Click here for a complete list of our election recommendations.
Proposition 35 on the Nov. 5 ballot would permanently extend the tax on managed health care insurance plans to pay for Medi-Cal services. The measure would require that revenues to be used only for specified services, including primary and specialty care, emergency care, family planning, mental health and prescription drugs.
Yes: CEO Julia Liou of Asian Health Services says the measure would secure stable funding for Medi-Cal services and make sure the money is used to protect and expand access. It also includes strong accountability requirements and independent performance audits.
No: State Sen. Caroline Menjivar, D-Panorama City, and Kiran Savage-Sangwan of the California Pan-Ethnic Health Network say Proposition 35 would harm the very communities it promises to help. The ballot measure rolls back recent progress in community investments, prioritizing funding for a select group of health care providers over holistic care that communities need.
Editorial: Proposition 35 locks in special-interest funding, and the winners would include doctors, hospitals and emergency ambulance providers bankrolling the initiative. It’s just another example of special-interest, ballot-box budgeting that limits the discretion of lawmakers and reduces flexibility to respond to fiscal crises.
Related Articles
Opinion: Proposition 35 harms the very communities it promises to help
Opinion: Prop. 35 will help ensure better health care for more Californians
Letters: Yes on Prop. 4 | San Ramon schools | Beach access | Smoke-free protections | Foster care fix | Centering humans
East Contra Costa officials rally behind Prop. 36
Prop. 2: A guide to California’s $10B education bond to build and repair schools
