Petitioners submitted comments challenging the Attorney General's draft caption and argue here that the certified caption does not comply with the statutory standard. Our task is to determine whether the Attorney General's certified caption satisfies the statutory standard. As petitioners argue, the caption sweeps too broadly, giving the incorrect impression that the subject matter of the proposed initiative measure is the use of any public resource for any political purpose. In fact, the primary subject of the measure is the use of public resources for the collection of political contributions from public employees, particularly through payroll deductions. The Attorney General's certified caption is not sufficiently specific to inform the reader of the measure's principal subject and, thus, is inadequate to satisfy the statutory standard.
Petitioners also argue that the caption is defective in other respects.
We decline petitioners' invitation to reexamine Peppers . Had the legislature intended the Attorney General to use similar wording in ballot title captions and result statements, petitioners reason, those statutes would not have different requirements. Petitioners suggest that their argument is bolstered by the fact that result statements may be five words longer than captions. Nevertheless, we do not agree that a result statement necessarily is defective merely because it is worded similarly to the ballot title caption. Thus, regardless of their similarity to the caption, those statements satisfy the statutory standard.