The Peace and Freedom Party Sacramento County Central Committee has decided to support one and oppose three measures on the November ballot in Sacramento County.
•Measure D: the Low-Income Housing Measure Even though this measure only “authorizes” the government to act on development of low-income housing, we support it anyway. Now let’s pressure government actually to do something! Vote YES on Measure D.
•Measure O: Homeless Persons Shelter and Encampment Measure One part is good, and three or four parts are bad. Housing, drug, and mental health services are needed, but certainly not more “enforcement.” The cons outweigh the pros. Vote NO on Measure O.
Aaron Reveles is an at-large officer on the Peace and Freedom Party State Committee, as well as an active member of the Los Angeles County Committee & Statewide Media Committee. He has dedicated his party work to rebuilding bridges with old comrades that have once been burnt, as well as building new bridges with the plethora of socialist groups that have been popping up after the 2020 election cycle.
Aaron hails from the east side of Los Angeles, earning degrees in History from the University of California Santa Barbara and a Master’s of Science in Education (M.Ed.) from the Johns Hopkins School of Education. He is currently a teacher with the Los Angeles Unified School district.
On why he is running for a seat on the Montebello Unified School Board, Aaron states, “As a teacher and a community organizer, I see how both educational and political policy affects my students, whether inside or outside of the classroom. I have learned both in study and practice that students in poverty cannot learn until their basic needs are met.
“I am running because I can bring ideas to the table that will meet not only student's educational needs, but also their basic needs."
If you would like to help Aaron in our efforts to build a mass base of support for our party at the local level please follow his campaign, sign up to volunteer for phonebanking, and/or donate to his campaign via Linktree by clicking here.
Proposition 29 would require a medical professional, specifically a physician, nurse practitioner or physician's assistant with relevant experience, to be present at dialysis clinics all times. Additionally, all dialysis clinics of which 5% or more are owned by any in-house physician would be required to disclose this information publicly.
The healthcare unions that are backing Proposition 29 hope to enact some long-overdue safety and health improvements at the clinics while stopping clinic owners from hiding their ownership and dodging reasonable regulation.
The backers will be immensely outspent by the two corporations that own most California private dialysis clinics (DaVita Inc. and Fresenius Medical Care), who are using their usual tactic against the proposition: telling outrageous lies. These companies claim Prop 29 will shut down clinics (it won't), and they claim it will reduce the level of care (in fact, it will improve the level of care).
Sadly, lying in advertisements against propositions is perfectly legal in California, and the tactic worked in 2018 and 2020 on the same issue. This is an entirely good and entirely positive proposition, and it would pass if voters understood it.
Fight against the lies. Vote YES on Proposition 29.
In Election 2022 in California, Proposition 31 ia a referendum bankrolled by tobacco industry with the intention of overturning a law passed by the California legislature in 2020. Voting YES will allow the law to take effect.
Over the last few years, tobacco corporations have evaded the ban on selling tobacco products to minors by selling flavored preparations. They calculate that these are are so attractive to children that they will find ways to obtain them, and become addicted for life to nicotine.
In 2020, the California Legislature adopted Senate Bill 793 (SB-793), which banned the sale of most flavored tobacco products. The few exceptions are products used almost entirely by adults, like expensive flavored cigars. As the bill’s sponsor said, “Using candy, fruit, and other alluring flavors, the tobacco industry weaponized its tactics to beguile a new generation into tobacco addiction.”
SB 793 was so popular with the public that only one legislator voted against it. But the tobacco corporations, knowing the public supported the ban, nevertheless found a way to delay its implementation. Under California law, if a referendum against a law qualifies for the ballot, the law cannot be implemented until the voters make their decision. So they paid professional signature-gatherers millions of dollars to get enough signatures to delay the law until the election of November 2022.
How did they get the signatures? They lied. The signature-gatherers told voters that their signatures would qualify for the ballot a law that would ban selling flavored tobacco products! And the disclosure form they are legally required to show potential signers, showing that Philip Morris USA and the R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company provided almost all the funding for the referendum, was not shown to the voters.
This law is a good law and should be enacted by the voters now that the delay is over. The tobacco companies have already profited from the two-year delay they paid for, and they may or may not bother to spend more money on lying ads against Proposition 31. But a vote to uphold the law will keep these conscienceless corporations from continuing to sell these products, and an overwhelming vote may help convince the legislators to take further actions that will cut into their ill-gotten gains.
This health and safety measure is the sort of law that Californians need and support, and we urge a vote of YES on Proposition 31.
Ballot Proposition 28 would create a dedicated funding stream for arts programs in the public schools. It would not raise taxes, but instead require that the state match 1% of California’s prekindergarten-through-12th-grade school dollars from the general fund. The funding could not be used to supplant existing arts budgeting.
California’s legislative analyst estimates the set-aside would generate up to $1 billion. Seventy percent of the funding would be distributed to schools based on their enrollment. The remainder would provide additional funding for schools that serve low-income families.
The definition of arts programs is broad, including visual art, music, dance, video and computer art. The funding is for instructors for these programs, as well as for materials. Not more than 1% may be used for administrative purposes.
You could say that this is ballot-box budgeting and that school spending should be determined locally by elected boards or groups of teachers, parents, and students. But that is not how it works in reality. A combination of budget shortfalls and concentration on “teaching to the standardized test” have caused school districts to greatly reduce funding to arts programs.
California’s educational standards include arts instruction, which has known benefits for students’ intellectual and emotional development. At the same time, the state mandates either directly, by decree or indirectly, via rewards and penalties based on test scores, that schools concentrate on reading and math. School districts often require specific numbers of hours for such instruction, leaving little time for anything else. This is especially true in low-income areas where test scores tend to be lower.
Wealthier families can afford music and art instruction and experiences for their children outside of school. Music and art instruction have been demonstrated to help children learn in all areas.
Despite its imperfections, this ballot proposition gives voters a chance to decide whether they want California children to get more arts instruction in schools. Peace & Freedom Party urges a YES vote on proposition 28.
As worded on the Election 2022 ballot, Proposition 1 would enact an amendment to California’s constitution explicitly prohibiting the state from interfering with or denying an individual’s reproductive freedom. The California Supreme Court has in the past ruled that the right to abortion is implicit because the right to privacy is explicit in the state constitution. Recent events have shown that we need to make the right to get an abortion and to obtain and use contraceptives explicit.
This will be one of five abortion-related measures on the ballot in 2022 nationally after the Supreme Court’s overturning of Roe v. Wade in June. The amendment provided for in Prop 1 would read:
“The state shall not deny or interfere with an individual’s reproductive freedom in their most intimate decisions, which includes their fundamental right to choose to have an abortion and their fundamental right to choose or refuse contraceptives.”
Currently, millions of individuals in California have the right to an abortion and to choose their own contraceptives. If Prop 1 does not pass, millions of individuals will be at risk of being denied essential medicine: Common contraceptives used to treat inflammation, arthritis, psoriasis, and abnormal menstrual cycles will no longer be accessible. Pregnancy complications that could lead to maternal mortality are also expected to increase if a ban on abortion rights is passed.
The November vote comes on the heels of the victory in Kansas for abortion rights, which saw a 250% increase in early voter turnout compared to the 2018 midterm election. This huge victory is a success for gender equity and for the socialist movement everywhere in the U.S.
Unsurprisingly, Prop 1 has received opposition from conservative “pro-life” organizations such as Democrats for Life of America, California Conference of Catholic Bishops, the Republican Party of California, and various directors of the so-called Crisis Pregnancy Centers.
Although California appears to be a progressive state, leaning towards accepting reproductive freedom as healthcare and a fundamental right, a NO vote will place millions of individuals in dangerous situations. Let’s go all-out for abortion rights, because abortion is healthcare and essential. Vote YES on Proposition 1!
Two propositions on the November ballot address the seemingly inevitable legalization of sports betting in California – 33 state governments have done so since the Supreme Court decision of May 2018 invalidating the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act. The aims and ends of Propositions 26 and 27 could not be more different, however.
Proposition 26: Vote YES for Native American economic sovereignty Under current California law, Native American tribes have a near monopoly on providing casino gaming. The tribal casinos are not privately owned; they are owned by the local tribal governments, and the profits go for their social needs. Proposition 26 would allow sports betting in the state of California, but only in locations currently providing casino games.
According to the OC Register of August 19, 2022, the California state government has established gaming compacts with 79 tribes; agreements with another four are pending. Sixty-six casinos operated by 63 tribes are currently open for business in California. In 2021, these 63 tribes paid approximately $65 million in regulatory fees and in support of gambling addiction programs and "tens of millions" in local taxation. Another $150 million is redistributed from the state’s bigger gaming providers to those tribes who host 350 slot machines or fewer.
Proposition 27: Vote NO to keep revenue in California Proposition 27 would allow online sports betting within California state limits, while putting a 10% tax on sports betting revenues and licensing fees. It is written, sponsored and bankrolled by some private gambling corporations, and these corporations would take in at least 90% of the money from web-based sports betting that would represent a huge expansion of gambling in California. An undefined portion of the 10% will be divided 85/15 and devoted to the California Solutions to Homelessness and Mental Health Support Account and the Tribal Economic Development Account, respectively.
Pragmatically speaking, if Proposition 27 were to pass, online sports betting would be available to all Californians with an internet connection as soon as January 1, 2023. As has typically been the case in the state-by-state legalization of sports betting, certain New Jersey-based operators have a massive head start over any competition with their turnkey sportsbook sites.
And, since a maximum of 1.5% will be peripherally invested in California’s Tribal Economic Development Account, we can easily calculate that for every $100 million in profit that online sports betting generates, the state’s tribes will get to share $1.5 million. For comparison’s sake, the state of New York, with a similar-sized sports betting market, receives about $110 million in its share of revenue from online sports betting per month. Similar numbers would result in a total of about $20 million to the tribal account and about $112 million for homelessness. To put this in perspective, the state of California has spent an average of $6 billion per year on the homelessness issue for the past five years. And that has not put much of a dent in the housing shortage.
To top everything off, a group of interests funded by Penn Interactive Ventures, FBG Enterprises Opco LLC and Bet MGM are backing a mammoth advertising campaign loaded with Orwellian-style mistruths. For example, they claim that there is strong protection against under-age gambling in Prop 27 (there isn’t) and say that Prop 26 provides no such protection. Nonsense: under-age people are not allowed into the tribal casinos. Further, Prop 26 would not expand the gambling locations, just the nature of some of the games.
The truth is that at least 50 Native American tribes, six homelessness/low-income advocacy groups, three workers’ unions along with dozens of organizations from across the state oppose Prop 27.
A majority of the states now have some form of legal sports betting. There are two models for it: the tribal model and the corporate model. This choice between Props 26 and 27 gives us a vote on which model will be adopted in California. Sports betting is coming, sooner or later. Let’s keep it in the tribal casinos, and freeze the corporate liars out.
Stand with the Native American tribes of California and for their economic sovereignty. Vote YES on Proposition 26 and vote NO on Proposition 27.
A number of ballot propositions will be voted upon by Californians in the upcoming state election in November. The Peace & Freedom Party recommends the following for voting on these propositions. For a more detailed description of PFP’s stand on each of these props, please click on the header where applicable.
YES on Prop 1: Guarantee Reproductive Freedom This was placed on the ballot by the legislature. It makes explicit the right to abortion and contraceptives in the California constitution. It does not include universal free healthcare, paid family leave and child care, which would give us real reproductive freedom. But still, this is a YES.
YES on Prop 26: Uphold Tribal Sovereignty This is supported by almost all California tribes. It adds sports betting and table games to what is allowed at tribal casinos. We have supported similar measures in the past as part of tribal sovereignty, and continue our support with this one.
NO on Prop 27: Stop the Betting Company Scam Don’t be fooled by the ads. They are bankrolled by out of state gambling corporations, who have been first skirting laws and then assimilating each state into their online sports betting networks. The funding for good causes they promise are minimal. Almost all of the money will leave California.
YES on Prop 28: Fund Art and Music in the Schools This measure requires that the state government allocate a small percentage (about 0.5%) of the general fund to go toward arts programs in public schools. Music and art instruction help children learn in all areas. Wealthier families can afford to provide this outside of school. Let’s make it accessible to all.
YES on Prop 29: Make Healthcare Safer Union-backed Proposition 29 w ould enact some long overdue safety and health improvements at dialysis clinics, and stop the clinic owners from hiding their ownership and dodging reasonable regulation. The owners of two chains of private dialysis clinics are spending tens of millions of dollars on false advertisements to defeat it, as they did on similar measures in 2018 and 2020.
NO on Prop 30Reject Corporate Subsidies This measure is funded by the rideshare company Lyft, which by state law must go electric and wants someone else to pay for it.
This is a tax increase on incomes over $2 million to fund subsidies for electric cars and charging stations. Although we favor taxing the rich, such revenue should not be used to subsidize private automobiles, even electric ones. Tax money should go into the general fund and be used to fund projects which benefit the most, like real environmental protection and restoration, universal healthcare, and better, cleaner public transportation.
YES on Prop 31: Let a Good Law Stand In 2020, the Legislature outlawed most flavored tobacco products to stop the corporate effort to use them to addict children. The tobacco corporations then paid huge sums to qualify a referendum for the ballot and won a two-year delay of the law by doing so. Vote YES to uphold the law the legislature passed, and stop the sale of most flavored tobacco products in California.
The following article was originally published at Liberation News. The full version may be read here.
The results are in! Revolutionary socialist congressional candidate José Cortes received 3,343 votes in the San Diego, California, primary race. Cortes, a member of the Party for Socialism and Liberation (PSL) and Peace & Freedom Party, ran against Republican Stan Caplan and corporate Democrat Sara Jacobs for the seat in California’s newly formed 51st House of Representatives district.
Cortes also ran for Congress in the old 50th district in 2020. Amid record-low turnout in a district where half as many people voted as had voted in 2020, Cortes doubled his tally in ’22. Growing support for José Cortes, the Peace & Freedom Party and the PSL is further evidence of an observation made by socialist presidential candidate Gloria La Riva said in 2019: “the fog of anti-communism is lifting.”
The Cortes for Congress program centered on pro-working class demands such as housing for all, Medicare for All, ending all U.S.-involved wars and interventions overseas, full rights for all immigrants, reparations for oppressed peoples, jailing killer cops and defunding the police. While discussing his program at an African Liberation Day celebration on May 27 at the San Diego Justice Center, José told an engaged audience, “We’re actually in a conflict not just between ideas, but between classes.”
Achievements of the Cortes for Congress campaign
In addition to doubling his previous vote count, the Cortes for Congress campaign raised over $7,000, which helped José get on the ballot. Donations – large and small – poured in from working-class supporters across the country. The fundraising made it possible to obtain a voter guide statement that was sent to hundreds of thousands of voters in the district.
While there was not a single forum or debate held for the candidates in this race, Cortes’ campaign was featured in several major local media outlets such as the San Diego Union-Tribune and Times of San Diego.
José’s campaign was endorsed by the San Diego County Green Party, San Diego Socialist Alternative and Left Unity Slate candidates Meghann Adams, Nathalie Hrizi and Marco Amaral, among other community organizers and labor leaders.
Reflections on the campaign
Talking about the challenges of running a campaign while working at a call center full-time, José said to Liberation News, “Our campaign would routinely have to put in long days at work, followed by evenings filled with doing outreach outside of local grocery stores, malls and anywhere where working people could be found. Meanwhile, the ruling-class parties enjoyed paid staff and candidates who could run full-time without needing to have a real job.”
The campaign’s volunteer staff was made up entirely of working-class people and students. Campaign volunteer Max Lamangan told Liberation News, “The biggest challenge was balancing all of the tasks required for running a campaign that are typically delegated to a larger campaign team in the major parties.”
The Cortes for Congress campaign demonstrated a strong sense of solidarity and perseverance. Given the obstacles put in front of socialist parties trying to make a splash in the U.S. electoral arena and the challenges of campaigning during a pandemic, the outcomes are remarkable. “Seeing our people actualize their own power and participate in campaigns to not just fight, but win real material changes in their lives, opens the doorway to a socialist future,” says José.
California’s Green Party and Peace & Freedom Party are pointing to major electoral advances after Tuesday’s primary election that ensured both parties’ ballot status until 2026. Party leaders and candidates credit the historic cooperation between the two parties which created the first-ever Left Unity Slate of statewide candidates and resulted in significantly higher-than-usual vote totals.
“Those who crafted the Top Two Primary scheme did so with the intention of freezing us out,” said Kevin Akin, Peace & Freedom Party state chair. “Today, as a result of forming the Left Unity Slate, most of our statewide candidates received more than 2% of the vote, enough to ensure ballot status for both parties for another four years.” Some Left Unity Slate candidates performed notably better than this threshold and in some state locales garnered nearly 10%.
“Our left unity approach is needed now more than ever, when the majority of voters are realizing that corporate parties have not met and will not meet the needs of our communities,” said Laura Wells, of the Green Party of California’s Coordinating Committee, adding, “we will continue to build together so we can put real choices on the California ballot.”
Seven of the Left Unity Slate candidates for partisan statewide office mentioned the slate in their statements in the Secretary of State’s Voter Information Guide sent to every voter in the state, and the official endorsements by both parties were printed in the sample ballot pamphlets mailed out by all 58 California counties.
A party’s candidates must secure at least 2% of the vote in at least one statewide race in the gubernatorial primary to secure ballot status for the next four years. According to current figures, three Green Party candidates and three PFP candidates won more than 2% of the vote, so both parties remain on the ballot until at least 2026.
Currently, Laura Wells (of the Green Party), candidate for Controller, is now at 3.5%, and Meghann Adams (Peace & Freedom Party) for Treasurer is at 3.1%.
Other Left Unity candidates to receive at least 2% of the vote include Mohammad Arif (PFP) for Lieutenant Governor at 2.1%, Gary Blenner (GP) for Secretary of State at 2.5%, Dan Kapelovitz (GP) for Attorney General at 2.7%, and Nathalie Hrizi (PFP) for Insurance Commissioner at 2.3%.
Running against considerably wider fields than the other statewide races – the gubernatorial election included 26 candidates, the race for US senate ran 23 – Left Unity candidate for governor Luis J. Rodriguez (GP) has earned 1.3% of the vote and John Thompson Parker (PFP) is at 1.2% for senator.
The Left Unity Slate also included Marco Amaral, a non-partisan candidate for Superintendent of Public Instruction, who is currently at 7.9% in the vote count.
“We are very encouraged by the Left Unity Slate concept, and we’re pleased that each of our candidates clearly got more votes than they would have if just running as individual candidates,” said Akin.
Added Wells: “We are already exploring other forms of cooperation between our parties and expect this will strengthen both parties and have an impact on California’s politics to benefit the people of our state.”
The LeftUnitySlatewas formed in autumn 2021 with seven candidates for offices up for statewide vote in the California primary election of June 7, three members of the Peace and Freedom Party and four members of the Green Party, all formally endorsed by both parties.
Since then, the original seven Left Unity Slateendorsees have agreed to expand the slate by welcoming two fellow PFP/Green endorsees: Mohammad Arif, candidate for Lieutenant Governor, and Marco Amaral, candidate for Superintendent of Public Instruction.
The election for Superintendent of Public Instruction is non-partisan and all candidates run without party affiliation listed on the ballot, but all other Left Unity Slate candidates are listed with party labels.
The current Left Unity Slate numbers nine candidates, four PFP, four Green, and one unaffiliated:
• Luis J. Rodriguez for Governor (Green Party) • Mohammad Arif for Lieutenant Governor (PFP) • Gary N. Blenner for Secretary of State (G) • Laura Wells for Controller (G) • Meghann Adams for Treasurer (PFP) • Dan Kapelovitz for Attorney General (G) • Nathalie Hrizi for Insurance Commissioner (PFP) • John Thompson Parker for U.S. Senator (PFP) • Marco Amaral for Superintendent of Public Instruction (n/a)
Get your voice heard in Election 2024 – vote Peace & Freedom and the Left Unity Slate!
The California statewide primary election of March 5, 2024, includes first-round elections for political offices at all levels of government in the leadup to November's general election. Keep up with all the news regarding Peace & Freedom Party and Left Unity Slate candidates as well as PFP's stands on ballot props and other items on the ballot.
Donate to the Peace and Freedom Party by clicking the PayPal link -- PayPal membership is not required.
To send contributions via post, checks or money orders may be sent to:
Peace & Freedom Party P.O. Box 24764 Oakland, CA 94623
PFP Inform List
Join the PFP Inform List!
Get information on party activities and positions. Please sign up if you would like to get notices, letting you know about party campaigns and candidates, new positions and coalitions, and the availability of resources.