Propuesta 38: Bonos para investigación médica
Autoriza bonos para la investigación médica en inmunología
Ley por iniciativa. Una ley estatal que los votantes pusieron en la boleta al firmar peticiones.
En palabras sencillas
La Propuesta 38 permite que el estado pida prestados $8.4 mil millones para investigación en inmunología e inmunoterapia. Aproximadamente la mitad iría a un solo instituto de investigación elegido por el departamento de salud del estado. El resto financiaría subvenciones para investigación. Al menos $4.2 mil millones deben destinarse a investigación en inmunología sobre el cáncer, las enfermedades del corazón y el Alzheimer. Por lo general, los tratamientos que resulten de esta investigación deben venderse en California con un descuento del 20 por ciento. Pagar los bonos con el Fondo General costaría un estimado de $500 millones a $600 millones al año durante unos 20 años. El estado recibe el 10 por ciento de cualquier ingreso de la investigación, primero para pagar los bonos. Esos ingresos podrían ser importantes, pero su monto y su momento son inciertos, y compensar el costo de los bonos podría tardar décadas.
UN VOTO POR SÍ SIGNIFICA
Un voto por SÍ en esta medida significa: El estado podría solicitar un préstamo de $8.4 mil millones para financiar la investigación médica en inmunología e inmunoterapia que llevan a cabo los institutos de investigación y las universidades de California.
UN VOTO POR NO SIGNIFICA
Un voto por NO en esta medida significa: El estado no podría solicitar un préstamo de $8.4 mil millones para financiar la investigación médica en inmunología e inmunoterapia que llevan a cabo los institutos de investigación y las universidades de California.
Texto oficial en español de la Guía Oficial de Información para el Votante de California.
Fuente: guía oficial para el votanteRótulo oficial de la boleta
Las palabras exactas de su boleta. Toque para leer.
AUTHORIZES BONDS FOR IMMUNOLOGY MEDICAL RESEARCH. INITIATIVE STATUTE. Authorizes $8.4 billion in general obligation bonds for immunology and immunotherapy research, half to a single University of California-affiliated nonprofit medical research institute, half to research grants. Fiscal Impact: Increased state cost of $500 million to $600 million annually for about 20 years to repay the research bond, with some or all of the cost offset if the funded research generates revenue.
Fuente: Registro de Votantes del Condado de Los Ángeles, medidas en la boleta
Texto oficial en inglés. Lea la guía oficial para el votante en español.
Argumentos oficiales
Escritos por quienes apoyan y quienes se oponen, e impresos palabra por palabra en la guía oficial estatal para el votante. Los argumentos impresos en esta página son las opiniones de sus autores y ninguna agencia oficial ha verificado su exactitud.
Texto oficial en inglés. Lea la guía oficial para el votante en español (PDF).
Argumento a favor
De quienes apoyanFirmado por Susan Disney Lord, Eugene P. Brandon, and Dr. Brian Shuch. Toque para leer.
PATIENT ADVOCATES, DOCTORS, NURSES AND MEDICAL RESEARCHERS URGE YES ON PROP. 38
Leading patient advocates including the Alzheimer's Association, Michael J. Fox Foundation, American Nurses Association\ California, ALS Association, National Multiple Sclerosis Society and Prostate Cancer Foundation all urge YES on PROP. 38 because it could save your life and the life of someone you love.
"I was just weeks away from losing my life when a breakthrough immunotherapy gave me a second chance. Vote YES on PROP. 38 because every family facing a devastating diagnosis deserves this same hope."
- Laurie Adami, Cancer Survivor and Patient Advocate, Los Angeles
YES ON PROP. 38 - TO CURE AND PREVENT DISEASES THROUGH LIFE-SAVING IMMUNOLOGY RESEARCH
PROP. 38 accelerates development of breakthrough treatments and cures for the diseases that impact nearly every family. At least half of all funds are specifically dedicated to cancer, heart disease and Alzheimer's research.
"Immunology harnesses the body's immune system to detect and stop diseases. Today, breakthrough immunotherapies are already curing cancers like melanoma, lung cancer and leukemia. Promising research is underway to prevent diseases including Parkinson's, heart disease, diabetes and more."
- Mark Davis, Ph.D., Member of the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Medicine
"One in nine people over 65 are living with Alzheimer's, but there are currently no effective cures. YES on PROP. 38 provides real promise to find treatments and cures for the millions of patients and their families living with Alzheimer's and dementia."
- Susan Disney Lord, Board Chair of Alzheimer's Los Angeles
HELPS OFFSET FEDERAL FUNDING CUTS TO MEDICAL RESEARCH
Massive federal funding cuts and uncertainty are disrupting vitally needed medical research at nonprofit research institutes and universities, delaying progress toward life-saving cures.
PROP. 38 creates a stable source of funding for breakthrough immunology research. All funds are dedicated exclusively to California-based nonprofit universities and research institutes - helping California lead the nation in medical innovation, fostering collaboration among top scientists and universities, and creating tens of thousands of good-paying jobs.
"Immunotherapy is transforming the future of cancer care. PROP. 38 will help accelerate life-saving cures while strengthening California's role as a global leader in medical innovation."
- Gina Carithers, President and CEO, Prostate Cancer Foundation
LOWERS HEALTHCARE COSTS FOR CALIFORNIANS
Any cure or immunotherapy developed through PROP. 38 must be provided to California patients at a 20% DISCOUNT. Preventing and curing the most pressing diseases will also reduce long-term healthcare expenses and save the state and families tens of billions of dollars in avoided medical expenses.
STRONG ACCOUNTABILITY & TAXPAYER PROTECTIONS
PROP. 38 is designed to pay for itself WITH NO NET COST TO THE STATE OR TAXPAYERS. Ten percent of revenue from the licensing of successful immunotherapies must be returned to California to offset the costs of the bond, including interest.
PROP. 38 also includes strict accountability requirements, including:
- 2% Cap on State Administrative Expenses
- Public Disclosure of Spending
- Independent Financial Audits
- For-profit corporations are not eligible for grant funding
YES ON PROP. 38: SUPPORTED BY DOCTORS, NURSES AND PATIENT ADVOCATES
• ALS Association • Alzheimer's Association • American Nurses Association\California • Blood Cancer United • California Colorectal Cancer Coalition • Liver Coalition • Michael J. Fox Foundation • National Multiple Sclerosis Society • Parkinson Association of Northern California ... and many more.
YES on PROP. 38 could save your life and someone you love. Please, vote Yes.
www.YesOn38.com
Susan Disney Lord, Board Chair
Alzheimer's Los Angeles
Eugene P. Brandon, Ph.D., Board of Trustees
ALS Association
Dr. Brian Shuch, M.D., Board of Directors Member
Kidney Cancer Association
Respuesta al argumento a favor
De quienes se oponenFirmado por Robert M Kaplan. Toque para leer.
California should continue supporting biomedical research. Everyone hopes for new treatments for heart disease, cancer, Alzheimer's disease, and other serious illnesses. I do too. But Proposition 38 is the wrong way to achieve that goal.
The claim that Proposition 38 will pay for itself is speculative. Audits, public disclosure, and limits on administrative costs promote accountability, but they cannot guarantee that research investments will generate enough economic returns to offset billions of dollars in bond repayments.
California faces a continuing structural budget deficit.
Proposition 38 would require approximately $8.4 billion in bond repayments. According to the nonpartisan Legislative Analyst's Office, taxpayers would be committed to roughly $500 million in annual debt payments for the next 25 years. That long-term obligation would further reduce the state's fiscal flexibility to respond to changing priorities.
Meanwhile, recent actions by the Trump administration have placed funding for essential California public health programs at risk, including disease surveillance, emergency preparedness, HIV prevention, vaccination infrastructure, laboratory capacity, and community prevention. These challenges extend well beyond biomedical research.
If California chooses to replace declining federal support, elected officials should be able to consider all health priorities together. Proposition 38 instead earmarks billions of borrowed dollars for one scientific field, regardless of future needs or discoveries. Research priorities should be guided through the normal budget process - not by ballot measures that lock taxpayers into decades of debt. Vote No on Proposition 38.
Robert M Kaplan, Ph.D.
Argumento en contra
De quienes se oponenFirmado por Robert M Kaplan. Toque para leer.
California recognizes that continued investment in science is essential. But this proposition is not the best way to achieve that goal.
The measure would authorize approximately $8.4 billion in state borrowing to support immunology and immunotherapy research through a new University of California institute. Although the objective is appealing, the financing and policy framework are flawed.
First, the proposition continues the use of ballot initiatives to direct research funding toward selected topics. California has already created separate funding programs for stem cell research and precision medicine. This measure would add another highly focused program. Research priorities should be established through scientific review and public health planning - not by election campaigns. Cancer, Alzheimer's disease, and heart disease deserve attention, but so do mental illness, kidney disease, eye diseases, and many other conditions. Ballot-box science inevitably favors the most visible topics rather than the greatest scientific opportunities or public health needs.
Second, borrowing is an inappropriate way to finance scientific research. According to the Legislative Analyst's Office, the bonds authorized by this measure would obligate taxpayers to $500 million in annual debt payments for about 25 years. Bonds are commonly used for highways, schools, and other long-lived infrastructure with predictable benefits. Scientific research is different. Discoveries often require decades before they improve patient care, and many promising lines of investigation never produce marketable treatments.
Third, the proposition assumes that successful discoveries will generate revenues to offset state costs. In reality, universities rarely commercialize new therapies on their own. Publicly funded research lays the scientific foundation, but private companies typically invest the far greater resources required for product development, clinical testing, manufacturing, and regulatory approval. The public benefits are real, but they generally do not flow back to the state treasury.
Finally, the proposition requires certain therapies developed with state support to be sold in California at discounted prices. While this may sound attractive, it could incentivize companies to prioritize selling these products in other states where the prices are not controlled.
California should continue to support biomedical research. But research funding should be strategic, flexible, and fiscally responsible. Decisions about scientific priorities should be based on expert evaluation of emerging scientific opportunities and public health needs, not on a series of expensive ballot measures financed through long-term debt.
California has better options. For example, Senator Scott Wiener has proposed creating a state-funded research agency modeled on the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation. Rather than directing resources to specific areas of science, such an institution could establish priorities through expert scientific review and adapt its investments as new opportunities emerge. Although the legislation has not advanced, it received support from the University of California, the United Auto Workers, and the Union of American Physicians and Dentists. Similar legislation is likely to be considered in the future.
A "No" vote does not reject science. It rejects an inefficient financing mechanism and a fragmented approach to setting research priorities. California can and should support medical research through more coordinated, sustainable policies.
Robert M Kaplan, Ph.D.
Respuesta al argumento en contra
De quienes apoyanFirmado por Andrew Dale, Anne M. Holloway, and Chris Tarver. Toque para leer.
YES ON PROP. 38 IS VITALLY NEEDED FOR LIFE-SAVING IMMUNOLOGY MEDICAL RESEARCH
Today, breakthrough immunotherapies are already curing cancers like melanoma, lung cancer and leukemia. Promising research is underway to cure and prevent diseases including Alzheimer's, heart disease, Parkinson's, ALS and more.
MASSIVE FEDERAL FUNDING CUTS ARE THREATENING PROGRESS TOWARD LIFE-SAVING CURES
YES on 38 will ensure California universities and nonprofit research institutions can continue vitally needed immunology research to cure and prevent the most debilitating diseases.
"Immunology saved my life - I now live cancer-free, and it could save millions of other lives too."
- Andrew Dale, Immunotherapy Patient and Cancer Survivor
YES ON 38 IS DESIGNED TO PAY FOR ITSELF - WITH NO COST TO TAXPAYERS
Ten percent (10%) of revenue from licensing immunotherapies must be returned to California to offset bond costs. These requirements are locked into this measure.
YES ON 38 MANDATES STRONG ACCOUNTABILITY & TRANSPARENCY
- 2% Cap on State Administrative Expenses
- Public Disclosure of Spending
- Independent Financial Audits
YES ON 38 LOWERS HEALTHCARE COSTS
Immunotherapies developed through Prop. 38 must be provided to California patients at 20% discount. Preventing and curing diseases will also save families and the state billions of dollars in long-term healthcare expenses.
DOCTORS, NURSES AND PATIENT ADVOCATES URGE YES ON 38
• Alzheimer's Association • American Nurses Association\ California • ALS Association • Kidney Cancer Association • Melanoma Research Alliance • National Multiple Sclerosis Society • The Michael J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson's Research ... and many more.
Support Life-Saving Cures. Please Vote YES on 38.
www.YESon38.com
Andrew Dale, Cancer Survivor
Santa Monica
Anne M. Holloway, Board Member
The Michael J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson's Research
Chris Tarver, R.N., President
American Nurses Association\California
Qué posición tienen los grupos
Todos los grupos de nuestra lista, por categoría. Cada posición enlaza a la guía publicada por el propio grupo.
Definiciones de las etiquetas Las citas son las propias palabras de cada grupo, copiadas exactamente.
Partidos políticos
10 grupos
Los partidos estatales y del condado son grupos separados y pueden tener posiciones distintas.
American Independent Party
Sin posición
American Independent Party Su guía, revisada el 15 de octubre de 2026California Democratic Party
Sí
Sus palabras: "Proposition 38: Support"
California Democratic Party Fuente, revisado el 15 de oct. de 2026California Republican Party
Sí
Sus palabras: "Prop 38: Support"
California Republican Party Fuente, revisado el 15 de oct. de 2026Green Party of California
No
Sus palabras: "NO on Prop 38: Immunology and Immunotherapy Research Funding"
Green Party of California Fuente, revisado el 15 de oct. de 2026Green Party of LA County
Sin posición
Green Party of LA County Su guía, revisada el 15 de octubre de 2026LA County Democratic Party
Sí
Sus palabras: "STATEWIDE Prop 38 Authorizes bonds for immunology research. Initiative statute. YES"
LA County Democratic Party Fuente, revisado el 15 de oct. de 2026LA Hispanic Republican Club
Sin posición
LA Hispanic Republican Club Dónde buscamos (revisión: 18 de oct. de 2026)Libertarian Party of California
No
Sus palabras: "Bonds for Immunology Research ❌ NO"
Libertarian Party of California Fuente, revisado el 15 de oct. de 2026Peace and Freedom Party
No
Sus palabras: "Proposition 38 - NO - would issue bonds to establish an Immunology and Immunotherapy Research Institute affiliated with the University of California."
Peace and Freedom Party Fuente, revisado el 18 de oct. de 2026Republican Party of LA County
Sí
Su herramienta muestra: Prop 38: YES
Republican Party of LA County Fuente, revisado el 15 de oct. de 2026
Medios de noticias
5 grupos
Estos son los únicos medios de noticias que encontramos con respaldos publicados para esta elección. Sugiera otro.
Knock LA
No
Sus palabras: "State Measure 38: No"
Knock LA Fuente, revisado el 18 de oct. de 2026La Opinión
Sí
Sus palabras: "La Opinión apoya la Proposición 38 y exhorta a sus lectores a votar por ella."
La Opinión Fuente, revisado el 18 de oct. de 2026Los Angeles Daily News
No
Sus palabras: "Proposition 38: No"
Los Angeles Daily News Fuente, revisado el 15 de oct. de 2026Los Angeles Sentinel
Sí
Sus palabras: "Prop 38 | YES"
Los Angeles Sentinel Fuente, revisado el 18 de oct. de 2026Los Angeles Times
Sin posición
Los Angeles Times Dónde buscamos: la página de editoriales del LA Times (revisión: 18 de oct. de 2026)
Sindicatos
9 grupos
California Labor Federation
Neutral
Sus palabras: "Prop 38: Authorizes Bonds for Immunology Medical Research No Recommendation"
California Labor Federation Fuente, revisado el 15 de oct. de 2026California Teachers Association
Sin posición
California Teachers Association Su guía, revisada el 15 de octubre de 2026LA County Federation of Labor
Neutral
Sus palabras: "Prop 38: Authorizes Bonds for Immunology Medical Research - No Recommendation"
LA County Federation of Labor Fuente, revisado el 15 de oct. de 2026LA County Firefighters Local 1014
Sin posición
LA County Firefighters Local 1014 Su guía, revisada el 18 de oct. de 2026LA/OC Building and Construction Trades Council
Sin posición
LA/OC Building and Construction Trades Council Su guía, revisada el 18 de oct. de 2026Los Angeles Police Protective League
Sin posición
Los Angeles Police Protective League Dónde buscamos (revisión: 18 de oct. de 2026)SEIU Local 721
Sin posición
SEIU Local 721 Su guía, revisada el 18 de oct. de 2026UNITE HERE Local 11
Sí
Sus palabras: "Proposition 38: Authorizes Bonds for Immunology Medical Research | Recommend: YES"
UNITE HERE Local 11 Fuente, revisado el 18 de oct. de 2026United Teachers Los Angeles (UTLA)
Sin posición
United Teachers Los Angeles (UTLA) Su guía, revisada el 18 de oct. de 2026
Organizaciones empresariales
3 grupos
BizFed (LA County Business Federation)
Sin posición
BizFed (LA County Business Federation) Dónde buscamos (revisión: 18 de oct. de 2026)CalChamber
Sin posición
CalChamber Su guía, revisada el 15 de octubre de 2026LA Area Chamber of Commerce
Sin posición
LA Area Chamber of Commerce Su guía, revisada el 18 de oct. de 2026
Grupos cívicos y de buen gobierno
1 grupo
League of Women Voters of California
No
Sus palabras: "Medical research can save lives, but Prop 38 is the wrong way to fund it."
League of Women Voters of California Fuente, revisado el 15 de oct. de 2026
Grupos de causas y defensa
3 grupos
Abundant Housing LA
Sin posición
Abundant Housing LA Su guía, revisada el 18 de oct. de 2026LA Forward
No
Sus palabras: "Proposition 38 - Research bondOppose"
LA Forward Fuente, revisado el 18 de oct. de 2026Sierra Club Angeles Chapter
Sin posición
Sierra Club Angeles Chapter Su guía, revisada el 18 de oct. de 2026
Enlaces oficiales
Sobre el resumen
Resumen redactado con IA a partir del análisis oficial y comparado con él mediante revisión automática. Lea el análisis oficial