requires pornstars to wear condoms
❌ It failed, so...
Your porn doesn't change, and unprotected sex is still against OSHA regulations, but it won't be enforced in the way Prop 60 proposed. (LA already has a similar law, by the way).
Quick summary
If passed, porn stars have to wear condoms (during scenes with sexual intercourse). Anal included? You bet.
Complexity of issue: πŸ€”πŸ€”πŸ€”πŸ€”πŸ€”
Money involved: πŸ’ΈπŸ’ΈπŸ’ΈπŸ’ΈπŸ’Έ
Lopsided support? Very. Towards No
Who's most affected? The porn industry
Look, I'm a 5th grader and have 1 minute.
If used, condoms would provide greater protection against HIV and other STIs. As you might expect, the porn industry is vigorously opposed, saying their current testing practices are just fine, and condom requirements will further drive the industry to other states or even underground.[4] Proponents cite the rampant chlamydia and gonorrhea among performers, and that this is already law, but not properly enforced because of loopholes.

Surpisingly both the CA Democratic Party and the CA Republic Party are opposed to the measure, as well as the SF AIDS Foundation and AIDS Project LA.[2] Many publications express that the measure is excessive, saying it will give Californians too much legal power, and Michael Weinstein of the AIDS Healthcare Foundation too much power. On the other side, sexual health groups and occupational safety groups support condom use in porns.[..]
Why is this even on the ballot?
Cal/OSHA (the workplace safety folks) already require that, in general, a worker be protected from blood-borne pathogens, but when it comes to porn, Cal/OSHA has only enforced complaints, and they also recently rejected a regulation similar to Prop 60, creating specific additional regulations around porn. This regulation was proposed by the same people who wrote Prop 60, the AIDS Healthcare Foundation.

LA already has a condom requirement, (ironically, we hope) called Measure B, created by the same AIDS Healthcare Foundation.[2] In an effort to make it statewide, they proposed a bill similar to Prop 60 that failed in the state Senate in 2014. Now it's on the ballot, and up to you to decide.
This is the debate
Why you gotta hate? Condoms protect performers from HIV and STIs, which are all over your stars.
That study was conducted by you guys. Testing is already done every two weeks, and studios check the results right before a shoot.
But testing doesn't prevent transmission. Condoms do.
There hasn't been a case of HIV transmission on screen in more than 10 years!
There was just a case in Nevada.
He wasn't in the database we have. Performers can go to condom-only studios if they want, and besides, porn isn't going to stop. It'll just make filming go underground. Look at LA since 2012.
No one is going anywhere. California and New Hampshire are the only states that are legal to film porn.
Other states are vague about it and don't pursue porn studios. It's filmed all over.
The way the proposition is worded ANY Californian can sue offenders. They can't sue performers, I know, as long as they don't have a financial interest in the film, but in this age of media, many performers also act as producers.
OSHA rules should already force performers to wear protection, but they can't regulate every studio, so that's why we give that power to Californians.
Whoever it is, if they produce and distribute unsafe porn, then they are breaking the law.