Your guide to Proposition 38: Immunology and immunotherapy research funding

Within the first few weeks of the Trump Administration’s return to the White House last year, the president criticized and targeted congressionally approved funding for science, medical and other federal research grants.

The president froze or terminated an estimated $3 billion in research grants from agencies that include the National Institutes of Health and National Science Foundation, and at least half remained frozen or canceled at the beginning of this year, according to the Brennan Center for Justice. A more recent study found that of $177 billion in federal grants the president froze across the U.S., at least $126 million was for medical and science research for California, according to a tracking tool created by the States United Democracy Center and Grant Witness organization.

To backfill some of the loss in research funding, proponents say Proposition 38 will create a stable source of funding for scientists and medical experts. If approved by the voters, the measure will provide $8.4 billion in funding for immunology and immunotherapy research that aims to cure and prevent cancer, heart disease and Alzheimer’s disease.

California

Voter guide to the 2026 California general election

California’s general election takes place on Novemer 3. Learn about L.A.’s city and county races as well races for state office.

Oct. 1, 2026

Nationwide, medical research and development are funded by both private companies and government agencies such as the National Institutes of Health.

In California, voters previously approved additional funding resources, Proposition 71 in 2004 and Proposition 14 in 2020 for stem cell research, according to the Legislative Analyst’s Office. The propositions granted the state authority to issue a combined $8.5 billion in general obligation bonds — a loan that’s repaid with interest over time.

Proposition 38 would authorize the state to issue $8.4 billion in bonds to fund immunology and immunotherapy research to uncover treatments that help the immune system fight diseases such as cancer more effectively.

The measure would require at least $4.2 billion of the funds to be used for immunology research on cancer, heart disease and Alzheimer’s disease.

It also would authorize the state to enter a partnership with an immunology and immunotherapy research institute selected by the California Department of Public Health and allocate half of the bond revenue to it.

The remaining funds would be used for competitive research grants that focus on immunology and immunotherapy; the grants would be awarded by a council of representatives from University of California campuses, universities and nonprofit research institutions.

Californians would take on an increased cost of $500 million to $600 million annually to repay the bond for about 20 years, according to the Legislative Analyst’s Office.

It’s difficult to predict whether the state could receive any revenue from the research funded by Proposition 38. That depends on how many, if any, research projects lead to marketable treatments.

Fundraising data will be updated regularly until the election.

Leading the campaign in support of the proposition is YES on 38: Californians for Life-Saving Immunology Research and Cures.

The group has received endorsements from the ALS Assn., Alzheimer’s Assn., American Nurses Assn. of California, California Black Health Network, Source LGBTQ+ Center and Parkinson Assn. of Norther California.

The group touts that Proposition 38 will make California “a national leader in groundbreaking medical research,” according to the campaign website.

Susan Disney Lord, board co-chair of Alzheimer’s Los Angeles, said the proposed measure offers hope by supporting “breakthrough immunology research that would change the future for millions of people.”

Chris Tarver, president of the American Nurses Assn. of California, said she’s witnessed the need for continued research in immunotherapy research and supports the measure.

“As a daughter of a lung cancer survivor who had one year of immunotherapy, and as a registered nurse, I have seen firsthand the value of immunotherapy,” Tarver said in a statement.

Spearheading the campaign in opposition of Proposition 38 is Robert Kaplan, senior scholar at the Clinical Excellence Research Center at Stanford School of Medicine, and David Panush, who served as a senior health policy and budget advisor to five state Senate presidents.

Kaplan stated, “As written, Proposition 38 is deceptive,” because the proposed criteria for awarding the grant funding would appear to create an extremely minuscule pool of qualified recipients.

To qualify, a recipient institution must be established since Jan. 1, 2025 and have at least 200,000 square feet of research space it controls. From that start date, the recipients also must have an affiliation agreement with a University of California campus and be affiliated with a UC Health system that records more than 35,000 inpatient admissions and 3.5 million outpatient visits annually. The qualification requirements also include having identified at least $250 million in philanthropic support and securing two $50-million commitments for designated research programs.

Kaplan argues medical research grants should be awarded through a competitive process that gives all applicants equal opportunity. Instead, his campaign states, only the California Institute for Immunology and Immunotherapy, co-founded by billionaire Gary K. Michelson, would qualify under the proposed criteria. In a Cal Matters report, a UCLA spokesperson confirmed that among all nonprofit entities affiliated with the school, “only the California Institute for Immunology and Immunotherapy could satisfy the stipulations of Prop. 38.”

Robin Swanson, spokesperson for the Yes on 38 campaign, said that “lots of institutions would qualify for funds under this measure.”

“But it is very likely that [the California Institute for Immunology and Immunotherapy], which is a research institute affiliated with UCLA, will qualify for half of the funds under the current criteria,” she added during a virtual news conference in mid-September.

Swanson said it is likely that other research institutions from Stanford, Scripps Research , USC and Cedars Sinai will qualify for the other 50% of funds, “and that really is we wanted to ensure that we had research institutes that were ready to hit the ground running.”

Ultimately, she said, the decision lies with the California Department of Public Health.

Michelson’s institute first became a nonprofit in 2022, and the co-founder has donated at least $120 million to the research organization. The billionaire is the board chair of the institute, which is housed at a research center owned by UCLA, according to the opposition campaign.

The Vote No on Prop 38 campaign also argues against the financial model of the measure, saying a bond would saddle taxpayers with decades of debt and any potential future revenue from the research is uncertain.

Proposition 38 aims to fill the gap in immunology and immunotherapy research funding amid federal funding cuts by the Trump Administration.