Republish
Business wants voters to overturn legislative decrees
We love that you want to share our stories with your readers. Hundreds of publications republish our work on a regular basis.
All of the articles at CalMatters are available to republish for free, under the following conditions:
-
- Give prominent credit to our journalists: Credit our authors at the top of the article and any other byline areas of your publication. In the byline, we prefer “By Author Name, CalMatters.” If you’re republishing guest commentary (example) from CalMatters, in the byline, use “By Author Name, Special for CalMatters.”
-
- Credit CalMatters at the top of the story: At the top of the story’s text, include this copy: “This story was originally published by CalMatters. Sign up for their newsletters.” If you are republishing commentary, include this copy instead: “This commentary was originally published by CalMatters. Sign up for their newsletters.” If you’re republishing in print, omit the second sentence on newsletter signups.
-
- Do not edit the article, including the headline, except to reflect relative changes in time, location and editorial style. For example, “yesterday” can be changed to “last week,” and “Alameda County” to “Alameda County, California” or “here.”
-
- If you add reporting that would help localize the article, include this copy in your story: “Additional reporting by [Your Publication]” and let us know at republish@calmatters.org.
-
- If you wish to translate the article, please contact us for approval at republish@calmatters.org.
-
- Photos and illustrations by CalMatters staff or shown as “for CalMatters” may only be republished alongside the stories in which they originally appeared. For any other uses, please contact us for approval at visuals@calmatters.org.
-
- Photos and illustrations from wire services like the Associated Press, Reuters, iStock are not free to republish.
-
- Do not sell our stories, and do not sell ads specifically against our stories. Feel free, however, to publish it on a page surrounded by ads you’ve already sold.
-
- Sharing a CalMatters story on social media? Please mention @CalMatters. We’re on X, Facebook, Instagram, TikTok and BlueSky.
If you’d like to regularly republish our stories, we have some other options available. Contact us at republish@calmatters.org if you’re interested.
Have other questions or special requests? Or do you have a great story to share about the impact of one of our stories on your audience? We’d love to hear from you. Contact us at republish@calmatters.org.
Business wants voters to overturn legislative decrees
Share this:
Over the last decade, as Democrats solidified their dominance of the state Capitol, they have repeatedly attempted to change how private businesses operate in California
Those efforts have taken many specific forms, including mandates on employee benefits, making it easier for unions to organize workers, and regulating — or even prohibiting — products and services offered to customers.
All such efforts were aimed, their legislative and interest group sponsors said, at expanding equity and accountability for the benefit of workers and consumers.
Whatever their motives, as those efforts proliferate, the affected businesses have done what they could to block or at least modify what was happening. Nevertheless, those seeking more governmental regulation of business practices have scored some major victories and in response, affected businesses have increasingly used referenda to erase new laws or initiatives to repeal or modify them.
Those countermeasures have a mixed record of success, to wit:
— In 2014, the Legislature passed and then-Gov. Jerry Brown signed legislation to ban single-use plastic bags for groceries or other consumer goods. An industry referendum to block the new law failed in 2016.
— In 2018, the Legislature eliminated cash bail for criminal defendants. Two years later, the bail bond industry persuaded voters to reject the law.
— In 2019, legislators passed a sweeping law that reduced the ability of businesses to use freelance workers under contract. Rideshare and delivery companies such as Uber and Lyft placed a measure on the 2020 ballot to exempt themselves from the new law. Voters passed it, but it’s since been challenged in court.
— In 2020 the Legislature prohibited the sale of flavored tobacco products, saying they encourage young people to smoke. However, the tobacco industry’s referendum to block the ban was rejected by voters this year.
Corporate use of the ballot to thwart the Capitol’s Democrats is likely to continue.
The fast food industry has submitted signatures for a referendum to overturn the creation of a new agency, dominated by unions and union-friendly appointees, that would set wages and working conditions for fast food employees. If it qualifies, the law would be suspended until voters decide the issue in 2024.
The oil industry is gathering signatures for a referendum to overturn a newly enacted law that would ban new oil wells within 3,200 feet of schools and other public facilities. If it qualifies, it also would go on the 2024 ballot.
Another oil industry referendum is likely if the Legislature passes Newsom’s proposal to impose limits on its profits from gasoline sales and impose financial penalties for exceeding them.
Newsom’s original proposal was an excess profits tax, which would not have been subject to referendum because the state constitution declares that tax measures cannot be challenged via referendum.
However, non-tax laws, unless passed with two-thirds margins as “urgency measures,” are subject to referendum. If Newsom’s limit/penalty law is enacted next year as a non-urgency measure, the industry would have a 90-day window in which to qualify a referendum. The law would be suspended until voters had the final word.
The proliferation of business-sponsored ballot measures to overturn what legislators and the governor decree has angered groups, such as unions and environmental and consumer rights organizations, that support more oversight of business practices. They are pressing the Legislature to make the qualification of ballot measures more difficult.
However, Newsom and his predecessor, Jerry Brown, have opposed such changes for the simple reason that governors sometimes turn to the ballot themselves to enact laws that the Legislature is unwilling to pass.
Dan WaltersOpinion Columnist
Dan Walters is one of most decorated and widely syndicated columnists in California history, authoring a column four times a week that offers his view and analysis of the state’s political, economic,... More by Dan Walters