Carreras electorales federales

Representative, U.S. House California District 16

Seleccione UnoFederal  

(Dem)Anna Eshoo (Titular)


Respaldo político de

U.S. Senate California

Seleccione UnoFederal  

Esta contienda electoral es para el próximo periodo completo de seis años para el escaño en el Senado de EE.UU.

(Dem)Alex Padilla (Titular)

This vote is for Alex Padilla to serve a full term in the Senate beginning 1/2023


Respaldo político de

U.S. Senate California - Special

Seleccione UnoFederal  

Esta contienda electoral especial es para el periodo restante para ocupar el escaño vacante en el Senado de la vicepresidenta Kamala Harris.

(Dem)Alex Padilla (Titular)

This is to fill the balance of V.P. Harris' vacated seat until 1/2023


Respaldo político de

Carreras electorales estatales

Governor of California

Seleccione UnoEstatal  

(Dem)Gavin Newsom (Titular)


Respaldo político de

Lieutenant Governor of California

Seleccione UnoEstatal  

(Dem)Eleni Kounalakis (Titular)


Respaldo político de

Attorney General of California

Seleccione UnoEstatal  

(Dem)Rob Bonta (Titular)


Respaldo político de

California Secretary of State

Seleccione UnoEstatal  

(Dem)Shirley Weber (Titular)


Respaldo político de

California Treasurer

Seleccione UnoEstatal  

(Dem)Fiona Ma (Titular)


Respaldo político de

California Controller

Seleccione UnoEstatal  

(Dem)Malia Cohen


Respaldo político de

California Superintendent of Public Instruction

Seleccione Uno (Contiendas electorales apartidistas)Estatal  

Tony Thurmond (Titular)


Respaldo político de

California State Board of Equalization District 2

Seleccione UnoEstatal  

(Dem)Sally Lieber


Respaldo político de

California Commissioner of Insurance

Seleccione UnoEstatal  

(Dem)Ricardo Lara (Titular)


Respaldo político de

California State Assembly District 23

Seleccione UnoEstatal  

(Dem)Marc Berman (Titular)


Respaldo político de

Elección de juezas/jueces

California Supreme Court - Retention

¿Continuidad de este juez en el cargo? Seleccione Sí o NoEstatal  

Martin J. Jenkins (Titular)

Jenkins was appointed to the court by Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) in 2020.


SI

Respaldo político de

California Supreme Court - Retention

¿Continuidad de este juez en el cargo? Seleccione Sí o NoEstatal  

Joshua Groban (Titular)

Groban was appointed to the court by Gov. Jerry Brown (D) in 2018. Groban received a partisanship confidence score of Strong Democrat.


SI

Respaldo político de

California Supreme Court - Retention

¿Continuidad de este juez en el cargo? Seleccione Sí o NoEstatal  

Goodwin Liu (Titular)

Liu was appointed to the court by Gov. Jerry Brown (D) in 2011. He received a partisanship confidence score of Strong Democrat


SI

Respaldo político de

California 6th District Court of Appeal - Retention

¿Continuidad de este juez en el cargo? Seleccione Sí o NoEstatal  

Cynthia C. Lie (Titular)

Lie was appointed by Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) in 2021.


SI

Respaldo político de

California 6th District Court of Appeal - Retention

¿Continuidad de este juez en el cargo? Seleccione Sí o NoEstatal  

Charles E. Wilson II (Titular)

Wilson was appointed by Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) in 2021.


SI

Respaldo político de

California Supreme Court - Retention

¿Continuidad de este juez en el cargo? Seleccione Sí o NoEstatal  

Patricia Guerrero (Titular)

Guerrero was appointed to the court by Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) in 2022.


SI

Respaldo político de

California 6th District Court of Appeal - Retention

¿Continuidad de este juez en el cargo? Seleccione Sí o NoEstatal  

Mary J. Greenwood (Titular)

Greenwood was appointed to the court by Gov. Jerry Brown (D) in 2017. She was retained to the California 6th District Court of Appeal in 2018 with 81.9% of the vote.


SI

Respaldo político de

Carreras electorales locales

Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors District 1

Seleccione Uno (Contiendas electorales apartidistas)Local  

Johnny Khamis


Respaldo político de

Santa Clara County Sheriff

Seleccione Uno (Contiendas electorales apartidistas)Local  

Bob Jonsen


Respaldo político de

Gavilan Joint Community College District Board of Trustees Area 1

Seleccione Uno (Contiendas electorales apartidistas)Local  

Kathy Chvez Napoli


Respaldo político de

Gavilan Joint Community College District Board of Trustees Area 2 - Special

Seleccione Uno (Contiendas electorales apartidistas)Local  

Alicia Cortez


Respaldo político de

Gavilan Joint Community College District Board of Trustees Area 3

Seleccione Uno (Contiendas electorales apartidistas)Local  

Gabriel Gutierrez


Respaldo político de

Santa Clara Valley Water District District 7

Seleccione Uno (Contiendas electorales apartidistas)Local  

Gary Kremen (Titular)


Gavilan Joint Community College District Board of Trustees Area 7

Seleccione Uno (Contiendas electorales apartidistas)Local  

Irma Gonzalez (Titular)


Medidas y Proposiciones

California Medidas Electorales

Proposition 1California Proposition 1: California Right to Reproductive Freedom Amendment (2022)
A "yes" vote supported amending the state constitution to prohibit the state from interfering with or denying an individual's reproductive freedom, which is defined to include a right to an abortion and a right to contraceptives.
"SI" Recomendado por
A "no" vote opposed this amendment providing a right to reproductive freedom in the state constitution.
Proposition 26California Proposition 26: Legalize Sports Betting on American Indian Lands Initiative (2022)
A "yes" vote supported this ballot initiative to (i) legalize sports betting at American Indian gaming casinos and licensed racetracks in California; (ii) tax profits derived from sports betting at racetracks at 10%; and (iii) legalize roulette and dice games, such as craps, at tribal casinos.
"SI" Recomendado por

A "no" vote opposed this ballot initiative, thus continuing to prohibit sports betting in California and roulette and dice games at tribal casinos.
"No" Recomendado por
"sin opinión"
Proposition 27California Proposition 27: Legalize Sports Betting and Revenue for Homelessness Prevention Fund Initiative (2022)
A "yes" vote supported legalizing online and mobile sports betting for persons 21 years of age or older, establishing regulations for the mobile sports betting industry, imposing a 10% tax on sports betting revenues and licensing fees, and allocating tax revenue to an account for homelessness programs and an account for tribes not operating sports betting.

A "no" vote opposed this ballot initiative, thus continuing to prohibit sports betting in California.
"No" Recomendado por
"sin opinión"

Proposition 28California Proposition 28: Art and Music K-12 Education Funding Initiative (2022)
A "yes" vote supported this ballot initiative to:
  • require an annual source of funding for K-12 public schools for arts and music education equal to, at minimum, 1% of the total state and local revenues that local education agencies receive under Proposition 98;
  • distribute a portion of the additional funding based on a local education agency's share of economically disadvantaged students; and
  • require schools with 500 or more students to use 80% of the funding for employing teachers and 20% to training and materials.
"SI" Recomendado por
A "no" vote opposed requiring an annual source of funding for K-12 public schools for arts and music education equal to, at minimum, 1% of the total state and local revenues that local education agencies receive under Proposition 98.
"No" Recomendado por
Proposition 29California Proposition 29: Dialysis Clinic Requirements Initiative (2022)
A "yes" vote supported this ballot initiative to require dialysis clinics to have at least one physician, nurse practitioner, or physician assistant while patients are being treated; report data on dialysis-related infections; and not discriminate against patients based on the source of payment for care. 
"SI" Recomendado por

A "no" vote opposed this ballot initiative to require dialysis clinics to have at least one physician, nurse practitioner, or physician assistant while patients are being treated; report data on dialysis-related infections; and not discriminate against patients based on the source of payment for care. 
"No" Recomendado por
"sin opinión"
Proposition 30California Proposition 30: Tax on Income Above $2 Million for Zero-Emissions Vehicles and Wildfire Prevention Initiative (2022)

 A "yes" vote supported increasing the tax on personal income above $2 million by 1.75% and dedicating the revenue to zero-emission vehicle subsidies; zero-emission vehicle infrastructure, such as electric vehicle charging stations; and wildfire suppression and prevention programs.
"SI" Recomendado por
A "no" vote opposed increasing the tax on personal income above $2 million by 1.75% and dedicating the revenue to zero-emission vehicle subsidies; zero-emission vehicle infrastructure, such as electric vehicle charging stations; and wildfire suppression and prevention programs.
"No" Recomendado por
"sin opinión"

Proposition 31California Proposition 31: California Flavored Tobacco Products Ban Referendum (2022)
A "yes" vote is to uphold the contested legislation, Senate Bill 793 (SB 793), which would ban the sale of flavored tobacco products.
"SI" Recomendado por
A "no" vote is to repeal the contested legislation, Senate Bill 793 (SB 793), thus keeping the sale of flavored tobacco legal in the state. 
"No" Recomendado por
"sin opinión"

Palo Alto Ciudad/Pueblo Medidas Electorales

Measure KPalo Alto, California, Measure K, Local Business Tax Measure (November 2022)
A "yes" vote supported levying a tax on businesses of 7.5 cents per square foot occupied by a business, with annual adjustments for inflation, to fund general city services for 35 years.
A "no" vote opposed levying a tax on businesses of 7.5 cents per square foot occupied by a business, with annual adjustments for inflation, to fund general city services for 35 years.

Measure LPalo Alto, California, Measure L, Natural Gas Utility General Fund Transfer Measure (November 2022)
A "yes" vote supported continuing the existing city policy of transferring at most 18% of the city's revenue from the natural gas utility to a general fund for city services.
A "no" vote opposed continuing the existing city policy of transferring at most 18% of the city's revenue from the natural gas utility to a general fund for city services.
Volver a arriba

Y¡Su voto importa!