# 2005 California special election

Elections in California :
Federal governmentU.S. President
1852
1856
1860
1864
1868
1872
1876
1880
1884
1888
1892
1896
1900
1904
1908
1912
1916
1920
1924
1928
1932
1936
1940
1944
1948
1952
1956
1960
1964
1968
1972
1976
1980
1984
1988
1992
1996
Dem
Rep
2000
Dem
Rep
2004
Dem
Rep
2008
Dem
Rep
2012
Dem
Rep
2016
Dem
Rep
2020
Dem
Rep
2024
Dem
Rep
U.S. Senate
1849
1850
1852 sp
1856
1857 sp
1860
1860 sp
1868
1872
1873
1873 sp
1878
1880
1885
1886 sp
1887
1891
1891 sp
1893
1895 sp
1897
1900 sp
1903
1905
1909
1911
1914
1916
1920
1922
1926
1928
1932
1934
1938
1940
1944
1946
1946 sp
1950
1952
1954 sp
1956
1958
1962
1964
1968
1970
1974
1976
1980
1982
1986
1988
1992
1992 sp
1994
1998
2000
2004
2006
2010
2012
2016
2018
2022
2022 sp
2024
2024 sp
2028
2030
U.S. House of Representatives
1849
1851
1852
1854
1856
1859
1861
1863
1864
1867
1868
1871
1872
1875
1876
1879
1880
1882
1884
1886
1888
1890
1892
1894
1896
1898
1900
1902
1904
1906
1908
1910
1912
1914
1916
1918
1920
1922
1924
1926
1928
1930
1932
1934
1936
1938
1940
1942
1944
1946
12th
1948
1950
1952
1954
1956
1958
1960
1962
1964
1966
1968
1970
1972
1974
1976
1978
1980
1982
1984
1986
1987
5th sp
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2001
32nd sp
2002
2004
2005
5th sp
48th sp
2006
50th sp
2007
36th sp
2008
12th sp
2009
10th sp
32nd sp
2010
2011
36th sp
2012
2014
2016
2017
34th sp
2018
2020
25th sp
2022
22nd sp
2024
16th
20th sp
30th
45th
47th
2026 :
State governmentExecutive Governor
1849
1851
1853
1855
1857
1859
1861
1863
1867
1871
1875
1879
1882
1886
1890
1894
1898
1902
1906
1910
1914
1918
1922
1926
1930
1934
1938
1942
1946
1950
1954
1958
1962
1966
1970
1974
1978
1982
1986
1990
1994
1998
2002
2003 (recall)
2006
2010
2014
2018
2021 (recall)
2022
2026
Lieutenant governor
1950
1954
1958
1962
1966
1970
1974
1978
1982
1986
1990
1994
1998
2002
2006
2010
2014
2018
2022
2026
Attorney general
1970
1974
1978
1982
1986
1990
1994
1998
2002
2006
2010
2014
2018
2022
2026
Secretary of state
1970
1974
1978
1982
1986
1990
1994
1998
2002
2006
2010
2014
2018
2022
Treasurer
1994
1998
2002
2006
2010
2014
2018
2022
2026
Controller
1994
1998
2002
2006
2010
2014
2018
2022
Insurance commissioner
1994
1998
2002
2006
2010
2014
2018
2022
Superintendent
1994
1998
2002
2006
2010
2014
2018
2022
Board of equalization
2018
2022
Legislature Senate
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006
2008
2010
2012
2014
2016
2018
2020
2022
2024
Special
Assembly
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006
2008
2010
2012
2014
2016
2018
2020
2021 (79th sp)
2022 (17th sp)
2024
Special
Judiciary Court of appeals
1994
1998
2002
2006
Elections by year
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2005
2006
2008
Feb
Jun
Nov
2009
2010
Jun
Nov
2012
Jun
Nov
2014
2016
2018
2020
2022
2024 :
State propositions1910–1919
1911
4
7
8
1960–1969
1964
14
1970–1979
1978
6
8
13
1980–1989
1982
8
1986
64
65
1988
98
99
1990–1999
1994
187
1996
196
209
215
218
1998
6
10
227
2000–2009
2000
21
22
36
39
2003
53
54
2004
1A
55
56
57
58
59
60
60A
61
62
63
64
65
66
69
71
2005
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
2006
81
82
83
85
87
89
90
2008
91
92
93
94, 95, 96, and 97
98 and 99
1A
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
2009
1A
1B
1C
1D
1E
1F
2010–2019
2010
13
14
15
16
17
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
2012
29
30
32
34
37
38
39
2014
1
2
41
42
45
46
47
48
2016
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
2018
68
69
70
71
72
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
2020–2029
2020
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
2022
1
26
27
28
29
30
31
2024
1
2
3
4
5
6
32
33
34
35
36
Full list :
Los Angeles CountyLos Angeles County Board of supervisors
1980
1996
2006
2008
2010
2012
2014
2016
2018
2020
2022
2024
Ballot measures
1980
A
2008
R
2012
B
J
2016
M
Elections
2020
2022
2024
Los Angeles Mayor
1896
1898
1900
1902
1904
1906
1909 (sp)
1909
1911
1913
1915
1917
1919
1921
1923
1925
1929
1933
1937
1938
1941
1945
1949
1953
1957
1961
1965
1969
1973
1977
1981
1985
1989
1993
1997
2001
2005
2009
2013
2017
2022
2026
City attorney
2009
Ballot measures
1986
U
2017
S
Elections
2009
2011
2013
2015
2017
2019 (sp)
2020
2022
2023 (sp)
2024
Long Beach Mayor
1994
1998
2002
2006
2010
2014
2018
2022 :
Orange CountyOrange County Board of supervisors
2018
2020
2022
2024
District attorney
2018
Anaheim Mayor
2002
2006
2010
2014
2018
2022
Irvine Mayor
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006
2008
2010
2012
2014
2016
2018
2020
2022
2024
Costa Mesa Municipal
1947
1953
1954
1956
1958
1960
1962
1964
1966
1968
1970
1972
1974
1976
1978
1980
1982
1984
1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006
2008
2010
2012
2014
2016
2018
2020
2022
2024 :
SacramentoMayor
2000
2004
2008
2012
2016
2020
2024 :
San Diego CountySan Diego County Board of supervisors
2020
San Diego Mayor
1887
1889
1891
1893
1895
1897
1899
1901
1903
1905
1907
1909
1911
1913
1915
1917
1919
1921
1923
1925
1927
1929
1931
1932
1935
1939
1943
1947
1951
1955
1959
1963
1967
1971
1975
1979
1983 (sp)
1984
1986 (sp)
1988
1992
1996
2000
2004
2005 (sp)
2008
2012
2013–14 (sp)
2016
2020
2024
2028
City attorney
2004
2008
2012
2016
2020
City council
2002
2004
2006
2008
2010
2012
2014
2016
2018
2020
2022
2024
Special :
San FranciscoMayor
1901
1903
1905
1907
1909
1911
1931
1935
1939
1943
1947
1951
1955
1959
1963
1967
1971
1975
1979
1983 (recall)
1983
1987
1991
1995
1999
2003
2007
2011
2015
2018 (sp)
2019
2024
District attorney
2019
2022 (recall)
2022 (sp)
2024
Board of supervisors
1977
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006
2008
2010
2012
2014
2016
2018
2020
2022
2024
Board of education
2018
2022 (recall)
Ballot measures
2024
G
Elections
2004
Mar
Nov
2005
2006
Jun
Nov
2007
2008
Feb
Jun
Nov
2009
2010
Jun
Nov
2011
2012
Jun
Nov
2013
2022
Feb :
San JoseMayor
1974
1978
1982
1986
1990
1994
1998
2002
2006
2010
2014
2018
2022
2024 :
Other localities
Bakersfield
Mayoral elections:
2004
2008
2012
2016
2020
2024
Fresno
Mayoral elections:
1996
2000
2004
2008
2012
2016
2020
2024
Oakland
Mayoral elections:
1994
1998
2002
2006
2010
2014
2018
2022
2024
2025
Riverside
Mayoral elections:
1997
2001
2005
2009
2012
2016
2020
2024
San Bernardino
Mayoral elections:
2005
2009
2014
2018
2022
Stockton
Mayoral elections:
2008
2012
2016
2020
2024 :
vte :
The California special election of 2005 was held on November 8, 2005, after being called by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger on June 13, 2005.

## Summary

The California special election of 2005 was held on November 8, 2005, after being called by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger on June 13, 2005. California voters rejected all eight ballot propositions. Propositions 73, 76, and 77 were initiative constitutional amendments while the others were initiative statutes. The election was believed to have been the most expensive in California history. Lobby groups spent hundreds of millions of dollars on gathering signatures and advertising for this election.
Schwarzenegger called the election to allow voters to decide on propositions regarding teacher tenure requirements (Proposition 74), the use of union dues for political campaign contributions (Proposition 75), state budgetary spending limits (Proposition 76), and redistricting (Proposition 77). Schwarzenegger originally proposed a fifth proposition on the issue of public pension, but dropped that proposition amid criticism that the proposition would eliminate death benefits to widows of police and firefighters who died in the line of duty The four propositions that made it to the ballot eventually came to be known as Governor Schwarzenegger's reform agenda. The governor claimed his agenda would clear the way for correction of the problems he was elected to solve.
An alliance of public sector unions expended $24 million campaigning against Schwarzenegger's fiscal reform, with the California Teachers Association expending an additional $56 million and going so far as to mortgage its Sacramento headquarters to fund more campaign spending. Schwarzenegger likewise spent nearly $8 million of his own fortune campaigning. The tenor was highly divisive, with Schwarzenegger calling his opponents “stooges” and at one point Warren Beatty leading a bus full of public employees to follow the governor and shout down his events.
All Governor Schwarzenegger's other fiscal reform agenda initiatives were defeated by wide margins. It had been the most expensive election in California history. As the results came out in Sacramento a public union boss waived a broom over his head while state employees chanted “sweep, sweep, sweep”. SEIU's use of compulsory fees on nonmembers to fund its campaign was later found illegal by the U.S. Supreme Court in Knox v. Service Employees International Union, Local 1000.
Four other propositions appeared on the ballot because they qualified for the next statewide elections. The four other propositions were:
* Proposition 73: Parental notification for abortions by minors
* Proposition 78: A proposition on prescription drugs put by the pharmaceutical industry
* Proposition 79: A proposition on prescription drugs put by consumer groups in response to Proposition 78
* Proposition 80: Electric industry regulation

## Final results

| Proposition | Pass | Title | Yes Votes | Pct. | No Votes | Pct. |
| 73 | N | Minor's Pregnancy | 3,130,062 | 47.4 | 3,465,629 | 52.6 |
| 74 | N | Teacher Tenure | 2,987,010 | 44.9 | 3,662,932 | 55.1 |
| 75 | N | Public Union Dues | 3,092,495 | 46.5 | 3,551,011 | 53.5 |
| 76 | N | Spending/Funding | 2,522,327 | 37.9 | 4,115,388 | 62.1 |
| 77 | N | Redistricting | 2,673,530 | 40.5 | 3,920,487 | 59.5 |
| 78 | N | Rx Drug Discounts | 2,719,999 | 41.5 | 3,821,957 | 58.5 |
| 79 | N | Rx Drug Rebates | 2,523,803 | 38.9 | 3,950,763 | 61.1 |
| 80 | N | Electric Regulation | 2,189,126 | 34.3 | 4,182,374 | 65.7 |
* Y - Proposition passed
* N - Proposition did not pass

## Propositions
### Proposition 73: Parental Notification
#### Summary

Amends California Constitution to bar abortion on unemancipated minor until 48 hours after physician notifies minor's parent/legal guardian, except in medical emergency or with parental waiver. Permits judicial waiver of notice based on clear and convincing evidence of minor's maturity or minor's best interests. Physician must report abortions performed on minors and State shall compile statistics. Authorizes monetary damages for violation. Minor must consent to abortion unless mentally incapable or in medical emergency. Permits judicial relief if minor's consent to abortion is coerced.

#### Opinion Polls

| Source | Yes | No | Undecided | Spread |
| PPIC (10/16-23) | 42% | 48% | 10% | NO +6 |
| Survey USA (10/15-17) | 60% | 38% | 2% | YES +22 |
| Survey USA (9/30-10/2) | 59% | 39% | 2% | YES +20 |
| Field Poll (8/19-29) | 45% | 44% | 10% | EVEN |
| PPIC (8/8-15) | 44% | 48% | 10% | NO +4 |
| Field Poll (6/13-19) | 48% | 43% | 9% | YES +5 |

#### Results

| Option | Vote Count | Percentage |
| Yes | 3,130,062 | 47.4% |
| No | 3,465,629 | 52.6% |

### Proposition 74: Public School Teachers Tenure
#### Summary

Increases length of time required before a teacher may become a permanent employee from two complete consecutive school years to five complete consecutive school years; measure applies to teachers whose probationary period commenced during or after the 2003-2004 fiscal year. Authorizes school boards to dismiss a permanent teaching employee who receives two consecutive unsatisfactory performance evaluations.

#### Opinion Polls

| Source | Yes | No | Undecided | Spread |
| PPIC (10/16-23) | 46% | 48% | 6% | NO+2 |
| Survey USA (10/15-17) | 53% | 45% | 1% | YES +8 |
| Survey USA (9/30-10/2) | 55% | 44% | 2% | YES +10 |
| PPIC (9/12-19) | 43% | 47% | 10% | NO +4 |
| Field Poll (8/19-29) | 46% | 37% | 17% | YES +9 |
| PPIC (8/8-15) | 49% | 42% | 9% | YES +7 |
| Field Poll (6/13-19) | 61% | 32% | 7% | YES +29 |

#### Results

| Option | Vote Count | Percentage |
| Yes | 2,987,010 | 44.9% |
| No | 3,662,932 | 55.1 |

### Proposition 75: Union Dues - Political Contributions
#### Summary

Prohibits public employee labor organizations from using dues or fees for political contributions unless the employee provides prior consent each year on a specified written form. Prohibition does not apply to dues or fees collected for charitable organizations, health care insurance, or other purposes directly benefiting the public employee. Requires labor organizations to maintain and submit to the California Fair Political Practices Commission records concerning individual employees' and organizations' political contributions; those records are not subject to public disclosure.

#### Opinion Polls

| Source | Yes | No | Undecided | Spread |
| PPIC (10/16-23) | 46% | 46% | 8% | Even |
| Survey USA (10/15-17) | 56% | 42% | 2% | YES +14 |
| Survey USA (9/30-10/2) | 60% | 37% | 3% | YES +23 |
| Field Poll (8/19-29) | 55% | 32% | 13% | YES +23 |
| PPIC (8/8-15) | 48% | 33% | 9% | YES +15 |
| Field Poll (6/13-19) | 57% | 34% | 9% | YES +23 |

#### Results

| Option | Vote Count | Percentage |
| Yes | 3,092,495 | 46.5% |
| No | 3,551,011 | 53.5% |

### Proposition 76: State Spending Limits
#### Summary

Changes state minimum school funding requirements (Proposition 98), permitting suspension of minimum funding, but terminating repayment requirement, and eliminating authority to reduce funding when state revenues decrease. Excludes above-minimum appropriations from schools' funding base. Limits state spending to prior year total plus revenue growth. Shifts excess revenues from schools/tax relief to budget reserve, specified construction, debt repayment. Requires Governor to reduce state appropriations, under specified circumstances, including employee compensation, state contracts. Continues prior year appropriations if new state budget delayed. Prohibits state special funds borrowing. Requires payment of local government mandates.

#### Opinion Polls

| Source | Yes | No | Undecided | Spread |
| PPIC (10/16-23) | 30% | 62% | 8% | NO +32 |
| Survey USA (10/15-17) | 54% | 41% | 5% | YES +13 |
| Survey USA (9/30-10/2) | 58% | 36% | 6% | YES +22 |
| PPIC (9/12-19) | 26% | 63% | 11% | NO +37 |
| Field Poll (8/19-29) | 19% | 65% | 16% | NO +46 |
| PPIC (8/8-15) | 28% | 61% | 11% | NO +33 |
| Field Poll (6/13-19) | 35% | 42% | 23% | NO +7 |

#### Results

| Option | Vote Count | Percentage |
| Yes | 2,522,327 | 37.9% |
| No | 4,115,388 | 62.1% |

### Proposition 77: Redistricting
#### Summary

Amends state Constitution's process for redistricting California's Senate, Assembly, Congressional and Board of Equalization districts. Requires three-member panel of retired judges, selected by legislative leaders, to adopt new redistricting plan if measure passes and again after each national census. Panel must consider legislative, public proposals/comments and hold public hearings. Redistricting plan becomes effective immediately when adopted by judges’ panel and filed with Secretary of State. If voters subsequently reject redistricting plan, process repeats. Specifies time for judicial review of adopted redistricting plan; if plan fails to conform to requirements, court may order new plan.

#### Opinion Polls

| Source | Yes | No | Undecided | Spread |
| PPIC (10/16-23) | 36% | 50% | 14% | NO +14 |
| Survey USA (10/15-17) | 54% | 41% | 5% | YES +13 |
| Survey USA (9/30-10/2) | 59% | 36% | 5% | YES +23 |
| PPIC (9/12-19) | 33% | 50% | 17% | NO +17 |
| Field Poll (8/19-29) | 32% | 46% | 22% | NO +14 |
| PPIC (8/8-15) | 34% | 49% | 17% | NO +15 |
| Field Poll (6/13-19) | 35% | 46% | 19% | NO +11 |

#### Results

| Option | Vote Count | Percentage |
| Yes | 2,673,530 | 40.5% |
| No | 3,920,487 | 59.5% |

### Proposition 78: Drug Discounts
#### Summary

Establishes discount prescription drug program, overseen by the Department of Health Services. Enables certain low - and moderate - income California residents to purchase prescription drugs at reduced prices. Imposes $15 application fee, renewable annually. Requires Department's prompt determination of residents' eligibility, based on listed qualifications. Authorizes Department to contract with pharmacies to sell prescription drugs at agreed-upon discounts negotiated in advance, and to negotiate rebate agreements with drug manufacturers. Permits outreach programs to increase public awareness. Creates state fund for deposit of rebate payments from drug manufacturers. Allows program to be terminated under specified conditions.

#### Opinion Polls

| Source | Yes | No | Undecided | Spread |
| PPIC (9/12-19) | 43% | 38% | 19% | YES +5 |
| Field Poll (8/19-29) | 49% | 31% | 20% | YES +18 |
| Field Poll (6/13-19) | 57% | 26% | 17% | YES +31 |

#### Results

| Option | Vote Count | Percentage |
| Yes | 2,719,999 | 41.5% |
| No | 3,821,957 | 58.5% |

### Proposition 79: Drug Discounts (Consumer Groups Backed)
#### Summary

Provides for prescription drug discounts to Californians who qualify based on income-related standards, to be funded through rebates from participating drug manufacturers negotiated by California Department of Health Services. Rebates must be deposited in State Treasury fund, used only to reimburse pharmacies for discounts and to offset administration costs. At least 95% of rebates must go to fund discounts. Prohibits new Medi-Cal contracts with manufacturers not providing the Medicaid best price to this program, except for drugs without therapeutic equivalent. Establishes oversight board. Makes prescription drug profiteering, as defined, unlawful.

#### Opinion Polls

| Source | Yes | No | Undecided | Spread |
| PPIC (9/12-19) | 34% | 40% | 26% | NO +6 |
| Field Poll (8/19-29) | 42% | 34% | 24% | YES +8 |
| Field Poll (6/13-19) | 48% | 33% | 19% | YES +15 |

#### Results

| Option | Vote Count | Percentage |
| Yes | 2,523,803 | 38.9% |
| No | 3,950,763 | 61.1% |

### Proposition 80: Electricity Regulation
#### Summary

Subjects electric service providers, as defined, to control and regulation by California Public Utilities Commission. Imposes restrictions on electricity customers' ability to switch from private utilities to other electric providers. Provides that registration by electric service providers with Commission constitutes providers' consent to regulation. Requires all retail electric sellers, instead of just private utilities, to increase renewable energy resource procurement by at least 1% each year, with 20% of retail sales procured from renewable energy by 2010, instead of current requirement of 2017. Imposes duties on Commission, Legislature and electrical providers.

#### Opinion Polls

| Source | Yes | No | Undecided | Spread |
| Field Poll (8/19-29) | 33% | 35% | 32% | NO +2 |

#### Results

| Option | Vote Count | Percentage |
| Yes | 2,189,126 | 34.3% |
| No | 4,182,374 | 65.7% |