2005 California Proposition 75: Difference between revisions
Some work |
LucasBrown (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| (19 intermediate revisions by 17 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Short description|none}} <!-- "none" is preferred when the title is sufficiently descriptive; see [[WP:SDNONE]] --> |
|||
{{cleanup-date|August 2005}} |
|||
{{ElectionsCA}} |
|||
'''Proposition 75''' was a [[California ballot proposition|ballot proposition]] in the [[ |
'''Proposition 75''' was a [[California ballot proposition|ballot proposition]] in the [[California special election, 2005]]. |
||
== Summary (Prepared by the Attorney General) == |
== Summary (Prepared by the Attorney General) == |
||
Proposition 75: Public Employee Union Dues. Required Employee Consent for Political Contributions. Initiative Statute. |
Proposition 75: Public Employee Union Dues. Required Employee Consent for Political Contributions. Initiative Statute. |
||
* Prohibits the use by public employee labor organizations of public employee dues or fees for political contributions except with the prior consent of individual public employees each year on a specified written form. |
* Prohibits the use by public employee labor organizations of public employee dues or fees for political contributions except with the prior consent of individual public employees each year on a specified written form. |
||
| Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
==Reaction== |
==Reaction== |
||
Opponents of this |
Opponents of this proposition portrayed it as a measure to "silence the unions," since private corporations would not be affected. They also cited a [[Supreme Court of the United States|Supreme Court]] case in which union members could not be forced to join a union, and said that union members could already restrict their dues (opt-out process) towards political purposes. |
||
| ⚫ | |||
| ⚫ | |||
| ⚫ | |||
[[SEIU]]'s use of compulsory fees on nonmembers to fund its campaign against Prop. 75 was later found illegal by the U.S. Supreme Court in ''[[Knox v. Service Employees International Union, Local 1000]]''. The Court was disturbed that "SEIU's procedure was to force many nonmembers to subsidize a political effort designed to restrict their own rights." |
|||
| ⚫ | |||
==External links== |
==External links== |
||
* [http://vote2005.ss.ca.gov/Returns/prop/00.htm (Hopefully neutral) The |
* [https://web.archive.org/web/20051127033524/http://vote2005.ss.ca.gov/Returns/prop/00.htm (Hopefully neutral) The official results from the Secretary of State] |
||
* [http://www.joinarnold.com/site/c.itJUJ9MTIuE/b.1067073/k.6C76/Proposition_75__Paycheck_Protection.htm (Pro 75) Join Arnold] |
* [https://web.archive.org/web/20051013062506/http://www.joinarnold.com/site/c.itJUJ9MTIuE/b.1067073/k.6C76/Proposition_75__Paycheck_Protection.htm (Pro 75) Join Arnold] |
||
* [http://www.votecircle.com VoteCircle.com Non-partisan resources & vote sharing network for Californians] |
* [http://www.votecircle.com VoteCircle.com Non-partisan resources & vote sharing network for Californians] |
||
[[Category:California ballot propositions|75]] |
[[Category:2005 California ballot propositions|75]] |
||
[[Category:Initiatives in the United States]] |
|||
Latest revision as of 21:10, 9 June 2024
| Elections in California |
|---|
 |
Proposition 75 was a ballot proposition in the California special election, 2005.
Summary (Prepared by the Attorney General)
[edit]Proposition 75: Public Employee Union Dues. Required Employee Consent for Political Contributions. Initiative Statute.
- Prohibits the use by public employee labor organizations of public employee dues or fees for political contributions except with the prior consent of individual public employees each year on a specified written form.
- Restriction does not apply to dues or fees collected for charitable organizations, health care insurance, or other purposes directly benefitting the public employee.
- Requires public employee labor organizations to maintain and submit records to Fair Political Practices Commission concerning individual public employees’ and organizations’ political contributions.
- These records are not subject to public disclosure.
Summary of Legislature Analyst's estimate of net state and local government fiscal impact:
- Probably minor state and local government implementation costs, potentially offset in part by revenues from fines and/or fees.
Reaction
[edit]Opponents of this proposition portrayed it as a measure to "silence the unions," since private corporations would not be affected. They also cited a Supreme Court case in which union members could not be forced to join a union, and said that union members could already restrict their dues (opt-out process) towards political purposes.
The proponents cited this as a "Paycheck Protection" proposition, saying that this would help check union abuse.
The proposition was rejected on November 8, 2005 by 7% or about 500,000 votes statewide
SEIU's use of compulsory fees on nonmembers to fund its campaign against Prop. 75 was later found illegal by the U.S. Supreme Court in Knox v. Service Employees International Union, Local 1000. The Court was disturbed that "SEIU's procedure was to force many nonmembers to subsidize a political effort designed to restrict their own rights."