California Proposition 3

Wednesday, October 15, 2008 at 7:53 AM  by 
Jared Hanson

Children’s Hospital Bond Act

Summary:

Authorizes $980,000,000 in general obligation bonds for construction, expansion, remodeling, renovation, furnishing and equipping of eligible children’s hospitals. Fiscal Impact: State cost of about $2 billion over 30 years to pay off both the principal ($980 million) and interest ($933 million) costs of the bonds. Payments of about $64 million per year.

There doesn’t appear to be any organization formed in order campaign against this act. The only counter arguments presented in the Voter Information Guide involve general opposition to taxes and spending and the vague assertion that hospitals are “special interests.”

This seems pretty cut-and-dry. Who would vote against children’s hospitals?

However, after some googling, I turned up a compelling argument written by Pete Stahl. The claim is that the hospitals receiving funding from these bonds are private institutions. As such, the tax payers see no return on investment, since the money is not directed toward public works.

I am swayed by the argument, but not quite enough. I think, at a fundamental level, the health care system in this country has major flaws. Many corporations position themselves as middlemen and extract huge sums of undeserved money. I’m sure this involvement extends to children’s hospitals as well, willingly or otherwise.

However, children’s hospitals also serve families who could otherwise not afford treatment. This is, at least in a small way, a return on the public’s money. I can’t, in good conscience, vote against this.

I’m voting Yes on Prop 3.

Additional information is available at Ballotpedia.

Comments

Lonna Hanson
says:
October 15, 2008 at 10:22 AM

I appreciate and respect your compassion for the children that deserve and will recieve this treatment.
Mom

diane
says:
October 16, 2008 at 9:47 AM

I wondered if the hospital that is treating most of the serious illnesses so well in my part of the state was “private” — it is difficult to tell since they seem to be the place to go for everyone within 100s of miles – because they treat all children regardless of the ability of the family to pay. What part of that process is “private” I wonder. I guess they own the machines they purchase that they use to treat the community’s sick? They are not attached to a big govt institution – so it means they have to struggle for each dime they raise as they are certainly non-profit status -and spend more than they collect from medicare and insurance. So- how is it important that they are “private” when the purpose they serve is very “public”? This is a post from another blog that helped me understand a bit more…
” Posted by: Justine Kinder at September 24, 2008 08:53 AM

Being that even though many of the Childrens hospitals provide care for all, and don’t discriminate, then yes, the money should come from the state. We don’t only serve people who have insurance, and pay their medical bills. We serve and ever growing population on MediCal who are unable to pay for the care of their very sick child. If the money isn’t there to help these people, then the these hospitals will eventually close and there will be no place for these very special kids, with very specific illnesses to go. I work at a Children’s hospital ER, and I would be so afraid to take my children anywhere BUT a child specific hospital. If you ever hear how outside hospitals, and small community hospitals treat some diseases that child specific hospitals specialize in, even something as simple as Asthma, you would think that they didn’t keep up to date on the most recent practices in Pediatric Medicine.

Please don’t put Children’s hospitals in the same categories as private schools, businesses, etc. We do not function those same ways. We see every child under the sun, and treat them all with the same loving care and respect as the next. We serve our local communities and we become a part of those communities.

If you were to walk in to the hospital now, you would see the effect that other closing hospitals and ED’s have had on the Children’s Hospitals as well as other surrounding hospitals. We are over run, full to the max and have people sitting in the ED waiting for beds, that are filled with other sick children. The hospitals are full, we need to make room for them. The kids are sicker than they ever used to be, we need to be able to see them and care for them safely. Many outside public and private are closing their pediatric floors, in the end, where do they go? “

Jared Hanson
says:
October 16, 2008 at 10:13 AM

diane -

Thanks for replying with this information. I see this issue in a similar manner, which is why I’m voting Yes on Prop 3.

Also, I want to post a direct link to the comment you quoted, in case others people want to follow that thread. It is available at:

http://www.californiaprogressreport.com/2008/09/california_prop_5.html#c16701

Post a comment