Why CHA Withdrew Its Support
The California Healthcare Association was a founding member of the coalition sponsoring Prop. 67. But the association, which represents nearly 500 hospital and health system members, and more than 100 executive, associate, and personal members, withdrew its support in April 2004, after reviewing polling data. It now maintains a neutral position on the proposition.
The need for new sources of revenue to support emergency medical services “is absolutely there,” acknowledges Jan Emerson, CHA’s vice president for external affairs. “But we need to find a solution that is more acceptable to the public. The electorate won’t support anything they perceive to be a tax.”
Emerson explains the change of position: “Our understanding was that the Coalition to Preserve Emergency Care would do polling over more than a year, and then a final go/no go decision would be made after signatures were gathered. Initially, there seemed to be a reasonable chance of success. But after the November 2003 recall election, polling took a dip. And the polls after the March 2004 primary dipped again, indicating we were not likely to succeed.
“The environment has clearly changed since the effort began in 2002,” says Emerson. “Our board took the position that it was not in our best interests to move forward. We were on the hook; we had more financially at stake. We were disappointed that our other partners decided to continue.”
While acknowledging CHA’s official reason for withdrawing, Jack Lewin of the California Medical Association notes, “I suspect they were scared that SBC and the other phone companies would go after the big hospital systems in negative television ads.”
