Beware of billionaires who want you to pay for their ego trip. That’s the story behind Proposition (Prop) 38 and why voters should say “no.”
Prop 38 requires the state to borrow $8.4 billion for immunology research. Medical research is a good thing we all support and benefit from it. But Prop 38 is also a money grab, written by two billionaires who are trying to create their own research institution: The California Institute of Immunology and Immunotherapy (CIII). They also added special criteria in the measure that directs half the money from the bond—$4.2 billion—to their institute. They figured no one would find out, but we did.
Here are four reasons opponents say Prop 38 should be rejected:
1. The billionaire’s research institute – CIII – doesn’t currently exist. It has no director and no ongoing research projects. We were not even able to identify a current address or phone number. Someday, maybe, but not now. California has several nationally recognized research institutions with addresses, phone numbers, and researchers doing important immunology research. CIII is not one of them. Why should CIII get $4.2 billion in taxpayer funds, while arbitrary criteria are used to exclude renowned institutions?
2. No transparency and accountability? Proposition 38 exempts CIII from state transparency and ethics laws, including the Public Records Act and open-meeting requirements. It also exempts its decisionmakers from the Political Reform Act. This means they will NOT be required to disclose personal assets and income for the purpose of avoiding conflicts of interest. Why would we give $4.2 billion to an institute that is excused from standard accountability procedures?
3. Bonds are expensive. Prop 38 would saddle taxpayers with decades of debt – over $500 million annually for over 20 years. That means there’s less money in the state budget for health, higher education, childcare, and social programs. The Trump Administration has imposed unprecedented cuts of federal funds that are straining our safety net to the breaking point. Prop 38 may take away the money California needs to rescue these programs.
4. There’s a better alternative. The California Science and Health Research Bond Act (SB 895) is now awaiting the governor’s signature. If approved, it will be placed on the March 2028 ballot to authorize a $7.5 billion bond. Unlike Prop 38, it establishes a fair and competitive process to ensure that funds are awarded to the best projects and are the most likely to yield results. It’s better policy.
The two billionaires who spent millions to put Prop 38 on the ballot hoped no one would actually read the fine print of the initiative. But when they get the facts, it’s clear that Proposition 38 is less about finding cures to disease and more about funding an ego trip with taxpayer dollars. Learn more about Prop 38 and how to join our campaign by visiting our website. Together we can tell the billionaires that California’s initiative process is not for sale.
About the Author
David Panush served as a senior health policy and budget advisor to five presidents pro tempore in the California state senate. He was the external affairs director for Covered California and is now president of California Health Policy Strategies.
