A growing coalition says No on Proposition 38.

Editorial endorsement · October 14, 2026

Santa Cruz Sentinel

“Vote No on deceptive Proposition 38”

The Santa Cruz Sentinel recommends voting No on Proposition 38 in its October 14 editorial, titled ‘Vote No on deceptive Proposition 38.’

Editorial endorsement

San Francisco Chronicle

“Prop 38 is one of the most noxious deposits on California’s political dung heap in years.”

The Chronicle editorial board rejects a measure that would steer $4.2 billion to a new institute with no track record, incomplete facilities and no public strategic plan.

Editorial endorsement

Santa Barbara Independent

“We do know a sweetheart deal when we see one.”

The Independent recommends a No vote, warning that Proposition 38 would effectively guarantee half the bond proceeds to the institute founded by its biggest financial backer and illustrating how special interests have usurped California’s proposition process.

Editorial endorsement

Sacramento Bee / McClatchy California

“Proposition 38 is a sleeper on the ballot. California voters should beware.”

McClatchy’s California editorial board warns voters to scrutinize an $8.4 billion borrowing proposal that would direct half its proceeds to a single UC-affiliated institute.

Editorial endorsement

Bay Area Reporter

“We support science, but Prop 38 is not the way to do it.”

The Bay Area Reporter editorial board recommends a No vote, pointing to the measure’s $4.2 billion allocation to one unnamed institute and calling California’s broader, more transparent research-funding alternative the better route.

Editorial endorsement

San Diego Union-Tribune

“An $8.4 billion wolf in sheep’s clothing.”

The Union-Tribune editorial board urges Californians to vote No on Proposition 38.

Civic organization

League of Women Voters of California

“Medical research can save lives, but Prop 38 is the wrong way to fund it.”

The League warns that Proposition 38 would commit taxpayers to decades of debt while locking billions of dollars into one field of research.

Democracy organization

California Common Cause

“No on Proposition 38”

California Common Cause has confirmed its opposition to Proposition 38, adding a leading democracy and government-accountability organization to the coalition urging a No vote.

Voter-guide recommendation · October 20, 2026

Knock LA

“This is a total corruption of the ballot process and not how we should be funding medical research. Vote no.”

Knock LA’s statewide ballot-measure guide recommends No on Proposition 38, citing narrowly drawn eligibility rules that favor the institute chaired by the measure’s chief funder. Knock LA is a project of Ground Game LA.

Voter-guide recommendation · Staff consensus

Consumer Watchdog

“Something stinks about two billionaires getting taxpayers to pay for their pet project, especially when the measure doesn’t disclose that.”

Consumer Watchdog’s 2026 initiative guide recommends No on Proposition 38, citing eligibility rules that favor one institute and its role in allocating the remaining funds. The guide describes its picks as a staff consensus.

Progressive organization

“Proposition 38 invests billions in potentially important research, but does so through a model that forces us to bear the cost while getting a fraction of the benefits.”

DSA San Francisco recommends a No vote, arguing that publicly financed medical research should prioritize public benefit and that intellectual property produced with public money should remain publicly owned.

Independent voter guide

GrowSF

“Research is a good cause—and that is exactly why it deserves better than a bond one donor wrote around his own institute.”

GrowSF recommends a No vote, citing Proposition 38’s institution-specific eligibility rules, restrictions on competitive grants and $500 million to $600 million in annual General Fund debt payments.

Statewide voter-guide recommendation

California Democratic Socialists of America

“This proposition is pretty naked self-dealing by wealthy individuals.”

California DSA’s statewide voter guide recommends a No vote, arguing that voters should not commit billions in public debt through an initiative constructed around one private institution.

Regional voter-guide recommendation

Inland Empire Democratic Socialists of America

“Proposition 38 — Recommend: NO”

Inland Empire DSA’s 2026 voter guide recommends a No vote on Proposition 38.

Independent civic voice

Citizen Bean

“No on Proposition 38”

Citizen Bean recommends a No vote on Proposition 38 in its independent election coverage on Instagram.

Individual recommendation

Tom Steyer

“Not the Right Way to Fund Medical Research”

Steyer recommends voting No on Proposition 38, arguing that its narrow funding rules exclude many of California’s most promising research initiatives. He favors the broader, more inclusive research bond passed by the Legislature for a future ballot.