Yeah, I just don't get it. Are people worried this would be a slippery slope to a wealth tax on much smaller asset totals?

That was the primary campaign messaging against it, as well as it potentially leading to billionaires leaving the state, which could ultimately reduce tax revenues (so the messaging went). It was just a one-time tax, too, of 5%, and not a yearly thing.

I voted against it myself, not because I don't think that billionaires should be paying more taxes (I do think they should be paying more) or because I was worried about them coming after my assets (that's a long way from happening!), but it seemed not very well designed to me and I thought 5% was too high of a number to suddenly throw at people without giving them any time to adjust (it would have been effective for 2026). And I give some credibility to the notion that billionaires might pack up and leave, though that's a big unknown.