In summary
Proposal No. 34 concerns medical expenses. But it's also likely to quell the controversial AIDS Medical Foundation's fight for rent control.
The “Yes” and “No” campaigns are in a close race when it comes to Prop. 34, one of the most confusing statewide policies on the California ballot. This has implications for health care costs, but could also impact rent control and other forms of housing. problem.
Early results have been released and the race is close, with 9% of precincts partially reporting, according to the Secretary of State's Office.
Proposition 34 would create new rules for how some health care providers in California can use the revenue they earn from selling drugs through certain federal programs. What is not explicitly mentioned in the text of the measure is that only one organization, the AIDS Healthcare Foundation, appears to be affected by this change.
The foundation provides medical care to people with HIV and AIDS in California and beyond, and is led by the controversial Michael Weinstein. Under his watch, the foundation became a major player in state and local housing policy. The company also owns an affordable housing development in Los Angeles' Skid Row, where tenants have complained about livability and health issues.
If Prop. 34 passes, the AIDS Healthcare Foundation could withdraw from its housing advocacy work. That would likely leave a glaring hole in at least one area: the fight for statewide rent reform.
The AIDS Healthcare Foundation has previously sponsored three ballot measures that would have expanded rent control in California (the first two failed, and the third, this year's Prop. 33). If the foundation withdraws from that fight, it's unlikely anyone else will take its place, said Sharon LaPorte, California policy director for the Housing Assistance Corporation. Sponsoring rent control ballot initiatives is expensive and politically difficult because it is sure to alienate powerful landlord lobbies.
“I don't know if so many organizations have the will and the money to put it on the ballot,” Rapport said. Her organization has not taken a position on the proposal.
That means if Prop. 34 passes and Prop. 33 fails, there is little chance of statewide rent control reform in the near future, Rapport said. The state Legislature could reform rent control without a ballot measure, but it's a politically sticky issue that many lawmakers don't want to touch on, she said.
The AIDS Healthcare Foundation is also lending its energy (and money) to other housing-related fights. He campaigned against a bill that would have required local governments to approve high-density housing and supported a failed two-year moratorium on certain building projects in Los Angeles.
The AIDS Healthcare Foundation did not respond when asked by CalMatters whether it would stop its housing advocacy efforts if Prop. 34 passes. But if the foundation is found to be spending drug proceeds on things like rent control ballot measures in violation of Prop. 34 guidelines, the clinic, which serves 16,000 patients in California, may have its operating license revoked.
That's because the foundation participates in a federal program that gives medical providers discounts on drugs in exchange for serving low-income and at-risk patients. The provider can then turn around and sell those drugs at retail prices for a profit. Proposition 34 would require foundations to spend 98% of the revenue they receive through drug sales on “direct patient care.”
As far as the “Yes on 34” campaign is concerned, the money should go to patients, not to support political maneuvering in the housing field.
“Clearly this program was not designed for that purpose,” Yes spokesman Nathan Click said.
Opponents see the move as an attempt to silence nonprofit advocacy efforts.
“I think it's very dangerous to set a precedent where organizations are targeted in this way just for supporting their communities,” says Susie Shannon, No On 34's campaign manager. Silence the anti-smoking groups. ”
Supporters of Proposition 34 include the California Apartment Association, which also opposes Proposition 33, a rent control measure.
“I don’t know if too many organizations have the will and money to put it on the ballot.”
Sharon LaPorte, California Policy Director, Housing Assistance Association
Technically, Prop. 34 would require drug-related businesses that participate in federal drug programs, spend at least $100 million on expenses other than direct patient care, own and operate apartment buildings, and have at least 500 critical health and safety Applies to health care providers who have accumulated violations of. In the last 10 years.
The AIDS Healthcare Foundation appears to be the only organization that meets all of those criteria.
The scope of Proposition 34 is so limited that if it passes, the next stop will be the courts.
“Because I don't believe it's legal,” Shannon said.
The AIDS Healthcare Foundation argues that the measure is unconstitutional because it singles out one organization. The foundation has already gone to court once over the bill, unsuccessfully trying to get the California Supreme Court to remove the measure from the ballot. If voters approve the measure, the foundation has promised to challenge it again.
Opponents argue that the proposal has broader applicability.
“We'll just have to wait and see what the attorney general says,” Click said. “There are a number of companies that could be targeted.”
