California Proposition 42, Veterans Home Loan Bond Measure (June 1986)
| California Proposition 42 | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Election date June 3, 1986 | |
| Topic Bond issues | |
Status Approved | |
| Type Bond issue | Origin State Legislature |
California Proposition 42 was on the ballot as a bond issue in California on June 3, 1986. It was approved.
A "yes" vote supported authorizing the state to issue $850 million in bonds to fund veterans home loans and farm aid. |
A "no" vote opposed authorizing the state to issue $850 million in bonds to fund veterans home loans and farm aid. |
Election results
|
California Proposition 42 |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Result | Votes | Percentage | ||
|
|
3,338,320 | 75.61% | ||
| No | 1,076,981 | 24.39% | ||
Text of measure
Ballot title
The ballot title for Proposition 42 was as follows:
| “ | Veterans Bond Act of 1986 | ” |
Ballot summary
The ballot summary for this measure was:
| “ | This act provides for a bond issue of eight hundred fifty million dollars ($850,000,000) to provide farm and home aid for California veterans. | ” |
Full Text
The full text of this measure is available here.
Fiscal impact
The fiscal estimate provided by the California Legislative Analyst's Office said:[1]
| “ |
1. Cost of Paying Off the Bonds The bonds authorized by this measure would be paid off probably over a period of up to 25 years. If the bonds are sold at an interest rate of 7.5 percent, principal and interest payments would be about $67 million per year. Throughout its history, the Cal-Vet program has been totally supported by the participating veterans, at no direct cost to the taxpayer. However, if the payments made by those veterans participating in the program do not fully cover the principal and interest payments on the bonds, the state's taxpayers would pay the difference. 2. Other Indirect Fiscal Effects Borrowing Costs for Other Bonds. By increasing the amount which the state borrows, this measure may cause the state and local governments to pay more under other bond programs. These costs cannot be estimated. Lower State Revenues. The people who buy these bonds are not required to pay state income tax on the interest they earn. Therefore, if California taxpayers buy these bonds instead of making other taxable investments, the state would collect less taxes. This loss of revenue cannot be estimated.[2] |
” |
Path to the ballot
A simple majority vote was needed in each chamber of the California State Legislature to refer the measure to the ballot for voter consideration.
See also
External links
Footnotes
- ↑ University of California, "Voter Guide," accessed August 17, 2021
- ↑ Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
 |
State of California Sacramento (capital) |
|---|---|
| Elections |
What's on my ballot? | Elections in 2025 | How to vote | How to run for office | Ballot measures |
| Government |
Who represents me? | U.S. President | U.S. Congress | Federal courts | State executives | State legislature | State and local courts | Counties | Cities | School districts | Public policy |
