38 | Title and Summary / Analysis
PROPOSITION RAISES MINIMUM WAGE.
INITIATIVE STATUTE.
32 OFFICIAL TITLE AND SUMMARY PREPARED BY THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
BACKGROUND
State and Local Laws Set Minimum Wages.
Employers must pay their workers at least the
minimum wage. California’s minimum wage
currently is $16 per hour. Some local governments
have higher minimum wages. Minimum wage
laws do not apply to independent contractors and
other self-employed people.
Inflation Adjustments Under Current Law. Prices
tend to go up over time. These rising prices are
called “inflation. ” The state adjusts its minimum
wage every year based on inflation. Each
adjustment matches U.S. inflation, except in
two cases:
•
If inflation is negative, the adjustment is zero.
• If inflation exceeds 3.5 percent, the
adjustment is 3.5 percent.
Sta
te Sets Higher Minimum Wages for Some
Employers. State laws set higher minimum wages
for employers in some industries. For example,
most fast food restaurants must pay their workers
at least $20 per hour.
PROPOSAL
Higher Minimum Wage in 2025. In 2025,
California would have different minimum wages
for employers of different sizes. Employers with
26 or more employees would have a minimum
wage of $18 per hour. Employers with 25 or
fewer employees would have a minimum wage
of $17 per hour. Without Proposition 32, the
minimum wage for all employees would be about
$16.50 per hour. The proposition would not
change any local or industry-specific minimum
wages.
Minimum Wage $18 Per Hour in 2026. In 2026,
the minimum wage would be $18 per hour for all
employees. Without Proposition 32, it likely would
be about $17 per hour.
Inflation Adjustments Paused Until 2027. The
minimum wage would be adjusted for inflation
every year starting in 2027. These adjustments
would follow the current rules described earlier.
•
California’s minimum wage is currently $16 per
hour.
This measure increases that minimum, as
follows:
• Employers with 26 or more employees would
pay $17 hourly for the remainder of 2024
and $18 hourly beginning on Januar
y 1,
2025.
• Employers with 25 or fewer employees would
pay $17 hourly beginning J
anuary 1, 2025,
and $18 hourly beginning January 1, 2026.
• Thereafter
, as existing law provides, the
minimum wage annually adjusts for inflation.
• In addition to the generally applicable minimum
wage described above, current laws establish
a higher minimum wage in specified industries.
This measure does not amend those laws.
SUMMARY OF LEGISLATIVE ANALYST’S ESTIMATE
OF NET STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT FISCAL
IMPACT:
• State and local government costs could
increase or decrease. This change likely would
not exceed the high hundreds of millions of
dollars annually.
•
State and local tax revenues likely would
decrease. This revenue loss likely would not
exceed a few hundred million dollars annually.
ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST
The text of this measure can be found on page 97 and the Secretary of State’s website at voterguide.sos.ca.gov.
32 A t t achment 8
For the full text of Proposition 32, see page 97. Analysis | 39
ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST CONTINUED
FISCAL EFFECTS
Fiscal Effects Depend on Economic Effects.
Proposition 32 could have a wide range of
economic effects:
• Higher Wages. Workers who would have
made less than $18 per hour would instead
make $18 or more per hour by 2026. Higher
minimum wages also tend to push up wages
for other workers. This means that many
workers making a bit more than $18 per hour
also likely would get a raise.
• Likely Higher Prices. Higher wages would
increase costs for many businesses. Some
businesses likely would charge customers
higher prices. The overall price increase from
Proposition 32 likely would be smaller than
one-half of 1 percent.
• Likely Lower Profits. The costs of higher
wages likely would reduce some businesses’
profits.
• Effect on Jobs. The number of jobs in the
state could go up or down. This change
likely would be smaller than one-quarter of 1
percent.
Government Costs Could Go Up or Down.
Proposition 32 would increase state and local
government costs in some ways but would
decrease them in other ways:
• Higher Government Costs to Pay for
Workers. The state and many local
governments would have higher costs to pay
their employees. They also would have higher
costs to pay for work done by workers who
are not their employees.
• Savings From Lower Enrollment in
Health and Human Services Programs.
Proposition 32 would change the number
of people enrolled in health and human
services programs (such as California’s
Medicaid program, Medi-Cal) because it
would change people’s incomes. These
enrollment changes likely would reduce state
and local government costs.
Combining these two pieces, total state and local
government costs could go up or down. This
change likely would not exceed the high hundreds
of millions of dollars each year (annually). (Total
state and local government spending in California
exceeds $500 billion annually.)
The change in costs to the state’s General Fund
likely would be less than one-half of 1 percent
of the state’s total General Fund budget. (The
General Fund is the account the state uses to pay
for most public services, including education,
health care, and prisons.)
Lower Revenues. Proposition 32 would affect
income tax and sales tax revenues because it
would change incomes and prices. Overall, the
proposition likely would reduce state and local
government revenues. Revenues would be lower
mainly due to lower incomes for business owners.
The net revenue loss likely would not exceed a
few hundred million dollars annually. Last year,
total state and local revenue from these taxes was
about $200 billion.
Visit sos.ca.gov/campaign-lobbying/cal-access-
resources/measure-contributions/2024-
ballot-measure-contribution-totals for a list
of committees primarily formed to support or
oppose this measure.
Visit fppc.ca.gov/transparency/
top-contributors.html
to access the committee’s top 10 contributors.
RAISES MINIMUM WAGE.
INITIATIVE STATUTE.
PROPOSITION
32 32
32 40 | Arguments Arguments printed on this page are the opinions of the authors and have not been checked for accuracy by any official agency.
PROPOSITION RAISES MINIMUM WAGE.
INITIATIVE STATUTE.
32 ★ ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF PROPOSITION 32 ★
★ REBUTTAL TO ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF PROPOSITION 32 ★
VOTE NO on PROPOSITION 32!
Ballot measures shouldn’t be toys for multimillionaires.
ONE PERSON ALONE—A MULTIMILLIONAIRE—IS
BEHIND PROP. 32.
One person alone wrote Prop. 32, spent millions getting it on the ballot, and wrote the argument for Prop. 32.
SMALL BUSINESS AND WORKING FAMILY ADVOCATES
DON’T WANT PROP. 32
Many of California’s leading voices for working families and small businesses didn’t even want Prop. 32 on the
ballot, but this one author had to have it his way.
Even leading advocates for higher minimum wages urged
him to pull Prop. 32 from the ballot. He refused.
One person shouldn’t try to dictate labor policy for
39 million Californians, with the only qualification that he’s rich. No wonder Prop. 32 is so flawed.
Prop. 32 forces small businesses to INCREASE PRICES,
adding to inflation and raising the cost of living in
California even more. That hurts working families!
Prop. 32 raises costs for state and local governments
by BILLIONS, meaning they’ll cut vital services and
raise taxes.
Prop. 32 COSTS JOBS, with the greatest impact on teens
and people of color who are trying to get a career started with entry level jobs. That’s why leaders across California who previously supported minimum wage increases have
changed course and asked for them to be slowed down.
And Prop. 32 worsens California’s increasingly complex
patchwork of minimum wage laws, confusing both workers
and small business owners.
Prop. 32 seems to be an ego project, not a real solution for working Californians.
Get the facts at StopProp32.com.
VOTE NO ON PROPOSITION 32!
Jot Condie, President
California Restaurant Association
Jennifer Barrera, President
California Chamber of Commerce
Ron Fong, President
California Grocers Association
Every Californian who works at least a full-time, 40-hour work week should be able to afford life’s basic needs.
However, there are about 2 million Californians who are working full time, and more, but earn less than $18 per hour. Most of these Californians who earn less than $18 per hour are heads of their households. Most of these
Californians who earn less than $18 per hour have kids.
We can all agree that Californians who work hard, working full time or more, should not live in poverty. But that’s exactly how millions of Californians are living because their wages are too low to afford how expensive life has become in California.
In addition, when people who work hard are paid wages
that aren’t enough to cover life’s basic needs, a bigger burden is put on taxpayers to make up the difference
that some corporations aren’t honoring. It is wrong for all the businesses that do right by their workers that
some corporations are allowed to pay Californians such
low wages that those workers are left needing taxpayer
funded aid. Taxpayers should not be subsidizing some
corporations that choose to pay extremely low wages
and enabling them to keep the rest as excess profit for their owners.
By raising the minimum wage to $18 per hour,
Proposition 32 will bring a much-needed raise to 2 million California workers and create a more prosperous system
where big corporations aren’t allowed to exploit smaller businesses, our communities, and our hardest working
neighbors.
Finally, when more Californians earn a fair wage for their work, our entire economy does better. Working people
are better able to afford their rent, provide three meals per day for their kids, and all of that spending boosts the economies of our local communities. That boosted
spending creates more jobs in our communities, which
makes everyone better off.
It’s time that we make California a place that working
families can afford. By raising the minimum wage to $18, Proposition 32 will directly better the lives of 2 million Californians who will get a raise and we will stimulate more spending in our communities that most need that boost.
That boost will create more jobs and more prosperity
for everyone.
VOTE YES ON PROP. 32!
Joe Sanberg, Anti-Poverty Advocate
32 Arguments printed on this page are the opinions of the authors and have not been checked for accuracy by any official agency. Arguments | 41 ★ ARGUMENT AGAINST PROPOSITION 32 ★
★ REBUTTAL TO ARGUMENT AGAINST PROPOSITION 32 ★
YES on PROPOSITION 32 means a RAISE for SERVICE,
ESSENTIAL, AND OTHER WORKERS to help them afford
life’s basic needs.
YES ON PROPOSITION 32 means a RAISE for SINGLE
MOMS to help them afford life’s basic needs.
YES ON PROPOSITION 32 means CLOSING THE GENDER
PAY GAP for over a million working women.
The goods and services you buy have become more
expensive because CORPORATIONS ARE MAKING
RECORD PROFITS! CORPORATE PROFIT MARGINS
HAVE INCREASED 100% since the year 2000. The STOCK
MARKET has repeatedly made ALL-TIME HIGHS this year.
CORPORATE LOBBYISTS who will MAKE MORE MONEY
BY KEEPING WAGES LOW are trying to convince you that
raising the minimum wage will increase the cost of living, but that’s false. Record corporate profit margins are what has increased the cost of living. Now, we have to RAISE
THE MINIMUM WAGE TO HELP SERVICE WORKERS,
ESSENTIAL WORKERS, SINGLE MOMS, and other
WORKING CALIFORNIANS to be able to AFFORD LIFE’S
BASIC NEEDS.
YES on PROP. 32!
Learn more at: livingwageact.com
Ada F. Briceño, Co-President
UNITE HERE Local 11
Nanette Barragán, Congresswoman
U.S. House of Representatives, California 44th District Saru Jayaraman, President
One Fair Wage
VOTE NO on PROPOSITION 32.
PROPOSITION 32 INCREASES YOUR PERSONAL COSTS;
MAKES CALIFORNIA’S HUGE BUDGET DEFICIT WORSE;
PUNISHES SMALL BUSINESSES; COSTS JOBS; AND
HURTS THE VERY WORKERS IT’S SUPPOSED TO HELP.
PROPOSITION 32 MAKES OUR BUDGET DEFICIT WORSE
BY BILLIONS EACH YEAR AND JEOPARDIZES FUNDING
FOR PUBLIC SAFETY AND EDUCATION
California just experienced a $50 billion budget deficit.
Many cities and counties face huge deficits as well. The independent fiscal analysis of Prop. 32 in this same ballot pamphlet says a minimum wage increase will likely cost
state and local governments billions of dollars EACH
YEAR.
That means two things. You paying higher taxes to make
up the difference and cuts to important programs like
K–12 education, public safety, healthcare, and getting
homeless people off the streets.
PROPOSITION 32 INCREASES PRICES FOR
CALIFORNIANS WHEN WE CAN LEAST AFFORD IT
The cost of living in California is too high. Prices are up more than 20% in the last three years for food, gas, utilities, healthcare, and clothing. Proposition 32 makes it even worse as it will increase costs on family-owned businesses who can least afford it and force small
employers to increase prices for consumers to absorb
the higher minimum wage. Looking at the new California
fast-food minimum wage law, fast-food prices in California have gone up 7% in six months, the fastest in the nation.
Some well-known “value meals” now cost over 40% more
in California than the rest of the country.
Prop. 32 brings these record-setting price increases to small restaurants, grocery stores, convenience stores,
small retail shops, farmers, and more, so we’re going to see the same sticker shock everywhere.
PROPOSITION 32 WILL HURT SMALL, FAMILY-OWNED
BUSINESSES
Proposition 32 imposes the same high minimum wage
on small businesses as it does for large corporations.
Small businesses are more vulnerable to the impact
of this higher cost and could force these family-owned
businesses in our neighborhoods and communities to
shut down.
PROPOSITION 32 COSTS JOBS
Raising the minimum wage again sounds like something
that would help workers struggling to make ends meet.
Who doesn’t want workers to get paid more? It makes us
feel good if we think we’re helping our fellow Californians out.
But the reality has now been confirmed, raising the
minimum wage, especially when we raise it TOO FAST,
costs thousands of jobs, and when a worker loses a job, or the company goes out of business, the wage is ZERO
DOLLARS PER HOUR. And this job loss especially impacts
our vulnerable populations the most, with young African- American, Latino, and non-college educated workers
trying to find their first jobs facing the biggest burdens.
Get the facts at StopProp32.com, and vote NO ON
PROPOSITION 32!
Jot Condie, President
California Restaurant Association
Jennifer Barrera, President
California Chamber of Commerce
Ron Fong, President
California Grocers Association
RAISES MINIMUM WAGE.
INITIATIVE STATUTE.
PROPOSITION
32