LATEST NEWS
In the News

THE CONTRACT
Bargaining
Grievances
Faculty Rights Info

INSIDE CFA
Contact CFA
Lecturers
Counselors
Committees & Caucuses
Affiliates & Links
CFA Online Store

MEMBERSHIP
Join CFA
Member Help Desk
Member Benefits
Retirees

PUBLICATIONS
Publications
Research Center
Agency Fee Notices

PRESS ROOM
News Releases
Contacts & Bios

Home
Webmaster

CFA'S POSITIONS
ON BALLOT MEASURES


CFA has influenced the outcome of many California ballot measures. Through member activism, CFA has worked to secure passage of school bonds, protect public employee pensions, support fair campaign reform and support minimum-wage increases.

In the past CFA helped to defeat traditional “wedge” issues, such as Proposition 187 (anti-immigrant), Proposition 209 (anti-affirmative action), Proposition 226 (anti-labor), Proposition 227 (Unz English-only instruction) and Proposition 54 (information ban).

Through this important work, CFA can ensure that the needs of the CSU faculty and the university are voiced. Every election the union participates in, CFA gains political clout and influence in Sacramento. This influence in turn helps CFA successfully advocate for the best interest of the CSU.

CFA's Positions on Current Ballot Measures

Proposition 93 is a proposal to rearrange term limits in the legislature and is supported by CFA.

While reducing the total number of years a Californian may serve in the legislature from 14 (six in the Assembly, eight in the Senate) to 12, it allows an individual to serve the entire time in one house (six terms in the Assembly, three in the Senate) or in combination.CFA supports Prop. 93. California’s higher education system is complex, and to grasp satisfactorily the issues requires one to climb a steep learning curve. Often, by the time a legislator fully understands our system, she or he is “term-limited” out of her/his respective house.

Expertise requires experience. When we have an opportunity to work with someone who is devoted to public higher education, such as current chair of the Assembly Higher Education Committee Anthony Portantino, we would like to keep him in the Assembly as long as possible.

CFA urges a yes vote on Proposition 93 on Feb. 5.

Proposition 92 is a problematic measure and is opposed by CFA.

There are several problems with this initiative. It weakens legislative oversight, in one instance by requiring truly extraordinary majorities to alter the measure’s provisions (four-fifths vote of each house; we all know how difficult it is to get a two thirds vote for the budget).

But the fundamental reason for CFA’s opposition is Prop 92’s potential costs.

The non-partisan Legislative Analyst’s Office, who is charged with determining the fiscal impact of initiatives, estimates that the first three years of this measure would reduce the general fund by $880 million, which would be catastrophic for the CSU. It would be a catastrophe because so much of the state’s general fund budget is guaranteed in the state constitution to specific programs leaving only a relatively small portion subject to reduction.

The CSU budget is entirely in that small portion.The public higher education system in this state has three segments. In order to address the problems of an accessible, affordable, high quality public higher education, all the segments have to be involved.

CFA urges a no vote on Proposition 92 on Feb. 5.