Monterey County Herald Publishes Recommendations on Ballot Initiatives
The Monterey County Herald on Wednesday published its recommendations for several initiatives, including five related to health, that will appear on the Nov. 2 statewide ballot. Summaries appear below.
Proposition 61 is a $750 million measure that would pay for construction, expansion and equipment for children's hospitals. Including interest, the program would cost about $1.5 billion over 30 years (California Healthline, 10/26).
The Herald recommends voting "yes" (Monterey County Herald, 10/27).
Proposition 63 would increase by 1% the state personal income tax on individuals whose annual incomes exceed $1 million to finance an expansion of mental health services. The measure would raise an estimated $700 million annually to care for people with severe mental illnesses (California Healthline, 10/26).
The Herald recommends voting "no" (Monterey County Herald, 10/27).
Proposition 67 would add a 3% surcharge to residential telephone bills to fund hospital emergency services and training. The initiative would generate an estimated $550 million annually to fund emergency department services (California Healthline, 10/26).
The Herald recommends voting "no" (Monterey County Herald, 10/27).
Proposition 71 would raise an average of $295 million annually for a decade to promote stem cell research through the issue of state bonds. The measure would provide funds for a new stem cell research center at a University of California campus, as well as grants and loans for laboratory projects at other colleges. State analysts say the measure would cost a total of $6 billion, including interest (California Healthline, 10/26).
The Herald recommends voting "yes" (Monterey County Herald, 10/27).
Proposition 72 allows state residents to vote "yes" to uphold or "no" to repeal SB 2, a state law scheduled to take effect Jan. 1, 2006, that will require some employers to provide health insurance to workers or pay into a state fund to provide such coverage (California Healthline, 10/26).
The Herald recommends voting "yes" (Monterey County Herald, 10/27).
The Orange County Register on Sunday featured several opinion pieces by its commentary section staff about the five health-related ballot measures. The articles are summarized below.
- John Seiler: Proposition 63 is "fiscally insane" because when combined with a tax increase proposed by Democratic presidential nominee Sen. John Kerry (Mass.), could raise the state's top income tax rate by four percentage points, resulting in an "exodus of wealth," Seiler writes. Seiler concludes that if the state seeks to enact a tax that has "no connection" to the "cause it is funding," then the measure "should go through the normal state budgeting process."
- Alan Bock: Voters should reject Proposition 71 because "having government finance research, especially this way, is more likely to waste money than to bring results" in a project that "will inevitably be inefficient and heavily politicized," Bock writes.
- Seiler: SB 2 would force many businesses "to move to other states and others to close or lay off workers," Seiler writes, suggesting that residents vote "no" on Proposition 72 (Orange County Register, 10/24).
KQED's "Forum" on Thursday in the first hour of the program included a discussion on Proposition 63. The segment includes comments from Assembly member Ray Haynes (R-Temecula), who opposes the initiative, and Assembly member Darrell Steinberg (D-Sacramento), who supports the initiative (Krasny, "Forum," KQED, 10/28). The complete segment is available online in RealPlayer. In addition, KPCC's "KPCC News" on Wednesday interviewed voters in Glendale, Atwater Village and Leimert Park about Proposition 63 (Rabe, "KPCC News," KPCC, 10/27). The complete segment is available online in RealPlayer.
Additional information on propositions 61, 63, 67, 71 and 72 is available online.