Proposition 29: Requires on-site licensed medical professional at kidney dialysis clinics and establishes other state requirements

Proposition 29 would create more regulations for kidney dialysis clinics.

It requires them to have a physician, nurse practitioner, or physician assistant on-site during treatment, report infections and who owns the clinic to the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) and public or face a penalty, and obtain consent from the CDPH before closing.

Proposition 29 also prohibits dialysis clinics from denying care to patients based on who is paying for their treatment. The requirement for a medical professional would cost dialysis clinics hundreds of thousands annually, says the LAO. This could lead to clinics raising costs or potentially closing.

“There’s two avenues: keeping [dialysis clinics] open is very important, but it’s also important to have medical professionals there,” Cal High government teacher Alexander Geller said. “If somebody’s not there, that can be life threatening, so it’s a very delicate matter.” 

Opponents, including DaVita, Inc and Fresenius Medical Care which own 75 percent of dialysis clinics, say the measure is unnecessary and would potentially drive some clinics to close. 

Supporters argue that DaVita and Fresenius should care more for patient safety than profit, especially when dialysis leaves patients vulnerable to complications, according to Calmatters. They say Proposition 29’s reporting requirements would increase transparency while its physician requirement would keep patients safer.

Proposition 29 is primarily being pushed by Service Employees International Union-United Healthcare Workers West labor union. This is its third attempt to push regulation for dialysis clinics, according to CalMatters. The proposition is supported by the California Democratic party and opposed by the Republican party.