(B)(ii)(II) and (C)): With the multiplier, the clause (ii) amount can be larger than the actual capital gains revenue above the threshold. Subparagraph (C) then computes the Proposition 98 share "that results from including the amount calculated under clause (ii)" as proceeds of taxes. The text does not say whether the Proposition 98 share is figured on the multiplied amount or only on the real revenue, even though the findings say the act is not intended to change the Proposition 98 calculation. — "One hundred fifty percent of the portion of the estimate in clause (i) in excess of 10 percent of the estimate made under subparagraph (A)." [Proposition 2 Text of Proposed Laws (ACA 20)]
- **expansive language** (medium, Art. XVI, Sec. 20(c)(1)(B)(ii)(I)): In the extracted text the July 1, 2014 date limit appears next to this phrase in a way consistent with its deletion. If it is deleted, the debt-payment half of the set-aside could be used for any current or future unpaid Proposition 98 obligation, not just pre-2014 debt. That widens what counts as allowable "debt" and lets set-aside dollars cover school obligations that would otherwise be paid from the General Fund. The formatted PDF should be checked to confirm the deletion. — "Unfunded prior fiscal year General Fund obligations pursuant to Section 8" [Proposition 2 Text of Proposed Laws (ACA 20)]
- **ambiguity** (medium, Art. XVI, Sec. 20(c)(1)(B)(ii)(V)): This new allowable use has no date limit, so it could cover future federal loans as well as the current balance. It also does not say whether it covers interest as well as principal. Both choices affect how much of the debt-payment set-aside could go to unemployment insurance debt instead of pension and retiree health liabilities. — "(V) Federal loans made to the Unemployment Fund." [Proposition 2 Text of Proposed Laws (ACA 20)]
- **other** (low, Art. XVI, Sec. 20(c)(1)(B)(ii)(II)): These debt categories are defined by reference to a statutory fund and an Education Code provision as they may later read. By contrast, Sec. 20(e) freezes its infrastructure definition to Government Code Section 13101 "as that section read on January 1, 2014." Leaving these references dynamic means later statutes could change what the constitutional debt category covers. — "earlier than scheduled recognition of the costs of loans made to the Medical Providers Interim Payment Fund and earlier than scheduled recognition of costs described in paragraph (1) of subdivision (c) of Section 41206.04 of the Education Code" [Proposition 2 Text of Proposed Laws (ACA 20)]
- **duration** (medium, Art. XVI, Sec. 20(c)(1)(A)): The period in which half of the set-aside must go to the listed debts is extended by ten years, from 2029-30 to 2039-40. Section 22(a)(1) allows a budget emergency bill to suspend or reduce transfers to the Budget Stabilization Account, but the text gives no matching way to suspend the debt-payment half, so that requirement stays fixed for ten more years. After 2039-40, Sec. 20(c)(2)(C) lets the Legislature choose to appropriate up to 50 percent for those purposes. — "each fiscal year thereafter to the 2029– 30 2039–40 fiscal year, inclusive" [Proposition 2 Text of Proposed Laws (ACA 20)]
- **special clause** (medium, Art. XVI, Sec. 22(c)): A May budget revision that proposes suspending deposits or withdrawing reserves would itself count as the Governor's emergency proclamation, with no separate proclamation. This applies only "If the conditions required for the Governor to declare a budget emergency pursuant to subdivision (b) exist," but the text does not say who determines that those conditions exist, or when. — "shall constitute the Governor’s proclamation of the budget emergency if the revision proposes either of the following:" [Proposition 2 Text of Proposed Laws (ACA 20)]
- **other** (low, Art. XVI, Sec. 20(e)): The central change doubles the cap on the account balance. Spillover above the cap is still limited to infrastructure, as under current law. This is a plain change of a number, but because the higher cap is reached less often, spillover to infrastructure may happen less often. — "exceeds 10 20 percent of the amount of General Fund proceeds of taxes for the fiscal year estimated pursuant to subdivision (b)" [Proposition 2 Text of Proposed Laws (ACA 20)]
- Beneficiary: School districts and community colleges owed unpaid Proposition 98 amounts: The debt-payment half of the set-aside may be used for unfunded prior-year Proposition 98 obligations, and for earlier-than-scheduled recognition of costs under Education Code Section 41206.04. — "Unfunded prior fiscal year General Fund obligations pursuant to Section 8" [Proposition 2 Text of Proposed Laws (ACA 20)]
- Beneficiary: The state Unemployment Fund (its federal loan balance): Federal loans to the Unemployment Fund become an allowable use of the debt-payment set-aside. — "(V) Federal loans made to the Unemployment Fund." [Proposition 2 Text of Proposed Laws (ACA 20)]
- Beneficiary: State-level pension plans and retiree health (OPEB) prefunding: Required supplemental payments toward these liabilities continue for ten more years, through 2039-40, though they now share the set-aside with the new categories. — "Unfunded liabilities for state-level pension plans and prefunding other postemployment benefits" [Proposition 2 Text of Proposed Laws (ACA 20)]

Limitations: This is a close reading of the measure's text only; it does not estimate fiscal effects. The stored text lacks strikeout and italic formatting, so it is not always possible to tell from it alone which words are deleted; findings that depend on deletions say so. The analysis does not use outside sources on how the existing Article XVI rules have worked in practice.

## Timeline (newest first)

- **2026-10-23** — Published: California Proposition 2 explained (CalMatters)
- **2026-10-22** — Published: Prop 2 rainy day fund (Spectrum News 1)
- **2026-10-22** — Spectrum News 1 report on Proposition 2 published (Spectrum News 1)
- **2026-10-13** — Published: Commentary: rainy day fund California proposition (Jesse Gabriel) (CalMatters)
- **2026-10-09** — Published: Proposition 2: rainy day fund (LAist voter guide) (LAist)
- **2026-10-02** — Published: Proposition 2 would raise limit on rainy day fund deposits (KPBS)
- **2026-10-01** — Published: Proposition 2: Rainy day fund (CalMatters 2026 Voter Guide) (CalMatters)
- **2026-09-29** — Published: Proposition 2 would let California boost the rainy day fund (KQED)
- **2026-09-28** — Published: Proposition 2 Arguments and Rebuttals (California Secretary of State)
- **2026-09-28** — Published: Proposition 2 Official Title and Summary and Analysis by the Legislative Analyst (California Secretary of State)
- **2026-09-14** — Published: Opinion: Newsom's rainy day fund, Prop 2 (The San Francisco Standard)
- **2026-09-14** — David Crane opinion published urging rejection of Proposition 2 (The San Francisco Standard)
- **2026-09-08** — Published: Proposition 2 — Increases State's Rainy Day Fund (GrowSF voter guide) (GrowSF)
- **2026-08-26** — Published: Proposition 2 Text of Proposed Laws (ACA 20) (California Secretary of State)
- **2026-08** — Published: Should Voters Approve Proposition 2? How California's Rainy Day Fund Would Be Updated (California Budget & Policy Center)
- **2026-07-16** — Published: Proposition 2: Increases State's Rainy Day Fund (LAO ballot analysis) (Legislative Analyst's Office)
- **2026-06-25** — Assembly and Senate adopted ACA 20; filed with the Secretary of State (GrowSF)
- **2026-06-25** — Published: California Legislature places constitutional amendment to strengthen Rainy Day Fund on ballot (Office of Assemblymember Jesse Gabriel)
- **2026-06-25** — Published: Senator Hurtado Champions ACA 20 to Strengthen California's Rainy Day Fund (Office of Senator Melissa Hurtado)
- **2026-06-25** — Senator Hurtado announced passage of ACA 20 (Office of Senator Melissa Hurtado)
- **2026-06** — Legislature debated ACA 20; Asm. Joe Patterson spoke against it (KQED)
- **2026** — Legislature passed ACA 20 (Senate 29-2, Assembly 59-8), placing Proposition 2 on the ballot (California Secretary of State)
- **2026** — ACA 20 chaptered as Resolution Chapter 130, Statutes of 2026 (California Secretary of State)
- **2025-06-27** — Governor Newsom issued a budget emergency proclamation (California Budget & Policy Center)
- **2021** — Newsom and legislative leaders enacted the 2021-22 budget with a 33.7 percent General Fund spending increase, per Crane (The San Francisco Standard)
- **2014** — Voters reformed the BSA with Prop. 2 of 2014 (California Budget & Policy Center)
- **2014** — Voters approved Prop. 2 (2014), reforming the rainy day fund (CalMatters)
- **2004** — Voters created the Budget Stabilization Account with Prop. 58 (California Budget & Policy Center)
- **2004** — Voters approved Prop. 58, creating the budget stabilization account (CalMatters)
- **1987** — State refunded more than $1 billion to taxpayers under the spending limit (KQED)

## Sources

### California Proposition 2 explained
- CalMatters · news · published 2026-10-23 · stance: neutral
- <https://calmatters.org/politics/2026/10/california-proposition-2-explained/>

A CalMatters explainer by Yue Stella Yu on Proposition 2. It describes the measure as letting the state save up to 20 percent of General Fund tax revenue and save more when revenue grows fast, gives the history of California reserves (Prop. 58 of 2004, Prop. 2 of 2014), explains current withdrawal rules, and presents supporters' and critics' views, including the criticism that the measure keeps withdrawal rules unchanged.
  - Proponents include Gov. Gavin Newsom and Democratic lawmakers; the measure is endorsed by labor unions, hospital associations and chambers of commerce.
  - Josh Hoover is described as the only GOP lawmaker to vote for the measure; most Republican lawmakers opposed it.
  - Current law requires setting aside 1.5 percent of General Fund revenue plus capital gains spikes, half to reserves and half to debts.
  - Withdrawals require a governor's budget emergency ratified by a legislative majority, with up to half the balance withdrawn at once.
  - Proposition 2 would keep those withdrawal rules, which critics say gives future governors broad authority to spend down reserves.
  - Reference: ACA 20 bill page (Digital Democracy) <https://calmatters.digitaldemocracy.org/bills/ca_202520260aca20>
  - Reference: Gabriel and Hoover commentary <https://calmatters.org/commentary/2026/10/rainy-day-fund-california-proposition/>
  - Reference: DeMaio remarks at legislative hearing <https://calmatters.digitaldemocracy.org/hearings/279785>
  - Reference: David Crane opinion <https://sfstandard.com/opinion/2026/09/14/newsom-rainy-day-fund-prop-2/>
  - Reference: California Constitution Article XVI <https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displayText.xhtml?lawCode=CONS&division&title&part&chapter&article=XVI>
  - Reference: LAO report on reserve history <https://lao.ca.gov/Publications/Report/5028>
  - Reference: Yes on Prop. 2 endorsements <https://www.yesonprop2.com/>

### Prop 2 rainy day fund
- Spectrum News 1 · news · published 2026-10-22 · stance: neutral
- <https://spectrumnews1.com/ca/la/politics/2026/10/22/prop-2-rainy-day-fund>

A Spectrum News 1 report by Jamie Kennedy from a Sacramento proposition information session. It explains that Proposition 2 would double the rainy day fund ceiling and change how deposits count toward the spending limit, quotes Scott Graves of the California Budget & Policy Center on how a bigger fund and expanded debt uses would work, and quotes Assemblymember Carl DeMaio on the spending limit and refunds.
  - Proposition 2 would double the ceiling from 10 to 20 percent.
  - Deposits would count toward the spending limit only when spent, which opponents say could mean less money returned.
  - The set-aside for debt would expand to federal UI loans, certain K-14 obligations, and loans for Medi-Cal costs, per Graves.

### Commentary: rainy day fund California proposition (Jesse Gabriel)
- CalMatters · position statement · published 2026-10-13 · stance: support
- <https://calmatters.org/commentary/2026/10/rainy-day-fund-california-proposition/>

A CalMatters guest commentary by Assemblymembers Jesse Gabriel (D-Encino, Assembly Budget Chair) and Josh Hoover (R-Folsom, Appropriations Vice Chair) supporting Proposition 2. They argue California's revenue is highly volatile, that the measure doubles the rainy day fund and requires saving more in strong years without raising taxes, and that it builds on the 2014 framework and was recommended by the LAO.
  - The authors say California ranks fifth in revenue volatility but 29th in the size of budget reserves.
  - They describe the measure as a structural budget fix that does not raise taxes.
  - They say the reforms were recommended by the LAO and developed with input from the Department of Finance, fiscal experts and business leaders.
  - They argue a stronger fund would make the state more fiscally credible and let it borrow more cheaply.
  - Reference: LAO report on revenue volatility and reserves <https://lao.ca.gov/Publications/Report/5028>
  - Reference: Pew analysis of 2014 rainy day fund measure <https://www.pew.org/-/media/assets/2014/06/californiarainydayfundanalysis.pdf>
  - Reference: CalMatters Proposition 2 voter guide <https://calmatters.org/california-voter-guide-2026/proposition-2-rainy-day-fund/>

### Proposition 2: rainy day fund (LAist voter guide)
- LAist · voter guide · published 2026-10-09 · stance: neutral
- <https://laist.com/news/politics/voter-guides/2026-election-california-general-proposition-2-rainy-day-fund>

LAist's Proposition 2 voter guide, adapted from CalMatters. It explains that the measure doubles the deposit cap to 20 percent, excludes deposits from the Gann Limit, and authorizes paying down the $20 billion federal UI debt. It reprints the ballot label, the yes/no meanings, the LAO fiscal summary, and one-paragraph supporter and opponent views, and notes a simple majority is needed.
  - A simple majority is needed to pass.
  - Supporters: California Democratic Party, legislative Democrats, Gov. Gavin Newsom.
  - Opponents: Reform California and legislative Republicans.
  - Quotes the LAO that reserves would grow over time and that balancing the budget would be somewhat easier in downturns.
  - Reference: SOS Proposition 2 page <https://voterguide.sos.ca.gov/propositions/2/index.htm>
  - Reference: LAO ballot analysis <https://lao.ca.gov/BallotAnalysis/Proposition?number=2&year=2026>
  - Reference: Budget Center issue brief <https://calbudgetcenter.org/resources/should-voters-approve-proposition-2-how-californias-rainy-day-fund-would-be-updated/>
  - Reference: LA Times Prop. 2 voter guide <https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2026-10-01/2026-california-election-proposition-2-rainy-day-fund-voter-guide>
  - Reference: Reform California voter guide <https://www.reformcalifornia.org/voter-guides/california>
  - Reference: Yes on Prop. 2 <https://yesonprop2.com/>

### Proposition 2 would raise limit on rainy day fund deposits
- KPBS · news · published 2026-10-02 · stance: neutral
- <https://www.kpbs.org/news/politics/2026/10/02/proposition-2-raise-limit-on-rainy-day-fund-deposits>

KPBS republication of CalMatters' Proposition 2 explainer. It says the amendment would let the state deposit up to 20 percent of General Fund tax revenue in reserves, that the deposits would not count toward the Gann Limit, and that it authorizes spending some revenue to pay down the $20 billion federal unemployment insurance debt. It gives one-sentence supporter and opponent summaries and endorsement lists.
  - Raises the reserve ceiling from 10 to 20 percent of General Fund tax revenue.
  - Deposits would not count toward the Gann Limit, which caps annual spending and requires excess funds be returned.
  - Authorizes paying down the $20 billion federal unemployment insurance debt with some tax revenue.
  - Placed on the ballot by the Legislature.
  - Reference: California Democratic Party endorsements <https://cadem.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/08/FINAL-2026-General-Election-Endorsements.pdf>
  - Reference: Reform California voter guide <https://www.reformcalifornia.org/voter-guides/california>
  - Reference: SOS quick reference guide <https://vig.cdn.sos.ca.gov/2026/general/pdf/quick-reference-guide.pdf>

### Proposition 2: Rainy day fund (CalMatters 2026 Voter Guide)
- CalMatters · voter guide · published 2026-10-01 · stance: neutral
- <https://calmatters.org/california-voter-guide-2026/proposition-2-rainy-day-fund/>

CalMatters' 2026 voter guide entry for Proposition 2 summarizes the supporters' and opponents' cases in one sentence each, lists endorsements, and reprints the ballot label. Supporters say a higher ceiling lets the state save more in booms; opponents say reserves can be a 'slush fund' and the measure would let lawmakers withhold revenue without triggering the spending limit and avoid refunds.
  - Supporter endorsements listed: California Democratic Party, Legislative Democrats, Gov. Gavin Newsom.
  - Opponent endorsements listed: Reform California, Legislative Republicans.
  - Media endorsements listed: The Sacramento Bee, The San Diego Union-Tribune, The Orange County Register (the extracted page does not show which side each took).
  - Reprints the official ballot label and fiscal impact.
  - Reference: Sacramento Bee endorsement <https://www.sacbee.com/opinion/article317091637.html>
  - Reference: San Diego Union-Tribune endorsement <https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/2026/10/02/endorsements-props-2-37-wouldnt-yield-saner-state-budgets-more-housing/>
  - Reference: Orange County Register endorsement <https://www.ocregister.com/2026/10/07/endorsement-no-on-prop-2-california-needs-fiscal-discipline-not-accounting-tricks/>
  - Reference: California Democratic Party endorsements <https://cadem.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/08/FINAL-2026-General-Election-Endorsements.pdf>
  - Reference: Reform California voter guide <https://www.reformcalifornia.org/voter-guides/california>
  - Reference: SOS quick reference guide <https://vig.cdn.sos.ca.gov/2026/general/pdf/quick-reference-guide.pdf>

### Proposition 2 would let California boost the rainy day fund
- KQED · news · published 2026-09-29 · stance: neutral
- <https://www.kqed.org/news/12100604/proposition-2-would-let-california-boost-the-rainy-day-fund>

A KQED 'Prop Fest' podcast transcript in which politics correspondent Guy Marzorati explains Proposition 2: doubling the rainy day fund maximum to 20 percent, treating deposits as not spending under the state spending limit, and broadening the debts that set-aside money can pay. It covers Governor Newsom's backing, a near party-line legislative vote, Republican and anti-tax group opposition centered on taxpayer refunds, and little campaign spending on either side.
  - Newsom is the measure's main proponent and has said he wished he had saved more during the post-pandemic surplus, per Marzorati.
  - Marzorati says only one Republican in the Legislature supported placing it on the ballot.
  - Opponents argue the measure makes taxpayer refunds less likely; Marzorati notes a refund of more than $1 billion in 1987.
  - Reform California, led by Assemblymember Carl DeMaio, is campaigning against it; little spending on either side as of the episode.
  - California borrowed more than $20 billion from the federal government for unemployment benefits during COVID.

### Proposition 2 Arguments and Rebuttals
- California Secretary of State · position statement · published 2026-09-28 · stance: mixed
- <https://vig.cdn.sos.ca.gov/2026/general/pdf/prop2-arg-rebuttals.pdf>

The official ballot arguments for and against Proposition 2 and the rebuttals, as printed in the state voter guide. Supporters (California Professional Firefighters, Assembly Budget Chair Jesse Gabriel, Los Angeles Area Chamber of Commerce) argue the measure doubles the reserve requirement and protects services in downturns. Opponents (Assemblymember David Tangipa, Senator Steven Choi, Reform California chairman Carl DeMaio) argue it weakens the voter-approved spending limit, makes taxpayer rebates less likely, and creates a 'slush fund'.
  - Pro argument: the budget swung from a $100 billion surplus to a $50 billion deficit in a few years; the measure doubles the reserve requirement to 20 percent and requires banking more of revenue spikes.
  - Pro argument: Republicans, Democrats and Governor Newsom support it, and it follows LAO advice to save more.
  - Con argument: excluding reserve deposits from the spending limit lets politicians avoid constitutionally required tax rebates.
  - Con argument: within 24 hours of placing it on the ballot, backers voted to suspend more than $5 billion in required reserve deposits.
  - Rebuttal for: the 'rebate' relies on an accounting rule that rewards spending instead of saving.

### Proposition 2 Official Title and Summary and Analysis by the Legislative Analyst
- California Secretary of State · official analysis · published 2026-09-28 · stance: neutral
- <https://vig.cdn.sos.ca.gov/2026/general/pdf/prop2-title-summ-analysis.pdf>

The Proposition 2 pages of the state voter guide: the Attorney General's official title and summary, the final legislative votes on ACA 20, and the Legislative Analyst's analysis. The LAO explains current reserve and extra-debt-payment rules and says Proposition 2 would require deposits until the rainy day fund reaches 20 percent of General Fund taxes, make larger deposits when investment-gains revenue is very high, extend extra debt payments through 2040 for an expanded set of purposes, and exclude rainy day fund and surplus-holding-account deposits from the state appropriations limit until withdrawn.
  - Attorney General summary: doubles the reserve cap from 10 to 20 percent of General Fund revenues and requires additional savings when tax revenues are high.
  - LAO fiscal estimate: state budget reserves would be higher; possibly more debt payments.
  - Currently the state has about $20 billion in reserves usable for any program, according to the LAO.
  - Under current law, once the fund reaches 10 percent of General Fund taxes, money that would have been deposited must be spent on infrastructure.
  - Extra debt payments could be used for required payments to schools and community colleges, repaying borrowing from other state funds, and certain federal loans.
  - Holding-account deposits excluded from the limit could not exceed 10 percent of General Fund taxes in a year.

### Opinion: Newsom's rainy day fund, Prop 2
- The San Francisco Standard · third party analysis · published 2026-09-14 · stance: oppose
- <https://sfstandard.com/opinion/2026/09/14/newsom-rainy-day-fund-prop-2/>

An opinion piece by David Crane, a Stanford public policy lecturer and president of Govern for California, published in The San Francisco Standard. He argues that Governor Newsom withdrew billions from the Rainy Day Fund in years of higher revenue because spending grew faster, and that Proposition 2 leaves the withdrawal rules essentially unchanged, so a bigger fund would not stop future governors from doing the same. He calls for rejecting Proposition 2 and replacing it with a measure that limits withdrawals.
  - The 2018-19 budget had $138 billion in General Fund tax revenue and deposited $4.4 billion into the fund, according to Crane.
  - The 2024-25 budget had $207 billion in General Fund tax revenue and took $4.9 billion from the fund; the 2025-26 budget had $209 billion and took $7.1 billion, according to Crane.
  - A governor can tap the fund by declaring a budget emergency ratified by a legislative majority when resources fall short of the highest of the prior three budgets.
  - Crane argues a larger reserve can make officials more comfortable committing to new spending.
  - He also notes the measure leaves the mechanism that earmarks surplus revenue for pension debt.
  - Reference: 2018-19 enacted budget summary charts <https://ebudget.ca.gov/2018-19/pdf/Enacted/BudgetSummary/SummaryCharts.pdf>
  - Reference: 2024-25 enacted budget summary charts <https://ebudget.ca.gov/2024-25/pdf/Enacted/BudgetSummary/SummaryCharts.pdf>
  - Reference: 2025-26 enacted budget summary charts <https://ebudget.ca.gov/2025-26/pdf/Enacted/BudgetSummary/SummaryCharts.pdf>
  - Reference: Department of Finance historical Chart B <https://dof.ca.gov/media/docs/budget/historical-budget-information/summary-schedules-and-historical-charts/CHART-B.pdf>
  - Reference: California Constitution Article XVI <https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displayText.xhtml?lawCode=CONS&division&title&part&chapter&article=XVI>
  - Reference: Proposition 2 voter guide PDF <https://vig.cdn.sos.ca.gov/2026/general/pdf/prop2.pdf>

### Proposition 2 — Increases State's Rainy Day Fund (GrowSF voter guide)
- GrowSF · voter guide · published 2026-09-08 · stance: support
- <https://growsf.org/voter-guide/san-francisco-voter-guide-november-2026-election/measures/prop-2/>

GrowSF's San Francisco voter guide entry for Proposition 2, which recommends a 'weak yes'. It explains the 1.5 percent base deposit, the existing 8 percent capital gains rule, the new 150 percent tier above 10 percent with a worked example, the 20 percent cap, the Gann limit change and its effect on taxpayer rebates, and withdrawal rules, and lists reasons to vote yes along with a downside.
  - Worked example: in a $200 billion year with $30 billion of capital gains, current law sets aside $14 billion; Prop 2 sets aside $19 billion, before carve-outs for schools and debt.
  - Deposits stop counting against the Gann limit from 2027-28 until withdrawn, which GrowSF says makes rebates like the 2022 stimulus checks less likely.
  - Withdrawals still require a budget emergency and are limited to half the balance in one year.
  - The LAO does not put a dollar figure on the effects, GrowSF notes.
  - GrowSF calls its recommendation a weak yes.
  - Reference: ACA 20 full legal text (PDF) <https://elections.cdn.sos.ca.gov/ballot-measures/pdf/aca-20.pdf>
  - Reference: ACA 20 text and legislative history <https://calmatters.digitaldemocracy.org/bills/ca_202520260aca20>
  - Reference: LAO ballot analysis <https://lao.ca.gov/ballot/2026/prop2-110326.pdf>
  - Reference: California Constitution Article XVIII <https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displayText.xhtml?lawCode=CONS&division&title&part&chapter&article=XVIII>
  - Reference: GrowSF annotated legal text <https://growsf.org/voter-guide/san-francisco-voter-guide-november-2026-election/measures/prop-2/legal-text/>

### Proposition 2 Text of Proposed Laws (ACA 20)
- California Secretary of State · official text · published 2026-08-26 · stance: not_applicable
- <https://vig.cdn.sos.ca.gov/2026/general/pdf/prop2-text-proposed-laws.pdf>

The complete official text of Proposition 2 (Assembly Constitutional Amendment 20, Resolution Chapter 130, Statutes of 2026), titled the Save for California's Future Act. It adds findings and amends Sections 20 and 22 of Article XVI of the California Constitution governing the Budget Stabilization Account (rainy day fund). In this text extraction, the strikeout (deleted) and italic (added) formatting is lost, so old and new wording appear side by side.
  - Raises the cap on Budget Stabilization Account transfers from 10 to 20 percent of General Fund proceeds of taxes (Section 20(e)).
  - Adds a second tier of 'excess' capital gains set-aside equal to 150 percent of capital gains revenue above 10 percent of General Fund proceeds of taxes (Section 20(b)).
  - Extends the period in which half of set-aside revenue must go to specified debts from 2029-30 to 2039-40, and adds uses such as federal loans to the Unemployment Fund and certain Medi-Cal and education costs (Section 20(c)).
  - Provides that transfers to the Budget Stabilization Account, and to the Projected Surplus Temporary Holding Account up to 10 percent of General Fund proceeds of taxes, are not 'appropriations subject to limitation' under Article XIII B when made, but count when withdrawn (Section 20(i)-(j)).
  - Allows the Director of Finance's May budget revision to constitute the Governor's budget emergency proclamation when the emergency conditions exist and the revision proposes suspending deposits or withdrawing funds (Section 22(c)).
  - Declares that nothing in the act is intended to change the Proposition 98 school funding guarantee calculation.

### Should Voters Approve Proposition 2? How California's Rainy Day Fund Would Be Updated
- California Budget & Policy Center · third party analysis · published 2026-08 · stance: neutral
- <https://calbudgetcenter.org/resources/should-voters-approve-proposition-2-how-californias-rainy-day-fund-would-be-updated/>

An issue brief by the California Budget & Policy Center (Scott Graves, Alissa Anderson, Erik Saucedo) that explains what Proposition 2 would and would not change, and discusses implications. It describes the higher 20 percent cap, the 150 percent capital gains tier, expanded and extended debt-payment uses, the Gann Limit changes for two reserves, and the new May Revision path for declaring a budget emergency. It also argues the measure misses opportunities, such as allowing debt payments to be suspended in emergencies or counting federal funding losses as budget emergencies.
  - Prop. 2 would not change the 1.5 percent annual set-aside, the definition of budget emergency, the withdrawal limits, or the Prop. 98 guarantee.
  - Had the new capital gains rule applied from 2010-11 to 2023-24, more revenue would have been set aside in six of 14 years, by less than 1 to 2 percent of General Fund revenue each time.
  - Using set-aside funds to repay roughly $20 billion in federal unemployment insurance loans would shift a cost now borne by businesses to the state.
  - The Gann Limit change could add up to a few billion dollars a year of room under the cap.
  - A higher cap means less spillover revenue for infrastructure over time.
  - Reference: ACA 20 (leginfo) <https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202520260ACA20>
  - Reference: Budget Center overview of California's reserves <https://calbudgetcenter.org/resources/californias-rainy-day-fund-and-other-budget-reserves-overview/>
  - Reference: LAO: State Appropriations Limit <https://lao.ca.gov/Publications/Detail/4416>
  - Reference: California Constitution Article XIII B, Section 5 <https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=CONS&sectionNum=SEC.%205.&article=XIII%20B>
  - Reference: 2025 budget emergency proclamation <https://www.gov.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/Budget-Proc-2025.pdf>
  - Reference: LAO report on the 2025 budget problem <https://lao.ca.gov/Publications/Report/5079>
  - Reference: LAO report on UI loans <https://lao.ca.gov/Publications/Report/4943>

### Proposition 2: Increases State's Rainy Day Fund (LAO ballot analysis)
- Legislative Analyst's Office · official analysis · published 2026-07-16 · stance: neutral
- <https://lao.ca.gov/ballot/2026/prop2-110326.pdf>

The Legislative Analyst's Office's standalone analysis of Proposition 2 for the November 3, 2026 ballot. Its content matches the analysis printed in the state voter guide: background on the budget, reserves and debts; the proposal's four main changes; fiscal effects (higher reserves, possibly more debt payments); and the yes/no statement and ballot label fiscal impact.
  - Proposition 2 requires deposits until the rainy day fund reaches 20 percent of General Fund taxes instead of 10 percent.
  - Larger deposits would be made in years when investment-gains revenue is very high.
  - Extra debt payments would be required through 2040 instead of 2030 and could be used for more purposes, including payments to schools and community colleges, internal borrowing, and certain federal loans.
  - Rainy day fund deposits, and surplus holding account deposits up to 10 percent of General Fund taxes, would count toward the appropriations limit only when withdrawn.
  - Fiscal impact: state budget reserves would be higher.

### California Legislature places constitutional amendment to strengthen Rainy Day Fund on ballot
- Office of Assemblymember Jesse Gabriel · position statement · published 2026-06-25 · stance: support
- <https://gabriel.asmdc.org/press-releases/20260625-california-legislature-places-constitutional-amendment-strengthen-rainy-day>

### Senator Hurtado Champions ACA 20 to Strengthen California's Rainy Day Fund
- Office of Senator Melissa Hurtado · position statement · published 2026-06-25 · stance: support
- <https://sd16.senate.ca.gov/node/963>

A press release from Senator Melissa Hurtado (D-Bakersfield) announcing passage of ACA 20, the Save for California's Future Act, which she describes herself as an author of. She frames the measure as responsible budgeting that protects services when revenues decline or costs shift from Washington.
  - Hurtado announces ACA 20's passage and says she serves as an author.
  - She says expanding reserves gives a stronger backstop for schools, health care, public safety, water infrastructure and other programs.
  - She chairs Senate Budget Subcommittee 4.

### Proposition 2: Increases State's Rainy Day Fund. Legislative Constitutional Amendment. (Official Voter Information Guide)
- California Secretary of State · voter guide · published undated · stance: neutral
- <https://voterguide.sos.ca.gov/propositions/2/index.htm>

The Secretary of State's online voter guide page for Proposition 2 gives the ballot label (put on the ballot by the Legislature; increases the Rainy Day Fund approved by voters in 2014), the fiscal impact line (state budget reserves would be higher), the yes/no vote meanings, short pro and con argument excerpts, and campaign contact information. It lists supporters and shows "Opponents: None submitted" in its summary box, although it also prints a con argument and names Assemblymember David Tangipa as the contact against.
  - Put on the ballot by the Legislature as a legislative constitutional amendment.
  - Fiscal impact per the guide: state budget reserves would be higher.
  - A YES vote changes the rules for building reserves and paying extra state debts and requires extra debt payments for longer; a NO vote leaves those rules unchanged.
  - The pro excerpt says the measure doubles the Rainy Day Fund and protects education, health care and public safety funding.
  - The con excerpt says the measure excludes reserve deposits from the constitutional spending limit and makes taxpayer rebates less likely.
  - Reference: Yes on Prop. 2 campaign site <https://www.yesonprop2.com/>

### Text of Proposed Law: Proposition 2 (Official Voter Information Guide, Text of Proposed Laws, PDF pages 7–10)
- California Secretary of State · official text · published undated · stance: not_applicable
- <https://vig.cdn.sos.ca.gov/2026/general/pdf/text-proposed-laws.pdf#page=7>

## Suggested use

Ask me neutral questions about this subject using the material above. Distinguish what the sources say from your own background knowledge, cite the source titles you rely on, and say when information may be out of date given the dates shown.