Billionaire Netflix founder Reed Hastings and his wife have each given six figures to fight a California ballot measure that would require voters to prove their citizenship and show photo ID at the polls.
Hastings gave $1 million to oppose Proposition 39, while his wife, Patty Quillin, gave $1.5 million. The donations came days apart: Hastings’ contribution arrived Sept. 3, and Quillin’s followed Aug. 31, according to Secretary of State records.
The Measure and Its Critics
Proposition 39 would require Californians to produce government-issued ID for in-person voting and submit the last four digits of their ID number on mailed ballots. Backers say the measure is needed to prevent voter fraud.
Opponents, including the ACLU California Action and the League of Women Voters, argue the requirement could restrict voting access and expose personal data to identity theft. Many state Democrats also oppose the measure.
The Public Policy Institute of California found 55% of voters oppose Prop. 39, while 43% support it.
Who Is Funding the Fight
Hastings’ $1 million went to a “No on 39” committee backed by labor and community health groups. That committee also received $2 million from the California Community Foundation, per records.
Quillin’s $1.5 million went to a separate committee backed by the California Donor Table and the ACLU.
The measure’s major backers include Richard Uihlein and Nicole Shanahan. Shanahan was the former running mate and ex-wife of Sergey Brin, and she is also Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s former partner.
“California politicians are getting special interests to bankroll their dishonest smear campaign against Prop 39…we are confident voters will vote YES on Prop 39.”
That line came from Republican Assemblymember Carl DeMaio.
The Case Against the Measure
Proposition 39 was placed on the ballot amid concerns about voting system weaknesses and President Trump’s federal push for tighter voting rules. Vote-counting delays have fueled worry about flaws in the system.
Petition worker fraud reports have drawn negative attention to California’s voting apparatus. In June, First Assistant U.S. Attorney Bill Essayli launched investigations into voting issues.
Essayli wrote on X that California’s election system has “serious structural vulnerabilities.” Prop. 39 supporters accuse Attorney General Rob Bonta of deliberately watering down the ballot title to mislead voters.
No widespread fraud has been found in California’s voting system.
Hastings’ Track Record
Hastings is no stranger to California politics. He previously gave $3 million to block a recall attempt against Gov. Gavin Newsom in 2022.
He has contributed tens of millions in total to politicians of both parties since 2001.
| Donor | Amount | Date | Committee |
|---|---|---|---|
| Reed Hastings | $1 million | Sept. 3 | “No on 39,” backed by labor and community health groups |
| Patty Quillin | $1.5 million | Aug. 31 | Backed by California Donor Table and the ACLU |
The donations come ahead of a November vote.
The Stakes
This is a fight between two arguments that both sound reasonable on their own terms. On one side sit the backers who want voter ID to guard against fraud. On the other sit the ACLU and League of Women Voters, who see the requirement as a restriction on voting and a risk to personal privacy.
The vote is months away. The funding is already on the books. The question now is how the public weighs the two sides.
Where the paper stands
The paper backs neither Hastings nor Proposition 39’s backers, and instead backs smaller government and less control over how people vote, whatever the measure’s intent. The measure would give government more power over who can vote and how, and that is the kind of power the paper wants to see diminished, not exercised.
The donations from Hastings and his wife show money being used to fight a proposal that would make voting harder to access and easier to misuse. The ACLU and the League of Women Voters are right to raise these concerns, even as they oppose the couple’s contributions. The Public Policy Institute of California poll shows majority opposition to the measure, but that alone does not settle the case for government control over voting.
The paper would prefer no one had to prove citizenship or hand over an ID number just to cast a ballot. It would also prefer that billionaires did not fund campaigns to tell others how to vote, whether they agree or not. The vote is months away. The funding is already on the books. The question now is how the public weighs the two sides, without letting either side gather more power than it needs.
Source material: “Billionaire Netflix founder Reed Hastings and wife give big to stop California voter ID requirements,” the New York Post.
Get the Notebook.
The day's best stories and every fresh verdict, in plain English, in your inbox by seven. One email a day, no more.