| Argument in Favor | This - 214 | Argument Against |

Rebuttal to Argument in Favor of Proposition 214

Arguments on this page are the opinions of the authors and have not been checked for accuracy by any official agency.

PROPOSITION 214, LIKE 216, IS A COSTLY TROJAN HORSE. We don't need special-interest ballot initiatives to ''protect" patients. EXISTING LAW ALREADY: protects patient advocacy; prohibits gag rules; requires coverage criteria be developed by physicians; provides for safe staffing in hospitals; prohibits paying doctors to deny needed care; and prohibits disclosing confidential patient records.

These provisions are part of 214 to hide the measure's real purposes: to add bloated, costly staffing requirements, to give special-interest job protection to some health care workers, and to help trial lawyers file frivolous health care lawsuits.

Proposition 214 DOES NOT provide health coverage to a single Californian. It costs consumers BILLIONS OF DOLLARS in higher health insurance costs while costing taxpayers HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS more for administration and to cover government workers. Not a penny of 214 will provide health insurance for the uninsured.

Real health care reform should make insurance more affordable and reduce the number of uninsured. Props. 214 and 216 dramatically increase health insurance costs and will lead to MORE UNINSURED.

That's why groups like the Seniors Coalition, 60 Plus Association and United Seniors Association oppose 214 and 216. It's why leaders of groups that care for the poor like SISTERS OF MERCY and DAUGHTERS OF CHARITY oppose the initiatives. And it's why small business and taxpayer groups like the CALIFORNIA TAXPAYERS ASSOCIATION and the NATIONAL TAX LIMITATION COMMITTEE say NO on 214 and 216.

Don't be fooled by special-interest, trojan horse ballot initiatives. VOTE NO.

Legislative Director, The Seniors Coalition

Childrens Hospital, Los Angeles

President, California Chamber of Commerce

| Argument in Favor | This - 214 | Argument Against |