California voters have found one socialist shark even they are not willing to jump. Amid a blue tsunami this November, California voters rejected a ballot measure (Proposition 40) that would impose “a one-time tax on the accumulated wealth of California billionaires” by skimming 5% from any individual or trust “with net worth of one billion dollars.”

Although backed by the state Democratic Party and unions who would benefit from the funds, the measure faltered amid well-funded (by the targeted billionaires) attack ads. Outgoing Governor Gavin Newsom (D), who probably dreams of running for president someday, opposed the radical measure. Even Planned Parenthood was angry over how the confiscated wealth would be redistributed.

With an estimated 94% of votes counted, “no” votes led 52.4% to 47.6%, a margin of nearly 600,000 votes. Multiple outlets had concluded that Proposition 40 failed.

The failure is remarkable given the electoral environment. Candidates aligned with the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) gained nationwide attention for their far-left agenda, and DSA-aligned candidates and ballot measures scored 162 wins and counting (according to the organization’s own tracker), including eight seats in Congress and the mayor’s office of America’s second-largest city (they already captured America’s largest city last year).

In the final weeks before the election, the campaign for California’s billionaire tax called in heavy air support from Senator Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), who stands as something of a godfather to the current generation of American socialists. Yet even Sanders’s campaigning could not lift the socialist measure across the finish line.

Even though the measure divided Democrats, it’s clear why figures such as Sanders would support it. At the national level, Sanders and Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) have proposed an annual 5% wealth tax on billionaires. “This legislation builds upon what trade unions are working to establish in California,” the senator’s website explains. Yet, if the measure cannot make it across the finish line in California, what chance does Sanders-style socialism stand in Congress?

Sanders and Khanna are not alone in proposing a wealth tax. Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) have led an effort to impose a wealth tax on all fortunes above $50 million in value. As of March 2026, the measure had gained support from 11 senators and 41 representatives, as well as endorsements from “nearly 40 unions, advocacy groups, and national organizations.”

However, this growing socialist movement in Washington never shared the memo with blue state voters back home. Even in California, which so often makes itself a guinea pig in the laboratory of self-destructive leftism, voters were asked to consider just a one-time wealth tax. After much consideration, these voters went to the polls and replied, “no thanks.”

The bad news for California socialism doesn’t end there — the campaign for Proposition 40 triggered a counter-campaign for Proposition 42. Proposition 40 would impose a wealth tax; Proposition 42 would constitutionally prohibit any new state taxes on personal property, including wealth assets. With 94% of the expected votes counted, “yes” votes led 51.3% to 48.7%, a margin of 330,000.

If Proposition 42 passes, as it is on track to do, then the socialists would not only fail to get their wealth tax. They would also be prohibited from imposing a wealth tax in the future. Furthermore, the proposition narrows the state’s taxation options to fund its everyday experiments in statism.

The focus of Proposition 42 suggests an explanation for why Californians rejected a socialist wealth tax, even in an election when Democrats, including socialist Democrats, made historic gains. Voters did not elect Democrats because they loved socialist policies; they elected Democrats to reject the high and increasing cost of living that has afflicted the nation since the start of the decade.

Most American voters may not have a degree in economics, but they are smart enough to recognize that higher cost of living is associated with both tax increases and inflation, which is fueled by irresponsible government spending. In rejecting these, they also rejected Proposition 40 — and may yet have approved Proposition 42.

In short, whatever gains DSA-aligned candidate made in the 2026 midterm elections, this was a supporting act, a sideshow to the primary reason driving voter anger: high cost of living. And when progressives put forward socialist policies likely to increase cost of living further, voters rejected those, too.