How about we make a proposition that people that work all day get some help with medical bills because we can barely afford to pay our COPAYS or 30% of our medical bills make it make sense.
@@Babyberto10 Exactly! That "Anyone but Trump" mentality is what got our country into this mess! They voted for this 🤡 only because it wasn't Trump and for no other reason but! People forgot they aren't voting for a PERSON! They are voting for what they stand for. And Trump has done so much for this Country and Kamel'Toe Kamala just stands there and laughs like a idiot. We don't need her another 4 years.
Wrong. A no keeps the current system as is, no additional cost to you. A yes will increase the cost to the taxpayer and increase money given to doctors to bribe them to take on more Medi-Cal patients.
This system is in place now, a yes means we don't have to keep voting on it. No means we keep voting every 2 yrs. And that that money can be spent on other things.
IDK maybe its just me but Universal Health Care seems a lot less convoluted than having these companies dole out their MCO tax to the state, then have the state reimburse them, THEN having the federal gov match that number. Though I guess that's the point. Bureaucracy can never be streamlined.
I currently live in a country with "free healthcare". Most Middle class and upper still pay to avoid tax Levi and the horrible wait lists anyways. The only real plus is free health and DENTAL for kids. Dental and vision are still out of pocket even though they contribute to most health issues. It's not roses no matter which way you go and it's not really free. You just pay for it in tax instead
After watching this video and understanding this proposition a lot more I'll vote yes. I do have concerns about the money that could have been used elsewhere being used more into medi-cal, but ultimately Medi-Cal is essential and quite frankly it doesn't really feel like the rest of the money has been used very well anyways
You will see very little in your service. Medical reimbursement is more to cover drug addicts and migrants receiving benefits. Yes in 34, force AIDS foundation to pick up emergency room expenses from handing out free needles to addicts
I am concerned about not as much money being used to help in other parts of the state but ultimately I'm voting yes because Medi-Cal needs to be more accessible. My wife who is too broken to work a job uses Medi-Cal and I want Medi-Cal to remain strong
Yes, on Prop 35. Dedicate any and all funds for affordable health care for affordable health care workers. No means health care funds from the Feds could be funneled to paying for unnecessary greedy budgets such as police, pensions, tax breaks for the rich, or other lame projects that don't help regular CA residents.
This guy himself said he had to go through a lot of people to figure out this prop. I'm still confused so I feel I won't vote either on this prop like two other props I was confused on. Sounds like a no vote to me as well to be permanent on some tax thing but than a yes because he says "the hope is" to increase medical payments to doctors and clinics so that more doctors except patients. I'm not sure what that will do being just fine with the doctors I'm with currently. Wish I could understand this more but I'm so so confused 😭
@@NatalieJ22 The official sample ballot book says: Short-term state costs between roughly $1 billion and $2 billion annually to increase funding for certain health programs. Total funding increase between roughly $2 billion to $5 billion annually. Unknown long term fiscal effects.
@@austinreeves5221 yeah Newsom is in bed with these private medical companies, this seems similar to the same flaws of Obama care that just allows these private companies to rip off taxpayers even more. Imma vote no on it.
“This initiative hamstrings our ability to have the kind of flexibility that’s required at the moment we’re living in. I haven’t come out publicly against it. But I’m implying a point of view. Perhaps you can read between those many, many lines,”. NBC San Diego 7 source Reading between the lines he is indecisive on this vote not 100% against it.
2:11 So they're hoping that if we give doctors more money, they will accept more Medi-Cal patients. That doesn't sound good. What if we give them more money and they still don't accept more Medi-Cal patients.
Doctors are turning away medi-cal patients bc the paid rate is too low. This is about directing more money into Medi-cal so they pay competitive rates that match private insurance rates.
Why only medical coverage for low income....lets give working people medical too. I dont understand how anyone is elgible for Medi Cal. Min wage is high enough that nobody should qualify unless they dont work or have a large family?
@@lilboisaiyan4997 You are voting on whether or not it will be permanent. Carl DeMaio from Reform California suggests voting NO because it is still a tax on Americans, but finds there are good things in the measure despite this. His hope is that a better measure will come out in the future, rather than making this MCO tax permanent. The tax is due to expire in 2026, so nothing new is coming until then.
Low income doesn't mean for the poor ppl it means those older people that built our country before us that are now on fixed income like retirement social security.
What makes me nervous about this is that it will be both permanent and it could affect peoples insurance premiums. For example the insurance you get from your employer. If premiums go up some people in middle class will be unable to afford higher payments but will make too much to qualify for Medical therefore, could potentially leave people without healthcare. Unless you're high middle class or low income.
The flaw in this argument is that you shouldn't require working for the right companies to get employer provided healthcare. And most of the first world actually all of it besides the US healthcare is provided to everybody through tax dollars and is considerably a lot more affordable than it is here in the US
@@Sly88Frye There is no flaw in the argument. The flaw rather lies in the structure of the healthcare system. Reality is that we don't have that system in place in our country so this is real case scenario for many.
Where I work we have many patients that have medical and drive BMW’s, teslas and have Louis Vuitton wallets where they keep their medical cards. Just saying. I feel bad for the people who really need it but there’s many abusing the system, lying about their income.
It’s is not a new tax. Do you people not research anything at all? It’s a fee charged to MCOs that’s already being charged and will expire in 2026 if not extended.
@TurnTheCameraOff it very much is a tax and as you know it's going to extend it. Doesn't matter if the money comes from the federal or state level, we are the ones fundingnit through taxes. There are no free lunches. Watch Reform California he explained it pretty well.
Why would we allow medical funding to be used for non-medical costs in the first place. Man we really need an audit and efficiency plan smh I’m voting yes balance the books better and stop spending money on the stupid train to nowhere no one likes triains
🆘️ In California, we are voting for propositions and measures that have 4️⃣7️⃣0️⃣ NEW TAXES built into them! Please look at the CA voters guide here on Y.T. from the Reform California Organization. They address each one and advise if it would raise our taxes. VOTE EARLY 🗳
If they up the amount they should force doctors to take so many medicade patients? Like lawyers kinda... theyre doing this in hopes doctors will accept low income patients 😅 As usual everything seems like half an idea
💥BOMBSHELL REPORT from the Transparency Foundation calculates that the total higher costs paid by Californians versus national averages comes to upwards of $28,037 per year! It includes national averages for housing, utilities, food, gas, transportation, healthcare, insurance, childcare, and taxes. Let's vote 🆘️ Red down the ballot‼️
How about we make a proposition that people that work all day get some help with medical bills because we can barely afford to pay our COPAYS or 30% of our medical bills make it make sense.
That would be an amazing idea.
How about no lol
@@Socalkilla how about shut the f up and go on with your day :))))
Yes please!!
Yes! 💯
As soon as he said Newsome opposes this I was for it.
This would make the tax permanent, though. This one isn't about Newsom.
@@tinchothegreat3743reminds me of folks who vote trump just because he’s anti-left and vice versa, ignoring each candidate’s policies, track records.
@@ayblgr3202like Kamala’s track record is any better yeah I’ll vote trump all day
@@Babyberto10🤮
@@Babyberto10 Exactly! That "Anyone but Trump" mentality is what got our country into this mess! They voted for this 🤡 only because it wasn't Trump and for no other reason but! People forgot they aren't voting for a PERSON! They are voting for what they stand for. And Trump has done so much for this Country and Kamel'Toe Kamala just stands there and laughs like a idiot. We don't need her another 4 years.
So either way the money is taken. My choice is either to help old people get the medicine they need or elected officials get hottubs.
So basically whether we vote yes or no, we’re still screwed..
Yep, that's the govt for you
Wrong. A no keeps the current system as is, no additional cost to you. A yes will increase the cost to the taxpayer and increase money given to doctors to bribe them to take on more Medi-Cal patients.
This system is in place now, a yes means we don't have to keep voting on it.
No means we keep voting every 2 yrs. And that that money can be spent on other things.
IDK maybe its just me but Universal Health Care seems a lot less convoluted than having these companies dole out their MCO tax to the state, then have the state reimburse them, THEN having the federal gov match that number. Though I guess that's the point. Bureaucracy can never be streamlined.
I currently live in a country with "free healthcare". Most Middle class and upper still pay to avoid tax Levi and the horrible wait lists anyways. The only real plus is free health and DENTAL for kids. Dental and vision are still out of pocket even though they contribute to most health issues. It's not roses no matter which way you go and it's not really free. You just pay for it in tax instead
@@rubthesleep Rather my taxes go to keeping kids healthy than not
With all the money we sent to Ukraine would could have started free medical programs for USA citizens and free college and then some
After watching this video and understanding this proposition a lot more I'll vote yes. I do have concerns about the money that could have been used elsewhere being used more into medi-cal, but ultimately Medi-Cal is essential and quite frankly it doesn't really feel like the rest of the money has been used very well anyways
You will see very little in your service. Medical reimbursement is more to cover drug addicts and migrants receiving benefits. Yes in 34, force AIDS foundation to pick up emergency room expenses from handing out free needles to addicts
I'm voting NO on PROP 35. Will take another look at this when it comes up again in 2026.
Hey I benefit from prop 35. So I will Vote yes.
I am concerned about not as much money being used to help in other parts of the state but ultimately I'm voting yes because Medi-Cal needs to be more accessible. My wife who is too broken to work a job uses Medi-Cal and I want Medi-Cal to remain strong
Voting yes
Yes, on Prop 35. Dedicate any and all funds for affordable health care for affordable health care workers.
No means health care funds from the Feds could be funneled to paying for unnecessary greedy budgets such as police, pensions, tax breaks for the rich, or other lame projects that don't help regular CA residents.
i understood nothing
Ditto, made no sense to me either.
Just to be on the safe side, im voting no.
@@carlosmontanez1173 I benefited from Prop 35
Vote no
This guy himself said he had to go through a lot of people to figure out this prop. I'm still confused so I feel I won't vote either on this prop like two other props I was confused on. Sounds like a no vote to me as well to be permanent on some tax thing but than a yes because he says "the hope is" to increase medical payments to doctors and clinics so that more doctors except patients. I'm not sure what that will do being just fine with the doctors I'm with currently. Wish I could understand this more but I'm so so confused 😭
then do more research, google is free
No more tax increases! Enough is enough 😖
It’s not an increase. It’s a tax that already exists and it comes from existing federal money
@@NatalieJ22 The official sample ballot book says: Short-term state costs between roughly $1 billion and $2 billion annually to increase funding for certain health programs. Total funding increase between roughly $2 billion to $5 billion annually. Unknown long term fiscal effects.
If Newsome is against 35 ...then I am 4 it
yea we will bascially pay more taxes hence he wants it perm
I wonder if he said no to trick us tho
@@austinreeves5221 yeah Newsom is in bed with these private medical companies, this seems similar to the same flaws of Obama care that just allows these private companies to rip off taxpayers even more. Imma vote no on it.
@@austinreeves5221yep
“This initiative hamstrings our ability to have the kind of flexibility that’s required at the moment we’re living in. I haven’t come out publicly against it. But I’m implying a point of view. Perhaps you can read between those many, many lines,”. NBC San Diego 7 source Reading between the lines he is indecisive on this vote not 100% against it.
2:11 So they're hoping that if we give doctors more money, they will accept more Medi-Cal patients. That doesn't sound good. What if we give them more money and they still don't accept more Medi-Cal patients.
Doctors are turning away medi-cal patients bc the paid rate is too low. This is about directing more money into Medi-cal so they pay competitive rates that match private insurance rates.
They get paid per patient. They won’t any money if they don’t accept patients.
How voting yes to make it permanent will increase funding for the doctors and healthcare providers? Will it be the same as it is now?
The video states that portion of that money is used elsewise, so if it passes all of it would go to doctors, not just part.
Why only medical coverage for low income....lets give working people medical too. I dont understand how anyone is elgible for Medi Cal. Min wage is high enough that nobody should qualify unless they dont work or have a large family?
I have no idea what to choose. If I go ahead and choose the vote for it, and I also voting for the illegals to get it to.
@@lilboisaiyan4997 You are voting on whether or not it will be permanent. Carl DeMaio from Reform California suggests voting NO because it is still a tax on Americans, but finds there are good things in the measure despite this. His hope is that a better measure will come out in the future, rather than making this MCO tax permanent. The tax is due to expire in 2026, so nothing new is coming until then.
It should be free for all like Europe
@@Ayla0993 Remember NOTHING Is FREE ! People Who WORK Really Hard End Paying For People Who CHOOSE Not To Do ANYTHING !
Low income doesn't mean for the poor ppl it means those older people that built our country before us that are now on fixed income like retirement social security.
What makes me nervous about this is that it will be both permanent and it could affect peoples insurance premiums. For example the insurance you get from your employer. If premiums go up some people in middle class will be unable to afford higher payments but will make too much to qualify for Medical therefore, could potentially leave people without healthcare. Unless you're high middle class or low income.
The flaw in this argument is that you shouldn't require working for the right companies to get employer provided healthcare. And most of the first world actually all of it besides the US healthcare is provided to everybody through tax dollars and is considerably a lot more affordable than it is here in the US
@@Sly88Frye There is no flaw in the argument. The flaw rather lies in the structure of the healthcare system. Reality is that we don't have that system in place in our country so this is real case scenario for many.
So if the federal program goes away we’re just stuck paying it ourselves?
Where I work we have many patients that have medical and drive BMW’s, teslas and have Louis Vuitton wallets where they keep their medical cards. Just saying. I feel bad for the people who really need it but there’s many abusing the system, lying about their income.
It’s your professional responsibility to report Medi-Cal fraud and abuse to the CDPH. This is on you if you’re witnessing it and doing nothing.
No new taxes period. We need to strip down our government spending. They waste our taxes.
It’s is not a new tax. Do you people not research anything at all? It’s a fee charged to MCOs that’s already being charged and will expire in 2026 if not extended.
@TurnTheCameraOff it very much is a tax and as you know it's going to extend it. Doesn't matter if the money comes from the federal or state level, we are the ones fundingnit through taxes. There are no free lunches. Watch Reform California he explained it pretty well.
Why would we allow medical funding to be used for non-medical costs in the first place. Man we really need an audit and efficiency plan smh I’m voting yes balance the books better and stop spending money on the stupid train to nowhere no one likes triains
VOTING YES ON 35
Planned Parenthood supports this.
Doesn’t apply to me so I’ll for for my family
🆘️ In California, we are voting for propositions and measures that have 4️⃣7️⃣0️⃣ NEW TAXES built into them! Please look at the CA voters guide here on Y.T. from the Reform California Organization. They address each one and advise if it would raise our taxes.
VOTE EARLY 🗳
No on 35
So the governor only opposes it because it would mean he can’t use it for things it’s not meant to pay for?
Exactly voting yes.
So then he’ll find a way to tax something else or raise prices on something else instead?
If they up the amount they should force doctors to take so many medicade patients? Like lawyers kinda... theyre doing this in hopes doctors will accept low income patients 😅
As usual everything seems like half an idea
ahh .. so Gavin needs a lot of that money to pay for the overwhelming Debt California is in -
If it passes, I wonder where Gavin Newton will try to take the money from 😅
did you watch the video?
💥BOMBSHELL REPORT from the Transparency Foundation calculates that the total higher costs paid by Californians versus national averages comes to upwards of $28,037 per year! It includes national averages for housing, utilities, food, gas, transportation, healthcare, insurance, childcare, and taxes. Let's vote 🆘️ Red down the ballot‼️
Voting blue down the ballot😊💙💙💙