California ballot measure · November 3, 2026

California Proposition 2, explained

Rainy day fund and state spending limit. A ballot measure is a yes-or-no question put directly to voters — no candidate is involved, and the wording on the ballot is the wording that becomes law. This page shows that wording first, then what it actually changes.

The official wording

INCREASES STATE'S RAINY DAY FUND. LEGISLATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT. Increases California's Rainy Day Fund, approved by voters in 2014, to provide funding for education, health care, public safety, and other essential services during economic downturns. Fiscal Impact: State budget reserves would be higher.

This is what appears on the ballot. Everything below explains it.

What it actually means

Changes the state constitution so California keeps saving into its main rainy day fund until the fund reaches 20% of General Fund taxes, instead of stopping at 10%. It also extends required extra debt payments to 2040, and changes the accounting so money deposited into reserves no longer counts against the state's constitutional spending limit when it goes in.

If you vote YES

The state would keep making deposits into the rainy day fund until it reaches 20% of General Fund taxes, and would deposit more in years when taxes on investment gains are very high.
Required extra debt payments would continue through 2040 instead of ending in 2030, and could be used for more purposes, including required payments to schools, repaying borrowing from other state funds and repaying certain federal loans.
Deposits into the rainy day fund, and into a separate account for surging revenue (up to 10% of General Fund taxes a year), would count toward the state spending limit when money is taken out rather than when it is put in.

If you vote NO

Required deposits into the rainy day fund would stop once it reaches 10% of General Fund taxes; money that would have gone in above that level must be spent on infrastructure.
The requirement to make extra payments toward pension and retiree health debts would end in 2030.
Money put into reserves would continue to count toward the state spending limit in the year it is deposited.

The numbers that matter

Reserve cap: 20% of General Fund taxes (up from 10%)
Current general-purpose reserves: About $20 billion
Extra debt payments required through: 2040 (currently 2030)

Why supporters say YES

The state budget swung from a $100 billion surplus to a $50 billion deficit in a few years; doubling the reserve requirement and saving more of revenue spikes would protect schools, health care and public safety in the next downturn.
— Official argument in favor, signed by the California Professional Firefighters, Assembly Budget Committee Chair Jesse Gabriel and the Los Angeles Area Chamber of Commerce
The Legislative Analyst's Office has recommended that the state save significantly more than current rules require, and the measure follows that advice.
— Official rebuttal, signed by State Board of Education President Linda Darling-Hammond, the California Hospital Association and the California Primary Care Association

Why opponents say NO

Excluding reserve deposits from the voter-approved spending limit creates a loophole that makes taxpayer rebates, owed when revenue exceeds the limit, less likely.
— Official argument against, signed by Assemblymember David Tangipa, Senator Steven Choi and Carl DeMaio of Reform California
The measure dedicates no new money to education, health care or public safety, and within a day of placing it on the ballot its backers voted to suspend more than $5 billion in required reserve deposits.
— Official rebuttal to the argument in favor, signed by the same opponents

What’s genuinely uncertain

How much more the state actually saves depends on future revenue and on whether the Legislature declares budget emergencies, which allow deposits to be suspended or money withdrawn.
Whether the spending-limit change affects future taxpayer rebates depends on whether state revenue exceeds the limit in future years, which the Legislative Analyst does not estimate.

The bottom line

A larger cushion for downturns and longer debt paydown, against reserve money no longer counting toward the spending limit that triggers taxpayer rebates.

One neutral sentence describing the tradeoff — not a recommendation.

Sources:vig.cdn.sos.ca.gov ballotpedia.org

Checking it against the official text

The California Secretary of State publishes the certified measures and, in most states, an official voter guide with fiscal notes. That is the authoritative version. Everything here is an explanation of it, not a substitute for it.

Confirm this with the official source

Your ballot is determined by your election authority, not by us. Verify your registration, precinct, and sample ballot at California Secretary of State.

Other measures on the California ballot

Candidates on the same ballot

Everything on the California ballot →