Would levy a 0.2% tax on all businesses to help pay for clean money elections
Limits corporations to spending no more than $10,000 on initiatives
Provides limited public funds for qualified candidates who agree to take no private money so they can serve their constituents free of obligation to the big donors.
Bans contributions from lobbyists to politicians.
Lawmakers can be removed from office or jailed for violating the policy, up to 5 years in jail and $25,000 fine.
A YES vote on this measure means:
Candidates for state offices could choose to receive public funds to pay for the costs of campaigns if they meet certain requirements. Candidates not accepting public funds would be subject to lower contribution limits than currently. The tax rate on corporations and financial institutions would be increased to pay for the public financing of political campaigns.
A NO vote on this measure means:
Candidates for state offices would continue to pay for their campaigns with private funds subject to current contribution limits. The tax rate on corporations and financial institutions would not change.
Election resultsedit
The proposition was defeated in the November 2006 elections.
2006, california, proposition, proposition, failed, 2006, california, ballot, initiative, that, would, have, offered, clean, elections, centered, campaign, finance, reform, contents, main, points, proposition, election, results, also, external, resourcesmain, . Proposition 89 was a failed 2006 California ballot initiative that would have offered clean elections centered on campaign finance reform Contents 1 Main points of Proposition 89 2 Election results 3 See also 4 External resourcesMain points of Proposition 89 editWould levy a 0 2 tax on all businesses to help pay for clean money elections Limits corporations to spending no more than 10 000 on initiatives Provides limited public funds for qualified candidates who agree to take no private money so they can serve their constituents free of obligation to the big donors Bans contributions from lobbyists to politicians Lawmakers can be removed from office or jailed for violating the policy up to 5 years in jail and 25 000 fine A YES vote on this measure means Candidates for state offices could choose to receive public funds to pay for the costs of campaigns if they meet certain requirements Candidates not accepting public funds would be subject to lower contribution limits than currently The tax rate on corporations and financial institutions would be increased to pay for the public financing of political campaigns A NO vote on this measure means Candidates for state offices would continue to pay for their campaigns with private funds subject to current contribution limits The tax rate on corporations and financial institutions would not change Election results editThe proposition was defeated in the November 2006 elections Yes 25 7 2 124 728 No 74 3 6 132 618See also editClean ElectionsExternal resources editYes on 89 Analysis of Proposition 89 nbsp This article about the politics of California is a stub You can help Wikipedia by expanding it vte Retrieved from https en wikipedia org w index php title 2006 California Proposition 89 amp oldid 1136513265, wikipedia, wiki, book, books, library,
