Press Releases

No on Prop 23 statement in response to ruling in lawsuit against false and misleading ballot information prepared by Attorney General

SACRAMENTO – In response to the news that Judge Arguelles agreed with No on Prop 23 and modified the misleading ballot title and summary, the No on Prop 23 campaign issued the following statement from dialysis patient DeWayne Cox. Mr. Cox lives in Los Angeles and has been on dialysis for ten years. He was also the petitioner in the litigation filed by No on 23.

“We applaud Judge Arguelles’ ruling which correctly found that the Attorney General’s language was misleading, and more important, that the AG does not have carte blanche to mislead voters. The No on 23 campaign is prepared to aggressively communicate with voters about the problems with this dangerous and costly measure. Unless Prop 23 is defeated, clinics will be forced to cutback services or close, jeopardizing access to life-saving dialysis treatments for tens of thousands of patients like me. As a patient advocate, I’m strongly opposed to Prop 23 because patients’ lives will be put at serious risk.”

Background:

Nearly 100 groups oppose Prop 23, including the California Medical Association, American Nurses Association\California, and many others because it would jeopardize the lives of dialysis patients by forcing hundreds of dialysis clinics to cut back services or shut down completely – making it more difficult for dialysis patients to access their life-saving treatments.

Furthermore, this dangerous and costly dialysis measure would make the state’s current doctor shortage and emergency room overcrowding even worse, while unnecessarily increasing health care costs for taxpayers and consumers by hundreds of millions of dollars every year. All of this, amid a global pandemic, threatens to put a strain on necessary health care resources across California.

There are approximately 80,000 dialysis patients in California with failed kidneys who need machines to clean their blood and remove toxins from their bodies. Patients must receive dialysis treatment three times a week for four hours at a time to stay alive. Access to consistent dialysis treatments is so important that just one missed treatment increases patients’ risk of death by 30%.

Prop 23 is sponsored by the United Healthcare Workers West (UHW) union – the same organization that abused California’s initiative process two years ago by bankrolling Proposition 8 on the 2018 ballot. Prop 8 would have also caused dialysis clinics throughout California to cut back services or shut down dangerously threatening dialysis patients’ lives. That’s why every daily newspaper in California opposed Prop 8, and voters overwhelmingly rejected it by 20 points. Now, this special interest group is at it again with a different attempt, but the same outcome, that would put dialysis patients lives at risk.

While unions have the right to try to unionize workers, it’s not right to abuse the initiative system and use vulnerable patients as political pawns – especially now in the face of a public health crisis.

Please visit www.NoProp23.com for more information.