Staff Reports
The latest stunt from Attorney General Rob Bonta is one more reminder that when Democrats don’t get their way, they don’t argue — they rewrite. This week Prop. 39 backers say the Attorney General’s office quietly swapped the fair, neutral ballot language voters saw while petitions circulated for a far scarier headline that reads, in their telling, “PROHIBITS CITIZENS FROM VOTING UNLESS THEY PRESENT GOVERNMENT‑ISSUED IDENTIFICATION.” If that sounds like political theater rather than sober legal drafting, that’s because it is.
What changed — and why it matters
Originally, the Secretary of State posted Prop. 39 under the neutral circulating title: “ESTABLISHES ADDITIONAL VOTER IDENTIFICATION AND CITIZENSHIP VERIFICATION REQUIREMENTS.” The Attorney General’s earlier Title & Summary used similar, matter‑of‑fact language. Now proponents say the AG replaced that with alarmist wording emphasizing “prohibits” and “invalidates,” phrases designed to scare casual voters. Ballot titles and summaries are often the first words most voters read. Change the first line and you can change the outcome. That’s not policy making; that’s messaging by stealth.
Who’s crying foul
Assemblymember Carl DeMaio and the Yes on Prop. 39 team are furious — and rightly so. They’ve accused Attorney General Rob Bonta of trying to tilt the scales by swapping neutral language for a charged headline meant to depress support. They say they’re exploring legal action. Meanwhile, Secretary of State Shirley N. Weber’s June posting still shows the more neutral text, which raises a basic question: which version will actually appear in the Official Voter Information Guide? Voters deserve an answer, not a political footnote buried in press releases.
Courts, precedent, and the next move
California law lets the Attorney General write the ballot title and summary, but courts have stepped in before when the wording was misleading. Remember the 2018 gas‑tax fight? Judges rewrote language then. Prop. 39 proponents say they could sue to force a more accurate ballot title. That’s the right play. If the AG is allowed to hand voters a tilted summary, the ballot box stops being a place of debate and becomes a place of spin. For the sake of election integrity, that can’t stand.
Final word: demand transparency
Here’s what should happen next: the Attorney General must publish the exact, dated Title & Summary he intends for the voter pamphlet and explain why it differs from the circulating text. The Secretary of State should confirm which wording will appear in the Official Voter Information Guide. And if the AG can’t justify the change, courts should step in and restore honest language. Democracy gets a lot of grief for being messy — but it’s supposed to be honest. Californians should refuse to let officials turn the ballot into a partisan op‑ed. If Rob Bonta wanted to be a campaign manager, he should have run for office; rewriting ballot language is just bad manners — and worse politics.
