Proposition 38 is a November ballot request for voter approval for the state to borrow money. This proposition is asking approval to issue $8.4 billion in bonds for immunology and immunotherapy research.
The funding would be split into halves. One half will fund research in immunology and immunotherapy. Immunology is the study of the body’s immune system and how it protects the body from abnormal cells and other causes of disease.
The other half of the funding will fund immunology research on cancer, heart disease, and Alzheimer’s disease.
Many medical professionals and researchers support the proposition, but there is strong opposition. The language specifies that half of the funding will go to a single University of California-affiliated nonprofit medical research institute, and half to competitive research grants.
While the California Department of Public Health would select the institute, the selected institute must meet several criteria, which eliminate all candidates except the UCLA affiliated California Institute for Immunology and Immunotherapy.
Among the criteria that the single institute must meet are the following: it must be a nonprofit founded before 2025; focus on immunology and immunotherapy research rather than research broadly; be affiliated with a University of California campus with a medical center that serves a minimum number of patients (currently only UCLA meets that threshold); and meet a minimum square footage requirement for the size of the research institute.
Prop 38 language does require that 10 percent of any revenue generated from discoveries funded from this source must be given to the state to help offset the cost of the bond and interest.
Among the supporters of Prop 38 are the Alzheimer’s Association/AIM, American Nurses Association\California, Parkinson’s Foundation, and the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine.
The League of Women Voter’s opposes Prop 38. While medical research can save lives, they argue Prop 38 is the wrong way to fund it. Borrowing is a poor way to pay for ongoing scientific research, they say, arguing that bonds are best suited to long-lived investments such as buildings and infrastructure.
“Further Research royalties are no reason to take on $8.4 billion in debt. When voters approved $3 billion for stem-cell research in 2004, supporters pointed to royalties and millions in new state revenue. By 2022, the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine reported only $15.6 million in its licensing and royalties fund from royalty payments,” the League wrote in its opposition statement.
As of the end of June, proponents have spent more than $12 million advocating its passage. Since then, Gary K. Michelson, an American orthopedic surgeon, medical inventor, and billionaire philanthropist, has donated $12 million personally and another $2 million from his Center for Public Policy. The Center had already given $8.2 million in support of Prop 38. There is no organized committee with financing to oppose Prop 38.
