Prop. 4 explained: Lifting the ban on public money for campaigns

SAN JOSE - Proposition 4 would repeal a state ban on using public money to pay for candidates' election campaigns.  The Legislature placed it on the ballot through SB 42, which passed the Senate 29-8 and the Assembly 59-20.

What it would do

The measure does not create a public financing system.  According to the Legislative Analyst's Office (LAO), it lets the state and local governments create one later if they choose.  It sets rules for any future program:  money meant for education, transportation or public safety could not be used; candidates would need to show broad support and accept spending limits; and public money could not pay legal fees, fines or repay a candidate's personal loans.

Public financing can take forms such as matching small donations with public money.  The LAO says the current ban does not apply to some charter cities; Los Angeles, San Francisco, Long Beach, Oakland and Berkeley now provide public funds to candidates.

Who would be affected

Candidates for state and local office, local governments that might create programs and taxpayers who would fund any program would be affected.  The Fair Political Practices Commission, the state's campaign-finance watchdog, would give guidance.

What it would cost

The LAO estimates a few hundred thousand dollars a year for the Fair Political Practices Commission to answer questions.  The cost of any actual program would depend on decisions by the governments that create one and could be significant.

Supporters and why

Supporters include the League of Women Voters of California, the California Nurses Association, Consumer Watchdog and state Sen. Tom Umberg, the bill's author.  They say California is the only state that bans public campaign financing.

"Elections should be won, not bought." - Yes on Prop. 4, argument in favor

Opponents and why

Opponents include the California Taxpayers Association, the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, the Family Business Association of California and United Latinos Action.  They say the measure has no cap on spending.

"Proposition 4 has NO LIMIT on the number of candidates who can get taxpayer money." - Argument against Prop. 4

Where the parties stand

The California Democratic Party recommends yes; the California Republican Party opposes.  In the IGS poll, 62% of Democrats and 9% of Republicans said yes.  PPIC found 60% of Democrats, 42% of independents and 22% of Republicans in support.

The money

The largest listed Yes contributions include $250,000 from the California Nurses Association PAC, about $235,000 from Movement Voter PAC and $100,000 each from Jim Heerwagen, a California Labor Federation committee and the ACLU of Northern California.  No contributions to a No committee were listed.

Polling

In a Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC) survey of 1,086 likely voters taken Oct. 16-22 (margin of error plus or minus 3.8 points), 45% said yes and 52% no; Bay Area voters were the only region above half, at 51%.  In a Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies (IGS) Poll of likely voters taken Oct. 19-25 and released Oct. 29, 41% said yes, 41% no and 18% were undecided.

What your vote means

A yes vote means state and local governments could create public financing programs under the measure's limits.  A no vote means most could not.

Source:  Secretary of State, Voter Information Guide, Prop. 4; Legislative Analyst analysis, Prop. 4; Official arguments and rebuttals, Prop. 4; Secretary of State Quick Guide to Props, Prop. 4; California Democratic Party endorsements; California Republican Party endorsements; PPIC Statewide Survey, October 2026; Berkeley IGS Poll Release #2026-22