The California Chamber of Commerce Board of Directors has taken the following positions on two upcoming ballot measures:
SUPPORT: Proposition 16
Placed on the November 3, 2020 ballot by legislative measure ACA 5 (Weber; D-San Diego), Proposition 16 repeals Section 31 of Article 1 of the California Constitution, which establishes a prohibition on state and local government programs and preferences, based on race or gender or national origin, for hiring, contracting and admission into public higher education institutions.
Section 31 was added by Proposition 209 in November of 1996. The CalChamber did not take a position on Proposition 209.
The CalChamber Board of Directors based its decision to support Proposition 16 on the need to improve diversity and opportunity in California’s public workforce and educational institutions.
OPPOSE: Proposition 23
Appearing as Proposition 23 on the November 3, 2020 ballot, The Protect the Lives of Dialysis Patients Act mandates that each of the roughly 600 dialysis clinics in California have a physician on the premises during all operating hours, in a non-caregiving role.
The CalChamber Board of Directors based its decision to oppose the measure based on the fact that, if passed, Proposition 23 would drive up the cost of health care and reduce care options for sick patients.
A study by the Berkeley Research Group found the measure’s physician requirement would increase dialysis treatment costs by $320 million every year. According to the independent, non-partisan Legislative Analyst, this provision would result in “Increased state and local health care costs…resulting from increased dialysis treatment costs.” These increased costs will be passed on to all Californians in the form of higher insurance premiums and higher taxes for government-sponsored health care.
Other Ballot Measures
The CalChamber Board of Directors previously voted to:
- Oppose Proposition 15: See https://advocacy.calchamber.com/2019/12/16/calchamber-board-votes-to-support-school-infrastructure-bond-oppose-split-roll-ballot-measure-2/
- Support Proposition 20: See https://advocacy.calchamber.com/2020/03/03/calchamber-takes-position-on-november-ballot-measures/
- Oppose Proposition 21: See https://advocacy.calchamber.com/2020/03/03/calchamber-takes-position-on-november-ballot-measures/
- Support Proposition 22: See https://advocacy.calchamber.com/2020/06/05/calchamber-board-of-directors-votes-to-support-the-protect-app-based-drivers-and-services-act-initiative/
4 thoughts on “CalChamber Takes Position on Prop. 16, Prop. 23”
(Commenter ID is a unique per-article, per-person commenter identifier. If multiple names have the same Commenter ID, it is likely they are the same person. For more information, click here.)
No on Prop 16. The poor of all races deserve a chance. Equity should be class based not race based.
Prop 16 reduces competition and increases cost in state contracting. Competitors would be shut out when the state has blank check to select vendors by race.
In fact the main donor to the yes 16 campaign is a blac real estate developer Wayne Jordan who would benefit greatly.
It worries me that free market leader like CalChamer are also hijacked by the ideology of the radical left.
Proposition 16 will strike out and eliminate this language from the California Constitution. No substitute is provided: “The State SHALL NOT discriminate against, or grant PREFERENTIAL treatment to, any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in the operation of public employment, public education, or public contracting.”
If diversity is the goal (according to this article) why eliminate the Constitution that says you cannot benefit one race/gender over another? Why not propose a proposition that says requires diversity? If you specifically prefer one race/gender over another isn’t THAT discrimination?
In the short run, Proposition 16 will hurt Asians given their higher performances in College admissions today. In the long run, it hurts everyone and it hurts our state because Prop 16 will eliminate equal opportunity and fair competition which has made California one of the most prosperous and diversified states in the whole country.
Prop 16 will legalize discrimination and waste tax money to fund the bureaucracy. California doesn’t need it.
Perplexed how anyone who wants fairness can support a proposition whose very basis is to tilt the scales. Particularly surprise and disappointed that the Cal Chamber would take this position.