Three Newspapers Release Recommendations for Health Care-Related Measures on November Ballot
The Modesto Bee, the Los Angeles Times and the San Luis Obispo Tribune have published editorials recommending how state residents should vote on the 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, 10/15).
The Bee recommends voting "no" (Modesto Bee, 10/20).
The Times also recommends voting "no" (Los Angeles Times, 10/17).
The Tribune also recommends voting "no" (San Luis Obispo Tribune, 10/22).
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, 10/15).
The Bee recommends voting "no" (Modesto Bee, 10/20).
The Times also recommends voting "no" (Los Angeles Times, 10/17).
The Tribune also recommends voting "no" (San Luis Obispo Tribune, 10/22).
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, 10/15).
The Bee recommends voting "no" (Modesto Bee, 10/20).
The Times also recommends voting "no" (Los Angeles Times, 10/17).
The Tribune also recommends voting "no" (San Luis Obispo Tribune, 10/22).
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, 10/15).
The Bee recommends voting "no" (Modesto Bee, 10/20).
The Times recommends voting "yes" (Los Angeles Times, 10/17).
The Tribune recommends voting "no" (San Luis Obispo Tribune, 10/22).
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, 10/15).
The Bee recommends voting "no" (Modesto Bee, 10/20).
The Times also recommends voting "no" (Los Angeles Times, 10/17).
The Tribune also recommends voting "no" (San Luis Obispo Tribune, 10/22).
Writer Adam Sparks, in an opinion piece in the San Francisco Chronicle ,recommends voting "no" on propositions 61, 63, 67 and 71, primarily because they are "not worth supporting ... in a time of severe fiscal crisis." However, Sparks recommends supporting Proposition 72 because the initiative would help increase health coverage for the uninsured while keeping "the system in the free market." He says that requiring employers to provide health insurance to employees would "sav[e] the government money by reducing visits to emergency rooms" while not "prevent[ing] other free-market solutions from working."
He concludes, "If conservatives want to head off a single-payer system, they, along with their governor and president, had better take some drastic action. Otherwise, the worst will be upon us. Ignoring the health care crisis is not an option" (Sparks, San Francisco Chronicle, 10/18).
KCET's "Life & Times" on Wednesday reported on Proposition 67. The segment includes comments from Michael Bagley, executive director of public policy for Verizon Wireless; Dan Higgins, past president of the California chapter of the American College of Emergency Physicians; Jim Lott, executive vice president of the Hospital Association of Southern California; Glen Melnick, health care economist at the University of Southern California and Rand; and Carol Meyer, director of Los Angeles County Department of Health Services' Emergency Medical Services (Okarski, "Life & Times," KCET, 10/20). The complete transcript is available online. The complete segment is available online in RealPlayer.
Additional information on propositions 61, 63, 67, 71 and 72 is available online.