TL;DR
Prime made for students and young adults
- Fast, free delivery for dorm and study essentials
- Prime Video and Amazon Music included
- Member-only deals
An Astral Codex Ten contributor has published a personal guide to California’s 2026 ballot, outlining tentative votes on several propositions and explaining the reasoning behind them. The supplied excerpt does not identify all measures or provide official proposition numbers, election dates, or final ballot text, so its recommendations are commentary rather than an official voter guide.
Astral Codex Ten has published a contributor’s personal guide to several California ballot measures for 2026, including proposals on housing, state budget reserves, a temporary tax and public financing for local campaigns. The writer, who says they vote in Oakland, Alameda County, describes some choices as weak preferences and frames them as individual judgments, not official recommendations.
On a housing-related measure, the writer says supporters claim it would build or renovate 40,000 homes. The contributor reports asking an AI superforecaster to estimate actual construction and says it predicted 22,000 homes. Based on that estimate, the writer argues the public cost could be high and doubts the measure would substantially lower market-rate prices. The excerpt does not name the proposition or provide its official cost analysis. The writer says they will weakly vote no, while noting that CA YIMBY, YIMBY Action and other YIMBY groups support it.
The contributor supports a separate proposal to let California save more money during periods of strong revenue. They say a 2014 policy created a reserve mechanism but capped how much the state could put aside, and characterize the proposed change as a measure of fiscal prudence. On a temporary tax on wealthy Californians that is scheduled to expire in 2030, the writer says they will weakly vote yes, citing concerns that ending it could affect education and health care funding. Those consequences are presented as the writer’s assessment, not an independently established forecast in the excerpt.
The guide also opposes a proposal concerning public financing of local campaigns. The writer estimates it could add about $75 million in local taxes, says it would not apply to Oakland because the city already has such a policy, and raises concerns about oversight and evidence of effectiveness. The contributor says they will weakly vote no, while objecting to state restrictions on cities testing policy approaches. The source excerpt begins a discussion of a recall-procedure measure but cuts off before stating the writer’s position.
How the Guide Weighs Ballot Trade-Offs
The guide matters as an example of how one politically engaged voter is evaluating a ballot that touches housing supply, public spending and local election rules. Its judgments show competing considerations rather than a single policy theme: the writer favors larger state reserves and keeping a temporary tax, but is skeptical of a housing funding proposal and public campaign financing.
Readers should treat its numbers and conclusions according to their source. The 22,000-home figure is an AI forecast cited by the author, not a confirmed project outcome, and the $75 million figure is the contributor’s estimate. These claims can help readers identify questions to investigate, but do not substitute for official fiscal analyses, full ballot language or evidence about how a measure would work statewide.
Popular right now
Bose QuietComfort Wireless Noise Cancelling Headphones, Sandstone
TCL QM64L 85-Inch QD-Mini LED 4K Smart Fire TV
De'Longhi 15-Bar Pump Espresso Machine with Milk Frother & Temperature Control
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
Oakland Voter’s Measure-by-Measure Approach
The post identifies its perspective as that of an Oakland voter and offers a first-person account of planned votes. The contributor repeatedly qualifies their choices as “weak” votes, indicating uncertainty or limited conviction rather than a categorical position. The housing section, for example, sets the need for more homes against concerns about the cost and design of publicly supported construction.
The source also points readers to other local ballot guides from Astral Codex Ten meetup groups and mentions that effective altruist movement leaders favor Scott Wiener for Congress in San Francisco. That is a separate endorsement noted by the writer; it is not itself a California ballot-measure recommendation, and the excerpt does not supply further details about the congressional race.
Several measures are described without their official names or numbers in the supplied material. The writer says California’s reserve policy began in 2014, refers to a temporary tax approved in 2012 and due to expire in 2030, and says a ban on a local practice dates to 1988, with an exception for charter cities. These details are the post’s account; readers need the official ballot materials to verify the precise proposals and legal effects.
“I weakly vote NO.”
— Astral Codex Ten contributor
Missing Measure Text and Fiscal Details
The supplied excerpt does not provide the official proposition numbers, complete ballot language or election date. It also ends partway through the recall-procedure discussion, leaving the writer’s recommendation on that measure and any further measures unknown. The source does not include official fiscal estimates or supporting study citations for the contributor’s cost and policy-effectiveness claims.
It is also unclear from the excerpt whether the 40,000-home target refers to a formal measure’s stated goal, what period construction would cover, or how the cited AI forecast was produced. The contributor’s prediction should not be read as a verified estimate. Likewise, the guide does not establish how the temporary tax’s expiration would affect specific services or explain the full enforcement provisions for the campaign-finance proposal.
Check Official Ballot Materials
Voters seeking to act on the guide’s recommendations should compare them with official California ballot materials, including each measure’s final wording, fiscal analysis and arguments for and against. The supplied source does not state when those materials will be available or identify the precise measures by number, so those details must be checked against election authorities and the complete original post.
The next step in the article’s own account is also incomplete: the recall section is cut off before the contributor explains how the proposed replacement process would work or how they plan to vote. Until the full text and official analyses are reviewed, the guide remains a partial, personal snapshot of the writer’s planned 2026 ballot choices.
Key Questions
Is this an official California voter guide?
No. It is a personal ballot guide by an Astral Codex Ten contributor who says they vote in Oakland. Its recommendations and estimates are the author’s views.
What does the writer recommend on the housing measure?
The contributor says they will weakly vote no. They question the expected cost and cite an AI superforecaster’s estimate of 22,000 homes actually being built, compared with supporters’ stated target of 40,000. The forecast is not a confirmed outcome.
Which measures does the writer support?
The writer says they will vote yes on increasing California’s reserve capacity and weakly support the measure linked to a temporary tax scheduled to expire in 2030. The excerpt does not give official proposition numbers or full ballot text.
What is missing from the supplied report?
The excerpt omits official measure names and numbers, the election date, complete ballot language and official fiscal analyses. It also cuts off during the recall-procedure discussion, so the author’s position on that measure is not available.
Source: astralcodexten.com
