Latest news with #Prop56
Business Wire
30-05-2025
- Health
- Business Wire
Prop 56 Cuts: Patients Will Suffer from Lack of Access to Proper Dental and Oral Healthcare – Leading to Severe and Costly Chronic Health Problems
ORANGE, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Western Dental, California's largest Medi-Cal dental provider, with 223 offices in 35 counties across the state, will be forced to close offices if the current proposal to cut Proposition 56 funding moves forward. The company is evaluating the extent of the expected closures, along with other measures to offset the significant impact to dental offices. Proposition 56, a measure overwhelmingly passed by California voters in 2016, directed revenue from a new tobacco tax to increase access to care for individuals and families that qualify for Medi-Cal (California's version of Medicaid) dental services. Prop 56 has not only made it possible for California dentists to provide access and care to more patients but also allowed new providers to open their doors and create a more stabilized and equitable health care system throughout the state, including areas where dentists were previously in short supply for everyone. 'Medi-Cal dental has been significantly under-resourced for decades. Proposition 56 provided critical funding that helped Western Dental open more than 100 new offices across the state and serve millions of patients, many in underserved areas who were otherwise without access to care,' said Preet Takkar, Chief Executive Officer of Western Dental. 'The current budget proposal represents dramatic cuts to dental reimbursement rates, which would make it impossible to keep many of these new offices open, while also impacting additional practices statewide. This proposal would reignite the dental access crisis that existed before the passage of Prop 56 and would ultimately cost the state more in the long run. Unfortunately, dental practices like ours across California will have to make tough choices—reassessing staffing, hours, and office locations—if this funding is eliminated.' Today, Western Dental employs more than 4,000 people in California, including more than 750 dentists and hygienists who provide more than 1 million Medi-Cal patient visits every year. 'Dental care is more than just getting your teeth cleaned. It's essential primary care for children and systemic care for adults,' said Dr. Peter Truong, Western Dental's Chief Dental Officer. 'If dental care is eliminated or reduced, patients suffer adverse health consequences, including tooth decay, gum disease, systemic health issues and social and economic impacts that are far more costly to treat. Eliminating access to dental care will have significant health consequences for millions of Californians. 'Western Dental will be forced to make hard decisions in the coming weeks and months, should Prop 56 funding be eliminated. Unfortunately, that will likely include closing as many as 50 offices, reducing staff in many offices and reducing the number of Medi-Cal dental patients each practice is able to treat. The choices made by the Governor and California State Legislature will have a direct and immediate impact on access to necessary health care and jobs lost should Prop 56 funding be redirected and removed from dental care' added Mr. Takkar. About Western Dental Western Dental has been serving California communities for over 100 years, with a strong commitment to delivering high-quality, affordable dental care. With over 200 locations across the state, Western Dental provides a full spectrum of services including general dentistry, orthodontics, and pediatric care — creating a convenient, comprehensive 'Dental Home' for families across California. As part of the Sonrava Health family of brands, Western Dental shares in the mission to expand access and drive innovation in dental care.
Yahoo
30-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Prop 56 Cuts: Patients Will Suffer from Lack of Access to Proper Dental and Oral Healthcare – Leading to Severe and Costly Chronic Health Problems
The largest Medi-Cal Dental provider in the state likely to shutter dozens of offices across California ORANGE, Calif., May 30, 2025--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Western Dental, California's largest Medi-Cal dental provider, with 223 offices in 35 counties across the state, will be forced to close offices if the current proposal to cut Proposition 56 funding moves forward. The company is evaluating the extent of the expected closures, along with other measures to offset the significant impact to dental offices. Proposition 56, a measure overwhelmingly passed by California voters in 2016, directed revenue from a new tobacco tax to increase access to care for individuals and families that qualify for Medi-Cal (California's version of Medicaid) dental services. Prop 56 has not only made it possible for California dentists to provide access and care to more patients but also allowed new providers to open their doors and create a more stabilized and equitable health care system throughout the state, including areas where dentists were previously in short supply for everyone. "Medi-Cal dental has been significantly under-resourced for decades. Proposition 56 provided critical funding that helped Western Dental open more than 100 new offices across the state and serve millions of patients, many in underserved areas who were otherwise without access to care," said Preet Takkar, Chief Executive Officer of Western Dental. "The current budget proposal represents dramatic cuts to dental reimbursement rates, which would make it impossible to keep many of these new offices open, while also impacting additional practices statewide. This proposal would reignite the dental access crisis that existed before the passage of Prop 56 and would ultimately cost the state more in the long run. Unfortunately, dental practices like ours across California will have to make tough choices—reassessing staffing, hours, and office locations—if this funding is eliminated." Today, Western Dental employs more than 4,000 people in California, including more than 750 dentists and hygienists who provide more than 1 million Medi-Cal patient visits every year. "Dental care is more than just getting your teeth cleaned. It's essential primary care for children and systemic care for adults," said Dr. Peter Truong, Western Dental's Chief Dental Officer. "If dental care is eliminated or reduced, patients suffer adverse health consequences, including tooth decay, gum disease, systemic health issues and social and economic impacts that are far more costly to treat. Eliminating access to dental care will have significant health consequences for millions of Californians. "Western Dental will be forced to make hard decisions in the coming weeks and months, should Prop 56 funding be eliminated. Unfortunately, that will likely include closing as many as 50 offices, reducing staff in many offices and reducing the number of Medi-Cal dental patients each practice is able to treat. The choices made by the Governor and California State Legislature will have a direct and immediate impact on access to necessary health care and jobs lost should Prop 56 funding be redirected and removed from dental care" added Mr. Takkar. About Western Dental Western Dental has been serving California communities for over 100 years, with a strong commitment to delivering high-quality, affordable dental care. With over 200 locations across the state, Western Dental provides a full spectrum of services including general dentistry, orthodontics, and pediatric care — creating a convenient, comprehensive "Dental Home" for families across California. As part of the Sonrava Health family of brands, Western Dental shares in the mission to expand access and drive innovation in dental care. View source version on Contacts Media ContactRon Trujilloron@ Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Politico
19-05-2025
- Politics
- Politico
How to governor-proof an initiative
Presented by Our Sun. Our Power. WHAT BALLOT MANDATE? — Supporters of last year's two most popular statewide ballot initiatives found that spending tens of millions of dollars to qualify and pass their proposals wasn't enough to keep the measures' most high-profile critic, Gov. Gavin Newsom, from disregarding them in his latest budget proposal. Newsom's moves to undercut last year's Propositions 35 and 36 raise strategic, political and legal questions for organizations hoping to go to the ballot in 2026 or 2028. How do you convince funders to pour millions into a measure — and persuade voters to support it — if the governor can undo it on a whim come budget season? 'There may be a new approach taken on making sure that you're governor-proof on something, certainly if it's related to the budget,' said Rob Stutzman, a Sacramento-based consultant who worked for Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and many interests at the ballot before and since. Prop 35's backers across the health care industry specifically drafted their initiative to prevent state leaders from sweeping billions of dollars into the general fund in tough financial years, and 68 percent of voters agreed with them. But Newsom, facing a large deficit, announced Wednesday he would do exactly that (just as he wants to repurpose millions in revenue generated by Prop 56, the tobacco tax increase passed in 2016). Also missing from Newsom's budget proposal was money for the drug treatment, probation, social workers and administrative costs experts say is required to properly implement Prop 36, the tough-on-crime initiative voters also overwhelmingly passed in November over the governor's opposition. 'It's like he's purposely wagging his fingers at the voters and saying, 'I told you so, and since I told you so, I'm not going to fund this thing, or I'm going to take money from it when you didn't want me to in the first place,' state Sen. Roger Niello told Playbook. 'I'm at a loss to understand why he's doing it.' Interest groups unhappy with their lot in a state budget typically follow two main ballot strategies for recourse. They can ask voters to establish a new source of revenue (like the Prop 56 tobacco tax, for example) or pass a statute that attempts to lock in a funding stream for a specific purpose (like Prop 35). But Newsom's budget casts doubt on how enforceable either of those will be once voters have passed a measure. Tom Hiltachk, a veteran lawyer who specializes in ballot-measure clients — including the proponents of last year's Prop 36 — said governors have long tried to shortchange initiatives by refusing to fund them. Initiative backers typically consider the scenario when drafting their proposals, he said. 'The actions of the governor to disregard the policy preferences of the electorate, as most recently evidenced by the 2024 election results, is unfortunately not a new concern for initiative proponents,' he said. Backers of a measure like Prop 36, which changed sentencing rules but did not include a direct mechanism to pay for expanded prisons or mental-health treatment beds, could opt to build funding into the proposal itself. That poses its own challenges: Suddenly you're asking voters not only to change policy but possibly raise their own taxes, too. Molly Weedn, an adviser to the Yes on 35 campaign, told Playbook that the coalition that passed Prop 35 is considering a range of legal and political options to ensure the initiative is properly implemented. Going forward, she said, campaigns will need to think inventively about how to keep governors' hands off the piles of money voters create via the ballot. 'The current climate, both with the budget and what's going on federally, gives the opportunity for organizations to be creative with how they pursue solutions,' Weedn said. 'We may be surprised what sort of creative outlets people come up with.' — With help from Rachel Bluth NEWS BREAK: Drake calls for Newsom to pardon fellow Canadian rapper Tory Lanez after prison stabbing … California officials react to Joe Biden's cancer diagnosis … San Jose fire captain charged with stealing drugs from station. Welcome to Ballot Measure Weekly, a special edition of Playbook PM focused on California's lively realm of ballot measure campaigns. Drop us a line at eschultheis@ and wmccarthy@ or find us on X — @emilyrs and @wrmccart. TOP OF THE TICKET A highly subjective ranking of the ballot measures — past and future, certain and possible — getting our attention this week. 1. Measure Z (Santa Cruz, 2024): Almost three weeks after the first challenge to a statewide ban on soda taxes took effect, the American Beverage Association has still not filed a widely expected lawsuit. The Santa Cruz city attorney is among those now speculating that the beverage industry fears a losing lawsuit may harm its position more than any courtroom victory would help. 2. Transit tax (Bay Area, 2026): Among the losers in last week's budget revision were Sen. Jesse Arreguín and Assemblymember Mark González, whose request for a $2 billion infusion for BART and MUNI didn't make Newsom's list of priorities. The lawmakers had proposed the money to maintain service levels while transit operators ask voters to back new taxes to fund the system on next year's ballot. 3. Local tax thresholds (2026): Assemblymember Carl DeMaio is hoping to ride shotgun on the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association's drive to make it harder for local governments to raise taxes. The Republican lawmaker, who had introduced a similar amendment earlier this year, has begun raising money for his grassroots apparatus Reform California with promises to support a petition drive behind whichever version of the measure the business community chooses to support. 4. Measure B (Cathedral City, 2021): The California Fair Political Practices Commission slapped a $31,500 fine on the Palm Springs-area resort haven for using public funds to promote a 2021 ballot measure voters passed that places new restrictions on short-term vacation rentals, a warning sign to other city halls looking to change policy via the ballot. 5. City charter reform (Los Angeles, 2026): Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass has named her picks to serve on the city's charter reform commission, as well as a new executive director to steer the effort. As POLITICO's Melanie Mason reported this morning, Bass's delay doing so has thus far slowed the commission's work. Now, with a quorum in place, the commission can get started — with the goal of putting its proposed changes before voters in November 2026. 6. Pay for performance (San Jose, 2025?): San Jose Mayor Matt Mahan's efforts to tie elected leadership's pay to performance may not need to go to the ballot, the Mercury News reports, based on a charter provision that allows city officials to voluntarily reduce their salaries. But the council members who would need to vote to do so are increasingly wary of an idea that could cut their paychecks by at least five percent. 7. Measures A & B (Huntington Beach, 2025): The campaign over control of the public library in this Orange County beach town is entering its final weeks, and the Yes side is out with its latest cozily bookish tactic — a rhyming Dr. Seussian mailer. The June 10 vote is being watched nationwide, as Emily reported in a story this weekend, inspiring librarians to consider the merits of fighting back against MAGA book bans via the ballot rather than through the courts. ON OTHER BALLOTS Voters in Louisiana may be asked to ban foreign contributions to ballot-measure campaigns after lawmakers advanced a proposed constitutional amendment on the topic … Signature-gatherers in Michigan will be working to qualify two dueling constitutional amendments requiring proof of citizenship to vote after a second proposal on the topic was cleared for circulation just a month after an initial proposal … Smart & Safe Florida, the group leading the push to legalize recreational marijuana via the Florida ballot, has signed onto a lawsuit against a recently enacted law it says would place 'draconian restrictions' on those looking to qualify future measures for the ballot … Lawmakers in Missouri passed legislation to overturn Proposition A, the ballot initiative voters approved in 2024 to implement paid sick leave … And an anti-tax group in Ohio moved a step closer to seeing its proposal to eliminate property taxes on a future ballot after the state's attorney general said its proposed title and summary were 'fair and truthful,' clearing the proposal for consideration by the Ohio Ballot Board. I'M JUST A BILL HOUSING BOND (AB 736): Assemblymember Buffy Wicks' proposal for a $10 billion affordable housing bond received Newsom's endorsement last week, a boost for the bill as it enters a crucial phase of the legislative process. 'We need to support a bond to address the issues of housing, yes, affordability, but also infrastructure,' the governor said during his presentation of his May revised budget proposal, calling the bond 'foundational' to the state's efforts to promote housing affordability. Newsom's comments were 'a shot in the arm' for the bond's chances of making it onto the 2026 ballot, said Ray Pearl, executive director of the California Housing Consortium, which represents developers, builders and public-sector interests and is backing the bond. 'Having him put his finger on the scale and say this is important is a signal — not only to advocates, but especially members of the Legislature — that this is going to be looked upon favorably should it get through the legislative process.' Pearl said the bond's backers hope to see it on Newsom's desk this fall, so that it can appear on the ballot in 2026. After passing through committee, AB 736 is set to be considered among dozens of other costly bills in the suspense file next week. WHATEVER HAPPENED TO ... PROP 24 (2020): California's landmark Privacy Rights Act enshrined an individual's right to control his or her personal data and created the nation's first privacy enforcement agency. But it's facing a serious stress test from Big Tech and Republicans in Washington as policymakers are forced to reread the four-year-old initiative in light of advances in artificial intelligence. The controversy hinges on three words buried near the back of the 34-page measure approved by 56 percent of voters: 'automated decisionmaking tools,' a technology that uses algorithms and often AI to assist or replace human decision-making in areas like health care, hiring, education and criminal justice. California's Privacy Protection Agency, the regulatory body created by Prop 24, argues that the initiative's language requires the agency to draft rules protecting the right to opt out of sharing personal information with ADMTs. Big Tech, business groups (led by the California Chamber of Commerce) and even Prop 24 architect and CPPA board member Alastair Mactaggart pressured the agency for months to cut AI regulations from the draft rules, contending the 2020 measure never specifically mentions AI. The agency's five-member board reluctantly pared back the draft rules earlier this month over objections from labor unions and consumer privacy advocates. But the Prop 24 debate is far from over, thanks to Congress. Republicans in Washington are considering a 10-year moratorium on state AI regulations, including rules governing ADMTs. It's a longshot idea but one that's gaining steam with tech industry lobbyists and powerful Texas Republican Sen. Ted Cruz. CPPA Executive Director Tom Kemp urged Congress to abandon the proposal in a letter sent last week, arguing it would 'strip away many crucial [privacy] protections' guaranteed in Prop 24. POSTCARD FROM ... … WESTWOOD: A year after a violent face-off between student protesters and police shut down campus, UCLA undergraduates last week tried their hand at a different California collegiate tradition of dissent: the ballot measure. The 33,040-person electorate faced three initiatives as part of annual student elections, all related to increasing or maintaining quarterly fees to fund various student programs and services. The university is one of many in California with such provisions for direct democracy, one of the few avenues offered for the student body to try to make demands of school leadership, rather than the other way around. For students, some not yet old enough to vote for president, the vote represents their first chance to take a spin on the direct-democracy merry-go-round. In prior elections, many have responded to that opportunity with a shrug, with turnout struggling to reach the 20-percent mark required for an initiative to pass. 'A lot of people don't know what's happening,' said Holly Hebden, a senior and the president of a campus organization called Good Clothes, Good People, which placed a student-fee initiative on the most recent ballot. 'They have other stuff going on.' Making matters more difficult for those trying to indoctrinate their peers into ballot-measure culture are the restrictions on campaigning that campuses impose on student organizations. According to Hebden, her group was allowed to hand out fliers in just one designated campus location and only during specific weeks and times. 'I want to have an impact on my campus and this is the most direct way I see to do it,' said Hebden. 'But it's been harder to reach the threshold.' Even winning at the ballot doesn't guarantee change. In 2018, Chico State students voted down fee increases on three separate occasions, only to have the administration proceed with the change anyways, according to CalMatters. Still, university ballot measures are not some middle-school class president exercise in play-politics. The issues that students vote on have real-life ramifications for student experiences. Hebden's organization, for example, provides free school and hygiene supplies to financially insecure students. As of Friday night, her initiative was passing with majority support and 28 percent turnout. 'Students haven't had this much control over this particular fee. A lot of this money goes to campus administration,' Hebden said. 'Now have direct, unilateral control over this fee and what it's utilized for.' THAT TIME VOTERS ... … GOT BEHIND THE WHEEL: Californians have seen ballot measures on a wide variety of questions related to cars and driving, including to: Impose a one-cent-per-gallon gas tax on top of the pre-existing two-cent license tax (1926, failed) … Require registration fees to be equal regardless of the type of fuel or engine used in a vehicle, and all revenue used for highway purposes (1936, failed) … Impose a 55-mile-per-hour speed limit on California highways (1976, did not qualify) … Repeal a state gas tax and exempt motor vehicle fuels from sales tax (1980, did not qualify) … Require all vehicles registered with the California Department of Motor Vehicles be classified by color and specific model, and require any change of color to be reported within 10 days (1993, did not qualify) … Increase the gas tax by four percent to fund transportation programs and projects like light rail, commuter and intercity rail systems and bicycle projects (1994, failed) … Require the California DMV to make 12 decorative vehicle decals (one per month) available for public purchase for an annual fee of $240, which would go into an 'I Helped Save the Golden State' fund for education, social service, parks and recreation, and environmental protection programs (2004, did not qualify) … Allow buyers of used cars to return them to the dealer and cancel their purchase within three days and receive a full refund, limit dealer loan fees and require 'certified' used vehicles to be inspected by a qualified technician (2005, did not qualify) … And prohibit the sale of gas-only and diesel-only passenger vehicles and light trucks manufactured after 2020 (2020, did not qualify).
Newsweek
15-05-2025
- Health
- Newsweek
Planned Parenthood Turns on Gavin Newsom
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. California Governor Gavin Newsom's proposed $322 billion budget for the 2025-26 fiscal year includes a $500 million cut to health care provider payments funded by Proposition 56, a move that Planned Parenthood says would significantly hinder its ability to offer essential health services across the state. Newsweek contacted Newsom's office and Planned Parenthood for comment. Why It Matters The elimination of these funds would deeply affect organizations such as Planned Parenthood, which relies on the money to serve low-income and marginalized communities. Prop 56 pays for family planning and women's health providers to make room for funding the voter-mandated Proposition 35, which expands Medi-Cal—California's Medicaid program financed equally by the state and federal government. Planned Parenthood of Los Angeles CEO Sue Dunlap speaking as Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass looks on at a news conference on April 10, 2023. Planned Parenthood of Los Angeles CEO Sue Dunlap speaking as Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass looks on at a news conference on April 10, To Know The $500 million reduction specifically targets incentive payments to health care providers that serve Medi-Cal patients. These funds are primarily distributed through Proposition 56, a tobacco tax initiative approved by voters in 2016. The revenue was earmarked for expanding and improving access to Medi-Cal services, which serves about 15 million Californians. Newsom's budget proposal, part of the governor's attempt to close a projected $12 billion budget deficit, would eliminate about half a billion dollars in Proposition 56 supplemental payments in the fiscal year 2025-26 and cancel an additional $900 million in planned increases in subsequent years, The Washington Post reported. "Because of Prop 35 and the fact that it is burdened over the next 2 fiscal years by $4.6 billion, it's increased the budget deficit, we are trying to figure out ways of offsetting that," Newsom said, according to Oakland news station KTVU. Jodi Hicks, the president of Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California, told KTVU that the cuts would slash the organization's annual budget in the state by a third. "We called California the beacon of hope for anyone that needs health care, come to California," Hicks told KTVU. "So it's a little bit of whiplash that now we're proposing these cuts." "Over 85 percent are on public programs, including Medicaid, and some of the most vulnerable patients, and so we're severely restricting access to women's health," she continued. Hicks said Newsom was "effectively defunding Planned Parenthood in the state of California," KCRA 3 reported. She then wrote on X, formerly Twitter, "Happy to go on his Podcast and explain why this devastates women's health in his state." Izzy Gardon, a spokesperson for Newsom, told KCRA 3 that the funding changes were conveyed ahead of the announced budget proposal. "At a time when Donald Trump and Mike Johnson are working to gut access to basic reproductive care, Governor Newsom is not going to sign a budget that would shut down health clinics across California," Gardon said. "Any suggestion otherwise is laughably absurd." What People Are Saying Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California wrote on X: "Here's what you need to know about @CAgovernor's May Budget Revision: 1. It decreases funding for sexual & reproductive health care providers by half a billion $. 2. It would eliminate 1/3 of PP in CA's annual funding. 3. It effectively defunds Planned Parenthood in CA." California state Representative Maggy Krell wrote on X: "At a time when access to reproductive healthcare is under attack & Congress is proposing to defund Planned Parenthood & cut Medicaid, California must do more." What Happens Next Newsom and Democratic lawmakers remain under pressure to balance fiscal responsibility with maintaining California's progressive health care promises. The outcome of these budget negotiations will signal how the state prioritizes its most vulnerable residents in times of economic strain.
