We're just over a week away from the election. With an estimated 10,000,000 people expected to vote, we need 5,000,000 votes, plus one, to win this election--a simple majority. I've heard about a third of us are absentee voters, so we've already got hundreds of thousands of votes for Prop. 63 just waiting to be counted.
I just want to thank everyone again for everything you've done. Many ballot initiative campaigns have big financial backers who put in millions of dollars to ensure success. We didn't have that. Ours was a grassroots effort. Most of our money came in donations of $10,000 or less. Much of it came in donations of $25 to $100. Every donation counted.
We'll begin hearing some "No on 63" advertising as we near the election. I've heard their arguments, and I'll tell you that I have not wavered a bit in my commitment to this cause. In fact, I'm all the more committed to the cause because I haven't heard a viable alternative.
I've often said that a ballot measure isn't the perfect way to do this, but it's the only way. I've heard comments that what we are doing through Prop. 63 is a job for the Legislature. Well, I've been a member of the Legislature for six years, and mental health has been my top priority, and I will tell you that it is not a job that is going to get done in the Legislature. Mental health is not a priority for most members of the Legislature, and the state just doesn't have the money in the General Fund to fund a system of integrated services for people with severe mental illness.
And I'll tell you how I came to this conclusion. My first year in office, I introduced AB 34, my first bill, to appropriate money from the General Fund to provide integrated services to people with severe mental illness. I asked for $350,000,000 in that bill. At the end of the very difficult process of working that bill, I got an appropriation of $10,000,000, and that felt like a major success. Because of the success of the AB 34 program in keeping people with severe mental illness out of jail and out of hospitals and off the streets, the appropriation was, in a subsequent fiscal year, increased to $65,000,000, but then later cut back to $55,000,000 because of difficult budget times. Every year, the funding is subject to being cut. And, because of funding limitations, the AB 34 program serves only a fraction of people who qualify for the services. And the children's system of care was blue-penciled by the Governor this year. Maintaining funding for that programs that served children with severe mental illnesses who did not qualify for Medi-Cal and didn't have adequate insurance was a fight in the Legislature every year. Now that money is gone. The promise of a community system of mental health services has remained unfulfilled for almost 40 years.
Prop. 63 will create a dedicated funding source of $600,000,000 to $700,000,000 a year, plus matching funds of an estimated $300,000,000 from the federal government. Prop. 63 will provide the stability in funding that we have needed for decades. Prop. 63 is going to fund a system of "integrated services," recognized as the best practices by President Bush's New Freedom Commission on Mental Health. Prop. 63 will give people with severe mental illness access to the integrated services they need to turn their lives around and to reach their potential in their lives, and I'm talking about services that include job training, peer support, transportation as needed, and housing until they can live independently.
The nonpartisan Legislative Analyst's Office has concluded that investing in mental health will save our state hundreds of millions of dollars in jail costs, law enforcement costs, special education costs, and hospitalization costs. The Governor, in his proposed budget, and President Bush's New Freedom Commission on Mental Health have recognized the success and effectiveness of the AB 34 programs. Yet the state simply does not have the money to make the investment we need in mental health, even if making the investment would save money and human suffering.
Thanks to every one of you who has helped in any way. As we near the election, please keep emailing and telling your friends about Prop. 63. We all know how close elections can be, and every single vote counts. Severe mental illness does not have to mean hopelessness, and we know that. We are just a week away from fulfilling the almost 40-year-old promise of a system of community mental health services. We have the opportunity to put an end to our current "fail first" system. Let's keep pushing.
When I first learned about prop 63 I thought it was a good idea. But the more I think about it, the more disturbed I got.
Why only tax people making over $1,000,000? Why not $100,000? Why not? You would get a lot more money if you taxed people making $100,000.
The reason I think it only goes after people making $1,000,000 is because there are very few people who make that kind of money, so therefore they won't be able to defend themselves against the millions of other voters and prop 63 should pass pretty easily.
I am disturbed because this is a case of the majority population taking advantage of a minority group.
I don't think that the rich will be hurting if they pay an extra 1% tax. Not at all.
But I worry about others using this same tactic to take advantage of other minority groups.
There are so many worhty causes out there: battered women, homeless, alcoholics etc.,
that could use the same logic to fund their needs. Where will it end? Soon the threshold will drop to lower income groups to raise money.
If there is a tax, everyone should pay the tax.
Ethically, the money for noble causes should come from the the pockets of its supporters, not pryed out of the pockets of someone else.
I think Prop 63 is a noble idea that is treading on dangerous water: if Prop 63 can
do this for their cause, why can't other good causes do the same?
Posted by: Rocky | October 25, 2004 at 04:43 PM
I have a question,
How come the cost of mental health is so high? it cost more than a luxury hotel. How come drug companies that make so much profit from each drug and fight to keep them from beeing produced generically get favored in the budgets? HOW COME THERE ARE NO CURES AND THERE IS A HIGH RATE OF MISDIAGNOSIS IN THE FILED? How come the department of Mental Health in California is being investigated by the Justice Department for such flagrant Violations and fraud? why is that money not being used for teh benefit of the patients? If this is for the well being of the mentally ill, how come you have no clearly designated programs? Mental health is your to priority because it is big profit for you and your budies, while the mentally ill still have no housing, not enough access to generic drugs, and squalid conditions.The money never gets to them really. This is just wrong!!!! no I do not want my children to bear the burden of too expensive,corrupt and not workable system that is riddle with fraud. Why can't the proposed budget be audited or inspected? so that the ongoing fraud is not uncovered? if you are going to raise money for mental health, then you sholud make it transparent so we can all see it does go to the benefit of the patients and not just the few pockets. Show us where every cent is spent, as in housing, better medications at lower prices, which can be done, and ocupational training, and better food for the mentally ill, then I'll consider it. Meanwhile a few made rich from the pockets of others who work hard, in the name of unfortunate ones, not a good combination at ALL
Posted by: concerned | October 27, 2004 at 01:54 PM
How come the department of Mental Health in California is being investigated by the Justice Department for such flagrant Violations and fraud? If this is for the well being of the mentally ill, how come you have no clearly designated programs?
Posted by: panorama maker mac guide | November 29, 2011 at 11:17 PM