Connect with us

California

Editorial: California Medi-Cal measure locks in special-interest funding

Published

on

Editorial: California Medi-Cal measure locks in special-interest funding


 

Proposition 35, the Medi-Cal funding measure on the Nov. 5 ballot, presents another example of special-interest ballot-box budgeting that limits the discretion of lawmakers and reduces flexibility to respond to fiscal crises. Voters should reject it.

If we’ve learned anything in the past few years, it’s that multibillion budget surpluses one year can morph into gigantic deficits the next. The governor and state lawmakers need flexibility to responsibly address the shortfalls.

California voters should not lock in funding allocations that favor doctors and hospitals over children and community health workers. Nor should they keep tying the hands of lawmakers, who must already contend with, for example, voter mandates for school funding, which must receive about 40% of the state budget; for prudent budget reserves; and for arts education.

Advertisement

At issue with Proposition 35 is a tax on health plans that provides $7.5 billion of the $161 billion needed to annually fund Medi-Cal — the federal-state health program for low-income people.

The tax is based on the number of people to whom the health plans provide coverage. The state leverages the tax money for matching funds from the federal government.

Medi-Cal, in turn, reimburses the health plans for almost all the tax, with the federal government covering the majority of the cost. In other words, it’s a tax that’s not really a tax but rather a way to pull in more federal money.

Proposition 35 is being sold as a measure that would secure that $7.5 billion in funding by permanently extending the tax on health plans. But this lock-in isn’t needed. State lawmakers, understanding how the tax leverages federal dollars, have generally levied and renewed it for nearly two decades and are incentivized to do so in the future.

Meanwhile, Proposition 35 would not only make the tax permanent, it would also dictate allocation of the spoils. It would pick winners and losers.

Advertisement

Not surprisingly, the winners include doctors, hospitals and emergency ambulance providers, which explains why they are major financial backers of the measure. Their funding would be protected and, in some cases, increased under Proposition 35.

Among the possible losers are community health workers, private nurses and children under age 5, who are currently protected from losing their Medi-Cal coverage.

To provide the additional funding for the winners under Proposition 35 and still preserve other Medi-Cal programs, the state would need to tap the general fund for another $1 billion to $2 billion annually in 2025 and 2026, according to the Legislative Analyst’s Office.

The current tax will expire at the end of 2026 unless the Legislature and the federal government extend it. But there’s every reason to believe state lawmakers will do their part, just as they have in the past.

Yet, Proposition 35 backers tout that their measure would make the tax permanent starting in 2027 — and use the notion of going after politically unpopular insurance companies for money as a selling point even though those companies will get their money back.

Advertisement

Backers of the ballot measure also say that the tax revenue has been diverted to bolster the state’s general fund. But the state this fiscal year will provide $62.4 billion to help fund Medi-Cal, including $35 billion from the general fund.

It’s fiscally reckless to keep using ballot measures to earmark unpredictable state revenues. Proposition 35, which is 43 pages long, “hamstrings our ability to have the kind of flexibility that’s required at the moment we’re living in,” says Gov. Gavin Newsom.

He’s right.

More funding for health care for the poor is a laudable goal. So are attempts to raise rates for doctors and other health care providers who serve Medi-Cal patients. Indeed, there are legitimate concerns about Medi-Cal patients not being able to find providers because doctors don’t want to take them on at low payment rates.

But the allocation of limited general fund money should be made when all the competing demands are weighed by state lawmakers. We shouldn’t be locking it in with a ballot measure few voters will ever understand.

Advertisement



Source link

California

Trump claims without proof Democrats are ‘trying to steal’ California primaries

Published

on

Trump claims without proof Democrats are ‘trying to steal’ California primaries


Donald Trump has alleged without evidence that Democrats are cheating in California’s primaries and claimed in a late-night social media post that the US attorney’s office in Los Angeles was investigating.

As counting continues in the most populous state in the US, the president’s unfounded remarks are likely to further alarm election observers, who have warned of the risk of escalating misinformation in the absence of a final result.

Trump has a history of undermining election results that don’t go in his favor. He has repeatedly alleged that Democrats “stole” the 2020 presidential election, which he lost to Joe Biden, despite privately admitting his defeat, according to aides.

At 12.48am on Thursday, Trump posted: “The Dumocrats are at it again! They are trying to STEAL THE GOVERNOR OF CALIFORNIA PRIMARY, AND THE MAYOR OF LOS ANGELES, PRIMARY, AWAY FROM TWO GREAT REPUBLICAN CANDIDATES. Here we go with the very late and massive numbers of MAIL IN BALLOTS.”

Advertisement

“There’s BIG cheating by the Dumocrats in California,” he said 17 minutes later in another post on his Truth Social platform. “Votes are all tied up. May not be in for weeks. Under investigation by the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Los Angeles. Why the vote counting DELAY??? President DJT”.

The US attorney’s office said it had no comment on Trump’s claim that his allegations of cheating are “under investigation” by US attorneys. The Department of Justice in Washington DC did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The president presented no substantive basis for questioning the legitimacy of the election.

Mail-in ballots factor heavily in California political races – typically about 80% of votes cast – and those ballots can be counted up to a week after election day, as long as they are postmarked before election day.

California uses a “jungle” primary process, in which the two candidates with the most votes advance to a runoff – regardless of their political party – unless one candidate wins an outright majority. A huge field of 61 candidates fragmented the vote in the race for governor, but Republicans have coalesced around Steve Hilton. Together with Xavier Becerra and Tom Steyer, the three are in a contest that remains too close to call as votes are tallied.

Advertisement

Mail-in ballots tend to favor Democrats, which implies the possibility that Hilton – whom Trump has endorsed – may drop into third place by the time all the ballots are counted.

The last Republican to win the California gubernatorial race was Arnold Schwarzenegger in 2006. Republicans have polled just under 40% in each of the last four contests.

Last month Gavin Newsom sent a letter to elections officials to thank them for their work while warning that a long process invites disingenuous accusations of misconduct.

“We must acknowledge that the longer the vote count takes, the more mis- and dis-information spreads,” wrote the California governor. “That means we must do all that we can to tabulate votes quickly and accurately. Time is of the essence in preventing election lies from taking root.”

On Wednesday evening, election observers echoed those concerns. “Conducting elections with integrity and ensuring that every eligible vote is counted are fundamental to maintaining public confidence in our democracy,” said Mike DuHaime of the Democracy Defense Project, a bipartisan effort to combat election misinformation.

Advertisement

“At the same time, prolonged delays in ballot tabulation, such as those that have become increasingly common in California, can undermine public trust and create unnecessary uncertainty around election outcomes,” DuHaime added. “The longer election results remain unresolved, the greater the opportunity for misinformation and speculation to spread online, eroding confidence in our electoral process. Accuracy must always remain the highest priority, but accuracy and timeliness are not mutually exclusive.”



Source link

Continue Reading

California

California man charged with bringing explosives to Sacramento airport after repeatedly calling FBI tip line | CNN

Published

on

California man charged with bringing explosives to Sacramento airport after repeatedly calling FBI tip line | CNN


A California man was charged Tuesday after authorities say he brought an explosive device and other weapons through a security checkpoint at Sacramento International Airport.

Kimani Osayande Jones, who also uses the last name Jackson, attempted to bring an improvised explosive device, a knife and other bladed weapons, a torch lighter and zip ties through a TSA security checkpoint on May 30, according to court documents filed Tuesday in the Eastern District of California.

Officials believe Jones, 49, repeatedly called the FBI tip line to report he was being threatened and intimidated in the months leading up to the incident.

Sacramento County Sheriff’s Office bomb technicians safely removed the explosive device and tested its powder and fuse, both of which were determined to be “viable and energetic,” officials say.

Advertisement

Investigators said the device had the potential to damage an aircraft and cause a loss of cabin pressure.

Jones’ other luggage, which had already been through security and loaded onto an American Airlines flight to Charlotte, North Carolina, was hand-searched and examined by a canine unit upon arrival, and investigators said nothing “illegal or concerning” was found.

Jones has been charged in federal court with unlawful possession of explosive material at an airport. He faces up to five years in prison and a $250,000 fine if convicted.

His attorney, Meghan McLoughlin, told CNN in a statement: “There is often more to these cases than the government’s allegations, and that the criminal process will reveal Mr. Jones’ story as well.”

Multiple cell phones and repeated FBI tip line calls

The Sacramento resident went through security on May 30 wearing a face covering and blue latex gloves, court documents say.

Advertisement

When officers found the explosive device and other items in Jones’ carry-on bag, he told them he was unaware the items were in his possession and said “he would be okay with just discarding them.” When authorities informed him that explosive material could not simply be thrown away, he denied ownership of the backpack.

Jones also had five mobile phones in his possession. The cameras on each phone had been covered with painter’s tape, which authorities believe was intended to prevent his surroundings from being recorded.

One phone contained a 15-minute timer ready to start and another had a message from an unknown number on the screen stating, “we will be awaiting your call,” according to court documents.

An individual police believe to be Jones made approximately 13 calls to the FBI tip line leading up to the incident, beginning in March.

On May 24, the caller reported being followed to and from a doctor’s appointment and described what he said were threats and intimidation by another individual.

Advertisement

He said he was “being coerced in sleep to say certain phrases through digital media” and described “hearing sounds coming through walls, window panes, or even outside, attributing the outside sounds to drones,” court documents say. The call was ultimately terminated because of its “nonsensical nature.”

On the day of the incident, the same caller again contacted the FBI tip line, alleging that several individuals were threatening him throughout the past year through “cyber means.” He also referenced exercising his Second Amendment rights while denying any intention to harm others.

The Sacramento County Sheriff’s Office also noted it had prior contact with Jones, “wherein he had a history of being paranoid.”



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

California

California may take weeks to finalize primary results. ‘This is normal’

Published

on

California may take weeks to finalize primary results. ‘This is normal’


play

Although results from California’s primary election began rolling in on Tuesday, June 2, it could take days or even weeks before the final counts are certified. 

“This is normal … We have a process that by law ensures both voting rights and the integrity of elections, so I would call on all Californians to be patient,” Secretary of State Shirley N. Weber said in a June 2 news release.

Advertisement

The Golden State’s lengthy vote-counting process has “become a national narrative about California elections,” according to Thad Kousser, a professor of political science at the University of California, San Diego.

“In California, it takes a long time to certify votes, to verify the signatures, to then count the ballots; all of that process takes a while,” Kousser said in an interview last week. “It may take a while for us to learn who the top candidates who emerge are.”

Here are some factors behind California’s lengthy vote-counting process. 

Mail-in ballots come with added verification step 

With each mail-in ballot cast, elections officials must compare the signature on a returned vote-by-mail envelope to the voter’s signature on their voter registration card. Various factors go into determining whether the signatures match, including the slant of the signature, whether it is printed or written in cursive, and the size, proportions, or scale. 

Vote-by-mail ballots were Californians’ preferred voting method in both the 2024 primary and general elections, with drop-off locations — such as ballot drop boxes and voting centers — the most popular way to return mail-in ballots. 

Advertisement

During California’s 2024 primary, more than 7.7 million votes were cast statewide, and 90 percent of those were mail-in ballots. This means election officials had to verify the signatures on more than 6.8 million ballots before they could be counted. For the November 2024 general election, 80% of cast ballots, or about 13 million, were vote-by-mail. 

Reviewing conditional voter and provisional ballots 

California also allows for same-day voter registration, also known as conditional voter registration. Voters who need to register, or re-register, within 14 days of an election can do so at their county elections office, polling place, or vote center. These ballots will be processed and counted after the county elections office has completed the voter registration process. 

In addition to conditional voter ballots, there are provisional ballots that must be verified before they are counted. Voters cast provisional ballots for a wide array of reasons, including if their name does not appear at a polling place or if they’ve made a mistake on their ballot. After a voter casts a provisional ballot, it will not be counted until election officials have confirmed that the voter is registered to vote in that county and has not already voted in that election. 

Vote-by-mail ballots can be sent on Election Day 

Though state officials recommend voters mail their ballots sooner rather than later, state law allows vote-by-mail ballots postmarked by Election Day to be counted if they arrive within a specified window afterward, thereby extending the tallying process. 

Advertisement

For the primary, ballots needed to be postmarked on or before June 2 and received by county elections office no later than June 10.  

California is, well, big 

California is the most populous state in the nation. And, as of May 18, a record total of 23,155,447 Californians were registered to vote. 

While not all registered voters are expected to have voted, county election officials estimate that more than 5 million ballots were cast statewide. 

When to expect final results 

Under state law, county elections officials are required to report the results for most ballots by June 15, or 13 days after the election, according to Weber. However, some ballots can take counties up to 30 days to count every ballot and then conduct a post-election audit. 

State law requires county elections officials to report final official results to state officials July 3. State officials then have until July 10 to certify the results of the election.

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending