Published
August 25, 2026
In recent years, organized labor in California has increasingly turned to the ballot initiative process not just to shape policy, but to exert political leverage. The Teamsters Union has emerged as one of the most assertive players in this shift.
Consider Proposition 40 as an example. The measure would tax assets such as investment holdings.. It has drawn strong opposition from Silicon Valley leaders, investors, and even Governor Gavin Newsom. They argue it could drive capital out of the state, destabilize revenues, and trigger legal challenges. A similar ballot ordinance in San Francisco was ultimately defeated, underscoring both the political limits of aggressive anti-growth tax proposals and the risks for labor groups that use ballot measures as instruments of leverage.
Within organized labor, the response has been far from unified. The California Teachers Association (CTA) and several healthcare unions oppose the initiative, while others have remained neutral. Teamsters in California, by contrast, is part of a smaller but highly active bloc forcing the measure forward.
The debate raises questions about California's economic future. Growth depends on a policy environment that encourages investment, innovation, and business expansion. As employers across California navigate challenges, , critics contend that imposing a new tax on assets could undermine confidence and discourage the capital formation needed to support and create jobs. Many argue that California should be pursuing policies that attract investment rather than risk driving it elsewhere.
In practical terms, the Teamsters’ role in the Billionaire Tax effort goes beyond endorsement. The union has helped finance and organize signature-gathering to qualify the measure for the ballot, deployed field operations and membership networks to build early momentum, and elevated the issue through coordinated advocacy. In doing so, the union is using the initiative process not just to pursue a policy outcome, but to force a broader economic agenda.
For the Teamsters, the initiative is as much about shaping the economic narrative as it is about securing a specific revenue mechanism. By contrast, unions opposing the measure, like the CTA, are prioritizing more predictable funding streams and have backed an alternative revenue proposal.
At its core, the fight highlights not just a policy disagreement. It’s a shift in how some unions, especially cross-sector ones s like the Teamsters, are using political tools to expand their influence beyond traditional collective bargaining and into the broader arena of statewide economic policymaking.
About the author
Michael Billet
Michael Billet, director of policy research for Employment Policy at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, keeps members and internal Chamber policy staff abreast of pending labor, immigration, and health care legislation, as well as federal regulatory and subregulatory activities. He is also responsible for planning the Chamber’s annual workplace and community wellness forum.
