Proposition 34: A Measure to Restrict Spending by the AIDS Healthcare Foundation
California Voters Approve Measure to Limit Spending by AIDS Healthcare Foundation
California voters have approved Proposition 34, a measure sponsored by the California Apartment Association (CAA) that aims to restrict spending by the AIDS Healthcare Foundation (AHF), a non-profit organization that has been critical of the measure. The initiative was passed with a narrow margin of 50.8% to 49.2%, according to the California Secretary of State.
What Does the Measure Do?
Proposition 34 applies to healthcare providers who have spent more than $100 million in any 10-year period on things besides direct patient care and have run multifamily housing with more than 500 "high-severity health and safety violations." If a healthcare provider meets this standard, they would be required to spend 98% of their revenues from a federal prescription drug program on direct patient care.
Aims of the Measure
The CAA claims that the new rules could apply to multiple organizations and notes that the initiative’s language does not name any specific group. The measure is intended to save taxpayers money while increasing spending on patient care. However, critics argue that the measure is a form of "revenge" by the CAA, which has been critical of AHF’s funding of rent control initiatives.
AIDS Healthcare Foundation’s Response
The AIDS Healthcare Foundation has bankrolled three initiatives to dramatically expand rent control in recent years, including Proposition 33 on this year’s ballot. The organization earns most of its revenue from the federal drug program at issue. According to the California Legislative Analyst’s Office, the program is intended to enable providers like AHF to serve more low-income patients, but the law does not directly restrict how providers spend their revenue from federal drug discounts.
What’s Next?
The results of Proposition 34 are uncertain, as AHF has already filed a lawsuit to remove the measure from the ballot, arguing it is unconstitutional due to its singling out of the organization. A legal expert previously told The Times that courts are generally reluctant to remove measures from the ballot before an election and that there is a "good chance" a judge would find the measure unconstitutional if it passes.
Conclusion
The outcome of Proposition 34 has significant implications for the AIDS Healthcare Foundation and its ability to fund rent control initiatives. While the CAA claims the measure will save taxpayers money and increase spending on patient care, critics argue that it is a form of "revenge" by the CAA and will limit AHF’s ability to fund important social services.
FAQs
Q: What is Proposition 34?
A: Proposition 34 is a measure sponsored by the California Apartment Association that aims to restrict spending by the AIDS Healthcare Foundation.
Q: What is the AIDS Healthcare Foundation?
A: The AIDS Healthcare Foundation is a non-profit organization that provides healthcare services and advocates for rent control.
Q: What is the purpose of the measure?
A: The measure aims to save taxpayers money while increasing spending on patient care by requiring healthcare providers to spend 98% of their revenues from a federal prescription drug program on direct patient care.
Q: What is the current status of the measure?
A: The measure has been approved by California voters with a narrow margin of 50.8% to 49.2%.
