September 6, 2022
In Case You Missed It: LA Times, San Francisco Chronicle, Marin Independent Journal Oppose Prop 29
For immediate release: September 6, 2022
Contact: Kathy Fairbanks, (916) 813-1010
In Case You Missed It:
LA Times, San Francisco Chronicle, Marin Independent Journal Oppose Prop 29
Sacramento – The Los Angeles Times, San Francisco Chronicle and the Marin Independent Journal are the most recent newspaper editorial boards urging California voters to reject Prop 29. Noting that dialysis treatment is a matter of life and death, all agreed Prop 29 was an abuse of the ballot and would make it harder for dialysis patients to receive critical care.
Prop 29 on the November 2022 California ballot will jeopardize access to care, worsen our health care provider shortage and increase health care costs for all Californians. It is opposed by a broad coalition of patients, doctors, nurses, veterans, seniors, community groups, and business and taxpayer groups.
Excerpts from the Los Angeles Time editorial: “On the ballot for a third time, Prop. 29 is a tired retread that could hurt dialysis patients”:
- “The measure has a number of needless provisions, such as requiring infections to be reported to the state, though these data are being reported to the federal government now, and prohibiting dialysis centers from discriminating due to payer which even the proponents say is not a problem now.”
- “… the most consequential provision is the requirement that a physician, nurse practitioner or physician’s assistant with experience be on-site at all times at the roughly 650 dialysis centers in the state.”
- “The proponents says the proposition is intended to improve patient care. It’s an assertion they can’t back up with evidence.”
- “Nor is there evidence that the current arrangement has harmed patients.”
- “You can find a full list of the opponents on noprop29.com.”
- “You can’t however, find a similar list of supporters on the Yes on Proposition 29 campaign website, because it doesn’t exist.”
- “California’s initiative system was created more than a hundred years ago to give citizens the power to make new laws when their elected leaders failed to do so. It was not intended to be weaponized in this way.”
Excerpts from the San Francisco Chronicle editorial: “Dialysis patients aren’t bargaining chips. Vote no on Prop. 29”
- “Are Prop. 29’s changes significant enough to make the third time a charm?”
- “Not even close.”
- “Just like in 2020, an independent review by California’s nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office found that this measure would ‘increase each clinic’s costs by several hundred thousand dollars annually on average.’ This could force clinics to close, putting patient health at risk.”
- “Any effort that could shut down the clinics patients rely on — absent widely substantiated safety concerns — should be a nonstarter.”
- “If these risks and costs were truly justifiable, you would no doubt see public health and patient advocates signing on to support the measure en masse. They are not.”
- “That’s because this bill is about political hardball, not patient health.”
- “…using the health of patients as a bargaining chip is unconscionable.”
- “Voters should reject Prop. 29’s cynical tactics in November — and as many times as they need to in the future.”
Excerpts from the Marin Independent Journal editorial: “Vote no on union’s Prop. 29 attack on kidney dialysis firms”:
- “they’re [SEIU] using the initiative system as a form of political blackmail designed to force the leading kidney dialysis firms to eventually cave to demands to unionize clinic workers.
- “Regulation of the industry is complex and best suited for the Legislature rather than the ballot box.”
- “…the Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO) warns that the requirement would increase a clinic’s costs by several hundred thousand dollars annually on average.”
- “…potentially forcing some clinics to close or operate at a loss.”
- “That could be devastating to patients, who could be forced to travel longer distances to receive treatments.”
- “Voters have rejected the two previous kidney dialysis ballot measures with good reason. They should do so again by voting no on Prop. 29.”
The Los Angeles Times, San Francisco Chronicle and Marin Independent Journal join the San Jose Mercury News, East Bay Times, Santa Rosa Press Democrat, Orange County Register, Riverside Press-Enterprise, Long Beach Press-Telegram, Pasadena Star-News, Whittier Daily News, San Bernardino Sun, San Gabriel Valley Tribune, Los Angeles Daily News, Torrance Daily Breeze, Redlands Daily Facts, and the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin urging voters to reject Prop 29 in recent editorials.
Prop 29 is opposed by the California Medical Association, American Nurses Association\California, patients, and many others because it would jeopardize the lives of dialysis patients by forcing hundreds of dialysis clinics to cut back services or shut down – making it more difficult for dialysis patients to access their life-saving treatments.
Prop 29 would make the state’s current health care provider shortage and emergency room overcrowding even worse, while unnecessarily increasing health care costs for taxpayers and consumers by hundreds of millions of dollars every year.
There are approximately 80,000 dialysis patients in California with failed kidneys who need dialysis machines to clean their blood and remove toxins from their bodies. Patients must receive dialysis treatment three times a week for four hours at a time to stay alive. Access to consistent dialysis treatments is so important that just one missed treatment increases patients’ risk of death by 30%.
Prop 29 is sponsored by the United Healthcare Workers West (UHW) union – the same organization that abused California’s initiative process in 2018 with Proposition 8 and in 2020 with Prop. Now, this special interest is at it again with Prop 29.
Please visit No on Prop 29 for more information.