California November 2026 Ballot — Prop 39 & Prop 40 (Survey #23)
From 2026-09-20 to 2026-11-04
Verified voters: 38 (Total: 44) · survey still open
My name is Long Jiao. I'm a Cupertino resident and a member of the CUSD Board of Education. Two statewide measures on the November ballot affect everyone in California: Prop 39 (voter ID) and Prop 40 (a one-time tax on billionaires). I've written neutral, sourced summaries of each — presenting both sides — to help you understand them, and I'd like to hear what you think.
This survey is conducted solely by me. It does not represent the CUSD Board, and it is not telling you how to vote.
Read the background first: Prop 39 explainer · Prop 40 explainer
Every question has a comment box — if the options don't capture your view, tell me in your own words.
Summary
Prop 40 — one-time billionaire wealth tax
Q1. Which argument in favor of Prop 40 do you find strongest?
44 answered
It raises billions for health care, education, and food aid as federal funds are cut5 (6) · 14%
It asks only billionaires — a very small group with highly concentrated wealth5 (5) · 11%
Everyday Californians pay nothing1 (2) · 5%
None of these persuade me27 (31) · 70%
Q2. Which concern about Prop 40 weighs most heavily for you?
44 answered
Billionaires may leave California, reducing future revenue and jobs9 (11) · 25%
One-time money can't sustain ongoing programs like health care6 (7) · 16%
Doubts it stays truly "one-time" (a future Legislature could re-impose it)13 (16) · 36%
Valuing billionaires' assets will be costly and litigated4 (4) · 9%
None of these concern me5 (5) · 11%
Q3. Having weighed both sides — if the election were today, how would you lean on Prop 40?
44 answered
Prefer not to say0 (0) · 0%
A broader question — budget strategy
Q4. Setting any single measure aside — when California faces a budget shortfall, which approach do you generally prefer?
44 answered
Focus on constraining or reducing spending28 (33) · 75%
Focus on raising new revenue (e.g., taxes on high wealth or income)2 (2) · 5%
A balance of both8 (9) · 20%
Prop 39 — voter ID & citizenship verification
Q5. Which argument in favor of Prop 39 do you find strongest?
44 answered
It adds a layer of election security and public confidence7 (10) · 23%
Requiring ID at the ballot is a common, reasonable safeguard15 (16) · 36%
Verifying citizenship on the voter rolls7 (8) · 18%
None of these persuade me9 (10) · 23%
Q6. Which concern about Prop 39 weighs most heavily for you?
44 answered
It could block eligible citizens who lack the required ID4 (5) · 11%
The measure defines no process to fix a wrongly-rejected ballot2 (2) · 5%
Citizenship is already required to vote; this adds cost for little gain8 (9) · 20%
The new ID and verification steps are expensive to run1 (1) · 2%
None of these concern me22 (26) · 59%
Q7. Having weighed both sides — if the election were today, how would you lean on Prop 39?
43 answered
Prefer not to say0 (0) · 0%
Q8. The same voter-ID measure (Prop 39) gets described very differently depending on who's writing. Here are three real-world titles for it. Which do you find most neutral?
40 answered
Establishes voter identification and citizenship requirement.17 (20) · 50%
Prohibits citizens from voting unless they present government-issued identification.4 (4) · 10%
Requires voters to show government-issued ID and requires officials to verify citizenship on the voter rolls.13 (16) · 40%
Q9. Do you have any other comments regarding Prop 39 or Prop 40?
Open-text question (see responses below).
Q10. Which topics would you like addressed in future surveys?
Open-text question (see responses below).
Responses
Tip: use your browser's Find (Ctrl/⌘+F) to locate a verification code below.
Verification code: 0a3a44ad06b44af2907a100c3eb54e28 (Verified voter) · 2026-10-04
Q1: None of these persuade me — Anti-business and anti-billionaires, will not help California, these will only force out the talented people and creative minds, lead California into poverty!
Q2: Billionaires may leave California, reducing future revenue and jobs — This is like that story that killing the goose which produces the gold, very stupid!
Q3: No
Q4: Focus on constraining or reducing spending — Budget discipline is a critical ability of any organization leaders, CA politicians failed BIG on this. Their solution to any issue is only 1 - increase tax on residents, so now CA has the highest tax rate, ridiculous gas price, average 10% sales tax and increasing, but homelessness, crime, affordability, etc. hardly seeing any improvement! So incompetent!
Q5: Requiring ID at the ballot is a common, reasonable safeguard — This one is pure common sense, don’t understand the opposing side, unless they have hidden agenda.
Q6: None of these concern me
Q7: Yes
Q8: Establishes voter identification and citizenship requirement.
Verification code: 0e3be91696ba42d79320c78f87619863 (Public) · 2026-10-09
Q1: It raises billions for health care, education, and food aid as federal funds are cut
Q2: Billionaires may leave California, reducing future revenue and jobs
Q3: No
Q4: Focus on constraining or reducing spending
Q5: It adds a layer of election security and public confidence
Q6: It could block eligible citizens who lack the required ID
Q8: Requires voters to show government-issued ID and requires officials to verify citizenship on the voter rolls.
Verification code: 1be1958c9fc54cfdb5a5ded24a08dd13 (Public) · 2026-09-30
Q1: None of these persuade me
Q2: Billionaires may leave California, reducing future revenue and jobs
Q3: No
Q4: Focus on constraining or reducing spending
Q5: It adds a layer of election security and public confidence
Q6: None of these concern me
Q7: Yes
Q8: Establishes voter identification and citizenship requirement.
Verification code: 28b67ebe518441a1be02fef014ccff9a (Verified voter) · 2026-10-08
Q1: None of these persuade me — NO on Prop 40. Unfair tax on assets acquired legally. Tax billionaires today and tomorrow we will be next. Need to stop the never ending spending, a lot of which is wasteful. More taxes are not the solution.
Q2: Doubts it stays truly "one-time" (a future Legislature could re-impose it)
Q3: No
Q4: Focus on constraining or reducing spending
Q5: Requiring ID at the ballot is a common, reasonable safeguard
Q6: None of these concern me
Q7: Yes
Q8: Establishes voter identification and citizenship requirement.
Verification code: 30d3af77c8c642dd820096b71a201e44 (Verified voter) · 2026-10-13
Q1: None of these persuade me
Q2: Billionaires may leave California, reducing future revenue and jobs
Q3: No
Q4: Focus on constraining or reducing spending
Q5: Requiring ID at the ballot is a common, reasonable safeguard
Q6: None of these concern me
Q7: Yes
Q8: Requires voters to show government-issued ID and requires officials to verify citizenship on the voter rolls.
Verification code: 3242f80b5bc848dfa7e2827e1a3dbe01 (Verified voter) · 2026-10-01
Q1: None of these persuade me
Q2: Valuing billionaires' assets will be costly and litigated
Q3: No
Q4: Focus on constraining or reducing spending
Q5: It adds a layer of election security and public confidence
Q6: None of these concern me
Q7: Yes
Q8: Establishes voter identification and citizenship requirement.
Verification code: 434b35a4d28f425e8978e8747f3059b3 (Verified voter) · 2026-10-12
Q1: It asks only billionaires — a very small group with highly concentrated wealth
Q2: None of these concern me — Tax should apply to income only.
Q3: No
Q4: Focus on constraining or reducing spending
Q5: None of these persuade me
Q6: Citizenship is already required to vote; this adds cost for little gain
Q7: No
Q10: Please add msung11@yahoo.com to send survey like this.
Verification code: 46acb55549024e459c0a0083b5c332a5 (Verified voter) · 2026-09-30
Q1: None of these persuade me
Q2: Doubts it stays truly "one-time" (a future Legislature could re-impose it)
Q3: No
Q4: Focus on constraining or reducing spending
Q5: Requiring ID at the ballot is a common, reasonable safeguard
Q6: None of these concern me
Q7: Yes
Q8: Requires voters to show government-issued ID and requires officials to verify citizenship on the voter rolls.
Verification code: 499fda8f5c2a443fa7fd893d5cb56832 (Public) · 2026-10-10
Q1: Everyday Californians pay nothing
Q2: One-time money can't sustain ongoing programs like health care
Q3: Undecided
Q4: A balance of both
Q5: None of these persuade me
Q6: Citizenship is already required to vote; this adds cost for little gain
Q7: No
Q8: Requires voters to show government-issued ID and requires officials to verify citizenship on the voter rolls.
Verification code: 4a866d58a61641358ef8f59bf79b0d6c (Verified voter) · 2026-10-02
Q1: None of these persuade me — Just another sneaky way to raise taxes, eventually for everyone
Q2: Doubts it stays truly "one-time" (a future Legislature could re-impose it) — Will never be limited to billionaires
Q3: No
Q4: Focus on constraining or reducing spending — Vote out those who caused it
Q5: Verifying citizenship on the voter rolls
Q6: None of these concern me
Q7: Yes
Q8: Establishes voter identification and citizenship requirement.
Verification code: 4ae3a051bce745f2a42d8fc99fb0b5b4 (Verified voter) · 2026-09-27
Q1: None of these persuade me — If I were a Billionaire, which I am not close, I would have my bags packed already, in case it passed. It WON'T be a one-time tax.
Q2: Doubts it stays truly "one-time" (a future Legislature could re-impose it) — California's government ALWAYS overspends. This band aid won't last long, and the billionaires are smart enough to know this.
Q3: No
Q4: A balance of both — It depends on the state of California's budget and current spending at the time of the shortfall.
Q5: Requiring ID at the ballot is a common, reasonable safeguard — There is currently too much voter fraud, and suspicion of voter fraud, from both main political parties. It's past time to VERIFY.
Q6: It could block eligible citizens who lack the required ID
Q7: Yes
Q8: Establishes voter identification and citizenship requirement.
Q10: Show the yearly increases in CA Government spending vs changes in CA Gov't revenues. From 1970 to the present.
Verification code: 4beb13599a7f4987953e7bfae6a08819 (Verified voter) · 2026-09-30
Q1: Everyday Californians pay nothing
Q2: None of these concern me
Q3: Yes
Q4: A balance of both
Q5: None of these persuade me — This is a non-issue.
As a long-time poll worker, the education and training I have received about the security and integrity of elections in California has given me significant confidence in the safety of our elections.
I encourage you to educate yourself about the actual election process through the Secretary of State and Registrar Of Voter info, which is readily available online to the public instead following mindless propaganda.
Knowing that you support prop 39, this means, you will not get my vote.
Q6: Citizenship is already required to vote; this adds cost for little gain — This is literally a non-issue researched, litigated, and documented time and time again
Your support for this nonsense as a point of reference for your mindset tells me everything I know about how trustworthy you are.
Q7: No
Q8: Prohibits citizens from voting unless they present government-issued identification.
Verification code: 596f5ae6ed234731b30a5a504a7df5fd (Verified voter) · 2026-09-28
Q1: It asks only billionaires — a very small group with highly concentrated wealth
Q2: None of these concern me
Q3: Yes
Q4: Focus on constraining or reducing spending
Q5: None of these persuade me
Q6: It could block eligible citizens who lack the required ID
Q7: No
Verification code: 6117fa61169a48e5a9ac7d7c1ba6e3b5 (Public) · 2026-10-07
Q1: None of these persuade me
Q2: Doubts it stays truly "one-time" (a future Legislature could re-impose it) — It will become an everyone tax.
Q3: No
Q4: Focus on constraining or reducing spending — The state has a spending problem not a revenue problem. There is NEVER enough money for them.
Q5: It adds a layer of election security and public confidence — A simple audit of our voter rolls will silence critics. Why do they refuse to do it?
Q6: None of these concern me
Q7: Yes
Q8: Establishes voter identification and citizenship requirement. — AG Bonta is a disgrace for his bias in ballot wording.
Verification code: 61b9448221154dcfaf856e4ca3ae56fd (Verified voter) · 2026-10-04
Q1: It raises billions for health care, education, and food aid as federal funds are cut
Q2: Valuing billionaires' assets will be costly and litigated
Q3: Yes
Q4: A balance of both
Q5: None of these persuade me
Q6: Citizenship is already required to vote; this adds cost for little gain
Q7: No
Q8: Requires voters to show government-issued ID and requires officials to verify citizenship on the voter rolls.
Q9: Nope
Q10: pickleball
Verification code: 647dd5b0dde34921a02fa9e0a61be18b (Verified voter) · 2026-10-15
Q1: None of these persuade me
Q2: Doubts it stays truly "one-time" (a future Legislature could re-impose it)
Q3: No
Q4: Focus on constraining or reducing spending
Q5: Verifying citizenship on the voter rolls
Q6: None of these concern me
Q7: Yes
Q8: Requires voters to show government-issued ID and requires officials to verify citizenship on the voter rolls.
Verification code: 661143db957a478e992c5a423b3a2a3e (Verified voter) · 2026-10-04
Q1: None of these persuade me
Q2: Billionaires may leave California, reducing future revenue and jobs
Q3: No
Q4: Focus on constraining or reducing spending
Q5: Requiring ID at the ballot is a common, reasonable safeguard
Q6: None of these concern me
Q7: Yes
Q8: Establishes voter identification and citizenship requirement.
Verification code: 6796a44872694e88ad81a8e56033661a (Verified voter) · 2026-10-07
Q1: None of these persuade me
Q2: One-time money can't sustain ongoing programs like health care
Q3: No
Q4: Focus on constraining or reducing spending
Q5: It adds a layer of election security and public confidence
Q6: The new ID and verification steps are expensive to run
Q7: Undecided
Q8: Establishes voter identification and citizenship requirement.
Q10: Results of your poll.
Verification code: 68cc4b06a3c84a0ab35ccf82e3a4fe1a (Verified voter) · 2026-10-02
Q1: It asks only billionaires — a very small group with highly concentrated wealth
Q2: Doubts it stays truly "one-time" (a future Legislature could re-impose it)
Q3: Undecided
Q4: Focus on constraining or reducing spending
Q5: It adds a layer of election security and public confidence
Q6: It could block eligible citizens who lack the required ID
Q7: Yes
Q8: Establishes voter identification and citizenship requirement.
Verification code: 702a703f13a8409f873548ba303027cf (Verified voter) · 2026-10-06
Q1: It raises billions for health care, education, and food aid as federal funds are cut
Q2: One-time money can't sustain ongoing programs like health care
Q3: No
Q4: A balance of both
Q5: It adds a layer of election security and public confidence
Q6: The measure defines no process to fix a wrongly-rejected ballot
Q7: No
Q8: Establishes voter identification and citizenship requirement.
Verification code: 7c2192feb3e549f5973690bd0391e8c4 (Verified voter) · 2026-10-04
Q1: It raises billions for health care, education, and food aid as federal funds are cut
Q2: Doubts it stays truly "one-time" (a future Legislature could re-impose it) — The argument that stuck out to me was the possibility of the tax being re-imposed in the future while not adjusted for inflation, making it so that people with a net worth under $1B may also be taxed. However, I believe that if prices remain high, the likelihood of the average worker/resident becoming multi-millionaires in the future is very low, so they won't be affected.
Q3: Yes
Q4: Focus on raising new revenue (e.g., taxes on high wealth or income) — While I believe taxing the ultra-wealthy is a good move for the state budget, I also believe that the current budget needs to be reassessed. The people of CA must be able to see with their own eyes how our politicians are working for us, not for themselves or foreign actors.
Q5: It adds a layer of election security and public confidence
Q6: Citizenship is already required to vote; this adds cost for little gain
Q7: No
Q8: Requires voters to show government-issued ID and requires officials to verify citizenship on the voter rolls.
Verification code: 7e09e417f2af4f29a50b65eeaa0dd45a (Verified voter) · 2026-09-29
Q1: None of these persuade me
Q2: Billionaires may leave California, reducing future revenue and jobs
Q3: No
Q4: Focus on constraining or reducing spending
Q5: Requiring ID at the ballot is a common, reasonable safeguard
Q6: None of these concern me
Q7: Yes
Q8: Establishes voter identification and citizenship requirement.
Verification code: 85b47525846a4222841cec2d74c9027b (Verified voter) · 2026-09-30
Q1: None of these persuade me
Q2: Billionaires may leave California, reducing future revenue and jobs
Q3: No
Q4: Focus on constraining or reducing spending
Q5: Requiring ID at the ballot is a common, reasonable safeguard
Q6: None of these concern me
Q7: Yes
Q8: Establishes voter identification and citizenship requirement.
Verification code: 86d3fc2e81934910b4c1018514fb4d41 (Verified voter) · 2026-10-16
Q1: None of these persuade me
Q2: Billionaires may leave California, reducing future revenue and jobs
Q3: No
Q4: Focus on constraining or reducing spending
Q5: Requiring ID at the ballot is a common, reasonable safeguard
Q6: The measure defines no process to fix a wrongly-rejected ballot
Q7: Yes
Q8: Establishes voter identification and citizenship requirement.
Verification code: 8fd9641a1af449d1ad77a59af26a91ee (Public) · 2026-10-04
Q1: None of these persuade me
Q2: Doubts it stays truly "one-time" (a future Legislature could re-impose it)
Q3: No
Q4: Focus on constraining or reducing spending
Q5: Requiring ID at the ballot is a common, reasonable safeguard
Q6: None of these concern me
Q7: Yes
Q8: Establishes voter identification and citizenship requirement.
Verification code: 9ddeab8f63b64ca6b67c1318ce81c6cc (Verified voter) · 2026-10-16
Q1: None of these persuade me
Q2: Billionaires may leave California, reducing future revenue and jobs
Q3: No
Q4: Focus on constraining or reducing spending
Q5: It adds a layer of election security and public confidence
Q6: None of these concern me
Q7: Yes
Q8: Requires voters to show government-issued ID and requires officials to verify citizenship on the voter rolls.
Q10: Cupertino city related topics.
Verification code: 9fd9c42f227a4c9aa00a28d6e8246df9 (Verified voter) · 2026-10-05
Q1: None of these persuade me
Q2: Billionaires may leave California, reducing future revenue and jobs
Q3: No
Q4: Focus on constraining or reducing spending
Q5: Verifying citizenship on the voter rolls
Q6: None of these concern me
Q7: Yes
Q8: Requires voters to show government-issued ID and requires officials to verify citizenship on the voter rolls.
Q10: All of the propositions on the ballot.
Verification code: a8e9341fe0d2430dacdab9acc8cb9278 (Verified voter) · 2026-10-17
Q1: None of these persuade me — It is not fair to collect Prop 40 tax for billionaire. They have paid income tax. Top 1% tax payers in USA paid about 38% total income tax. The question is not collect more tax from richers. California government should audit that how much the government wasted money in their spending.
Q2: One-time money can't sustain ongoing programs like health care — California government should welcome the billionaires to continue their business in California.
Q3: No — No for Prop 40!
Q4: Focus on constraining or reducing spending — Californians have too much taxes already. No for any new tax.
California government wasted too much money already. Such as High speed train from LA to San Francisco
Q5: Requiring ID at the ballot is a common, reasonable safeguard — This is a common sense to show ID to vote. I remember even 25 years ago, Voters need to show ID when they vote.
Q6: None of these concern me — Show ID when you vote: this is a common sense. I think it costs nothing and will block most of voting fraud.
Q7: Yes
Q8: Requires voters to show government-issued ID and requires officials to verify citizenship on the voter rolls.
Verification code: ab09b32ab6734a7ba828ac684e4742a4 (Verified voter) · 2026-10-13
Q1: None of these persuade me
Q2: Doubts it stays truly "one-time" (a future Legislature could re-impose it)
Q3: No
Q4: Focus on constraining or reducing spending
Q5: None of these persuade me
Q6: Citizenship is already required to vote; this adds cost for little gain
Q7: No
Q8: Prohibits citizens from voting unless they present government-issued identification.
Verification code: acb487eec7134e5c868fb68a23276f0e (Verified voter) · 2026-10-05
Q1: None of these persuade me
Q2: Billionaires may leave California, reducing future revenue and jobs
Q3: No
Q4: Focus on constraining or reducing spending
Q5: Requiring ID at the ballot is a common, reasonable safeguard
Q6: None of these concern me
Q7: Yes
Verification code: ad02de8c018c418e92760de846a9230b (Verified voter) · 2026-10-06
Q1: None of these persuade me — Ridiculous 'socialist' oriented bill.
Q2: Doubts it stays truly "one-time" (a future Legislature could re-impose it)
Q3: No
Q4: Focus on constraining or reducing spending
Q5: Requiring ID at the ballot is a common, reasonable safeguard
Q6: Citizenship is already required to vote; this adds cost for little gain
Q7: Yes
Q8: Prohibits citizens from voting unless they present government-issued identification.
Verification code: ba3d764734884324915837d5e12ca3c9 (Verified voter) · 2026-10-15
Q1: None of these persuade me
Q2: Doubts it stays truly "one-time" (a future Legislature could re-impose it)
Q3: No
Q4: Focus on constraining or reducing spending
Q5: Verifying citizenship on the voter rolls
Q6: None of these concern me
Q7: Yes
Q8: Establishes voter identification and citizenship requirement.
Q9: I hope both propositions pass.Common sense.
Verification code: c39a68481f9d45828cdcfce31a3471e4 (Public) · 2026-10-03
Q1: None of these persuade me — Everyone, including the low income should pay something to the state budget or they won't have any skin in the state taxing game and there are no Santa Clause around to give tax dollars to illegals, crooked politicians and the unions.
Q2: Doubts it stays truly "one-time" (a future Legislature could re-impose it) — There are no such things as a one time tax. Every tax politicians make will ALWAYS RESULT IN ADDITONAL EITHER ADD ON TAX OR INCREASED TAXES.
Q3: Yes
Q4: Focus on constraining or reducing spending — The California budget shortfall are from the SINGLE UNION/CONTRACTOR RUN DEMOCRAT STATE SUPER MAJORITY who passed more useless taxes for the so called homeless (but in reality gave billions to state scam artist who are being indicted as we speak), the unions and state run contractors who consume billions and produce nothing for the state citizens.
Q5: Verifying citizenship on the voter rolls — The first three. Since California like other states hand out drivers licenses and CDL like candy at Halloween which gives every applicant a california voting ballot, we have absolutely no idea who is voting and my guess is thousands and maybe millions of illegals are voting.
Q6: None of these concern me — Absolutely none of these are of any concern to me.
Q7: Yes
Q8: Requires voters to show government-issued ID and requires officials to verify citizenship on the voter rolls. — I think the state AG should not be allowed to and stop reworking ballot measures to fit the democrat agenda.
Q9: There's a laundry list of issues placed on the ballot especially by the Democrat supermajority that have driving California into bankruptcy and brought in millions of illegals living off the taxpayer's dime like free education, free food (even liquor) snap programs, free housing, free ell phones, and more. You're asking me why california is so screwed up. Look back to the the Democrats obtained a super majority in the state and you'll see when California started to go into bankruptcy.
Q10: Yes, let the California taxpaying citizens know that all the democrat super majority politicians in California who passed hundred of bills and laws passed causing sky high taxes, millions of illegals, millions of homeless, thousands of corrupt politicians and criminas who took advantage of their bills to help Californians actually wasted billions, that these politicians will walk away with fat pensions and with no accountability for any of their actions.
Verification code: c870a79bb16b4dbb8d424aaf58b0662c (Verified voter) · 2026-10-13
Q1: It raises billions for health care, education, and food aid as federal funds are cut
Q2: Valuing billionaires' assets will be costly and litigated
Q3: Undecided
Q4: A balance of both
Q5: None of these persuade me
Q6: Citizenship is already required to vote; this adds cost for little gain
Q7: No
Q8: Prohibits citizens from voting unless they present government-issued identification.
Verification code: ca2abbd9076e4aeaa2b2d44563d9f4bf (Verified voter) · 2026-10-12
Q1: None of these persuade me
Q2: One-time money can't sustain ongoing programs like health care
Q3: No
Q4: Focus on constraining or reducing spending
Q5: Requiring ID at the ballot is a common, reasonable safeguard
Q6: None of these concern me
Q7: Yes
Q8: Requires voters to show government-issued ID and requires officials to verify citizenship on the voter rolls.
Verification code: cc5985370aab4bfba484aff35a521234 (Verified voter) · 2026-10-08
Q1: None of these persuade me — It’s a stepping stone and the next time this one time tax will hit the rest of us
Q2: Doubts it stays truly "one-time" (a future Legislature could re-impose it)
Q3: No
Q4: Focus on constraining or reducing spending — Stop the tax and spend!!!!
Q5: It adds a layer of election security and public confidence — Only Americans should be voting in our elections!
Q6: None of these concern me — Again, only Americans should be voting in our elections.
Q7: Yes
Q8: Establishes voter identification and citizenship requirement.
Verification code: ced5fb2a17b64ce78054db6b80138847 (Verified voter) · 2026-10-11
Q1: None of these persuade me
Q2: Doubts it stays truly "one-time" (a future Legislature could re-impose it)
Q3: No
Q4: Focus on constraining or reducing spending
Q5: Verifying citizenship on the voter rolls
Q6: None of these concern me
Q7: Yes
Q8: Establishes voter identification and citizenship requirement.
Verification code: e0ca7a543c934636b17bb2bd44085d89 (Verified voter) · 2026-09-29
Q1: None of these persuade me
Q2: One-time money can't sustain ongoing programs like health care
Q3: No
Q4: Focus on constraining or reducing spending
Q5: Requiring ID at the ballot is a common, reasonable safeguard
Q6: None of these concern me
Q7: Yes
Q8: Requires voters to show government-issued ID and requires officials to verify citizenship on the voter rolls.
Verification code: e6a6f023c7d047d2b3aac4e8da13f39b (Verified voter) · 2026-10-07
Q1: None of these persuade me
Q2: Doubts it stays truly "one-time" (a future Legislature could re-impose it)
Q3: No
Q4: Focus on constraining or reducing spending
Q5: Requiring ID at the ballot is a common, reasonable safeguard
Q6: None of these concern me
Q7: Yes
Q8: Establishes voter identification and citizenship requirement.
Q9: 39 is reasonable. 40 is the reason why Democrats lose nationwide.
Verification code: e7e7770b37e74d6fb9d7ab831962b9c4 (Verified voter) · 2026-10-10
Q1: None of these persuade me
Q2: Not sure — The biggest problem is that it’s unfair. It’s the majority bullying the minority. The majority, simply because they have the numbers, gets to decide to impose higher taxes on the tiny minority of the ultra-wealthy. In essence, this is no different from what happened during China’s Cultural Revolution, when lower- and middle-class peasants and workers banded together to bring down wealthy landlords and business owners.
Q3: No
Q4: Focus on constraining or reducing spending
Q5: Verifying citizenship on the voter rolls
Q6: None of these concern me
Q7: Yes
Q8: Requires voters to show government-issued ID and requires officials to verify citizenship on the voter rolls.
Verification code: ea337549e8294655bc74473c7d67eb6d (Verified voter) · 2026-10-15
Q1: It asks only billionaires — a very small group with highly concentrated wealth
Q2: None of these concern me
Q3: Yes
Q4: A balance of both
Q5: None of these persuade me
Q6: Not sure
Q7: No
Q8: Requires voters to show government-issued ID and requires officials to verify citizenship on the voter rolls.
Verification code: fa5ac6949f0746d09f83cc8af31f96f5 (Verified voter) · 2026-09-27
Q1: It asks only billionaires — a very small group with highly concentrated wealth
Q2: One-time money can't sustain ongoing programs like health care
Q3: Yes
Q4: Focus on raising new revenue (e.g., taxes on high wealth or income)
Q5: None of these persuade me
Q6: It could block eligible citizens who lack the required ID
Q7: No
Q8: Requires voters to show government-issued ID and requires officials to verify citizenship on the voter rolls.
Verification code: fafaef710d1040b0a1559e323072102d (Verified voter) · 2026-10-19
Q1: It raises billions for health care, education, and food aid as federal funds are cut
Q2: None of these concern me
Q3: Yes
Q4: A balance of both
Q5: None of these persuade me
Q6: Citizenship is already required to vote; this adds cost for little gain
Q7: No
Verification code: fbe26a5946ee4189bb7b8e752c0ab692 (Verified voter) · 2026-10-11
Q1: None of these persuade me
Q2: Valuing billionaires' assets will be costly and litigated
Q3: No
Q4: A balance of both
Q5: Verifying citizenship on the voter rolls
Q6: None of these concern me
Q7: Yes
Q8: Establishes voter identification and citizenship requirement.
