Pevita Pearce
HAYWARD, CA – In a stark visual protest against federal healthcare funding cuts and their potential to destabilize hospitals and endanger patient lives, healthcare workers and community advocates staged a "die-in" demonstration outside St. Rose Hospital on Thursday afternoon. The event, organized by SEIU United Healthcare Workers, aimed to draw attention to the severe financial repercussions of federal budget reductions, particularly under H.R. 1, dubbed the "One Big Beautiful Bill" by the Trump administration, and to rally public support for a proposed billionaire tax measure on the upcoming November ballot.
The somber demonstration saw participants lying on the grass, surrounded by mock tombstone props inscribed with messages of financial ruin and loss of life. This symbolic act represented their deep-seated fears regarding the future of healthcare access for Bay Area residents, envisioning a scenario where critical medical services could become inaccessible or unavailable due to the drastic federal funding shortfalls.
This year’s federal spending package has led to a significant reduction in healthcare funding for California, with an estimated $100 billion cut impacting the state’s healthcare system. This has created a substantial $100 million funding gap within the Alameda Health System alone, a critical public health provider serving a diverse and often vulnerable population.
Assemblymember Liz Ortega, a vocal proponent of the billionaire tax measure, addressed the gathered crowd, articulating the perceived consequences of policies influenced by wealthy individuals. "There’s a price to be paid when you have billionaires running our country," Ortega stated emphatically. "It is our children who will not have access to care. It is our mothers who are dying—dying—giving birth."
Ortega urged attendees to cast their votes in favor of Proposition 40, a ballot initiative designed to generate revenue through a tax on the wealthiest individuals. She argued that these billionaires should contribute to closing the critical funding gaps exacerbated by the Trump administration’s budget cuts, emphasizing that the well-being of the community should not be compromised by fiscal austerity at the federal level.
"Yes on 40 because we matter, our lives matter," Ortega declared, underscoring the fundamental human right to healthcare. "In the largest economy, the biggest economy in the world, [and California being] the fourth largest, no one should be denied care. No one should die because they could not access a doctor."
The Assemblymember’s address was delivered from a stage positioned in front of St. Rose Hospital, a facility she helped to secure from a potentially devastating closure in 2024. Two years prior, Ortega, alongside Rep. Aisha Wahab (D-California), played a pivotal role in advocating for the Alameda Health System to acquire the hospital. This acquisition was instrumental in preserving Hayward’s only emergency room, a vital lifeline for the local community.
Further bolstering the hospital’s prospects, Stanford University announced in April a partnership with the Alameda Health System. This collaboration was intended to enhance specialty medical care at St. Rose Hospital, with plans to develop a new inpatient psychiatric unit and strengthen the facility’s long-term financial stability. However, these positive developments were soon followed by the closure of the hospital’s maternity department in 2025, a decision that underscored the ongoing financial pressures facing healthcare institutions.
A prominent sign displayed at the protest site bore the stark message: "Stop Killing Us / Save Healthcare," a testament to the urgency and gravity of the situation as perceived by the demonstrators.
Ortega did not shy away from criticizing what she termed "greed," directing her ire towards the more than 200 billionaires residing in California. "Who needs billions of dollars?" she questioned, implying that such vast personal wealth could be better allocated to support essential public services like healthcare.
The Assemblymember also voiced strong opposition to Propositions 41 and 42, characterizing them as counter-proposals backed by billionaires that could potentially undermine or defeat Proposition 40. The outcome of these ballot measures is seen as crucial for the future funding of healthcare services in the state.
"No parent should have to make a choice about whether to put food on the table or take their sick child to the doctor," Ortega stated, painting a vivid picture of the difficult decisions families may face due to inadequate healthcare funding.
The real-world impact of these funding cuts was articulated by Nastasha Evans, an Alameda Hospital patient access registration lead. Evans described how families and residents in Alameda County are already being forced to make agonizing choices between basic necessities and medical care. She highlighted the immense strain on healthcare workers, citing her own experience of working 14 consecutive days leading up to the protest due to staffing shortages and increased patient loads.
"I’m exhausted, we’re tired. We’re all overworked," Evans shared with the Bay Area News Group. "Every department is burnt out."
Evans provided a stark comparison of patient demographics before and after the federal cuts. Prior to the current year’s budget reductions, her hospital would see a "couple dozen or less" uninsured patients weekly. However, with the erosion of Medi-Cal coverage for Californians, the facility is now encountering "upwards of 18 uninsured patients daily." The prospect of the state failing to pass the wealth tax, she warned, would "make our situation drastically worse."
Echoing these concerns, Justin Kmetz, a radiology technologist with 24 years of service at St. Rose Hospital, expressed profound apprehension about the potential closure of the institution where his children were born and where he has dedicated his career. "I love working here," Kmetz said, underscoring the personal and community value of the hospital. "Healthcare cuts are going to put a lot of hospitals in jeopardy that have lost funding."
Background and Chronology of Healthcare Funding Challenges
The protest at St. Rose Hospital is the culmination of a growing crisis in healthcare funding, exacerbated by federal policy decisions. The passage of H.R. 1, the federal budget legislation, marked a significant turning point, introducing substantial cuts to healthcare programs.
Early 2026: Federal budget proposals begin to outline significant reductions in healthcare funding.
April 2026: Stanford University announces a partnership with Alameda Health System to enhance specialty medical care at St. Rose Hospital, aiming to bolster its services and stability. This included plans for a new inpatient psychiatric unit.
Mid-2026: The federal budget is enacted, including H.R. 1, which leads to an estimated $100 billion cut to California’s healthcare system. This results in a $100 million funding gap for the Alameda Health System.
Late 2026: The impact of these cuts begins to manifest, leading to increased strain on public health systems, staffing shortages, and a rise in uninsured patients.
October 2026: Healthcare workers and advocates, including SEIU United Healthcare Workers, organize a "die-in" protest outside St. Rose Hospital to raise awareness and advocate for the passage of Proposition 40, a proposed billionaire tax, as a potential solution to bridge the funding gap.
The Proposition 40 Initiative: A Proposed Solution
Proposition 40 is presented by its proponents as a vital measure to address the escalating healthcare funding crisis. The initiative proposes to implement a tax on the wealthiest individuals in California, aiming to generate substantial revenue that could be directed towards critical public services, including healthcare. The core argument behind Proposition 40 is that those who have benefited most from the state’s economic prosperity should contribute a larger share to ensure the well-being of its citizens, particularly those most vulnerable to healthcare access issues.
The proposed tax is targeted at individuals with extreme wealth, a demographic that has seen significant growth in recent years. By taxing these ultra-wealthy individuals, proponents hope to create a sustainable funding stream to offset federal cuts and bolster essential services. The projected revenue from such a tax is substantial, offering a potential lifeline to public hospitals and healthcare systems struggling with budget deficits.
Broader Implications and Analysis
The protest at St. Rose Hospital highlights a critical juncture for healthcare in California and potentially across the nation. The federal funding cuts, if left unaddressed, could have far-reaching consequences:
- Increased Patient Mortality and Morbidity: Reduced funding directly impacts the availability and quality of care. Hospitals may be forced to reduce services, postpone essential equipment upgrades, and face staffing shortages, leading to longer wait times for critical procedures and potentially worse patient outcomes. The fear of mothers dying during childbirth, as expressed by Assemblymember Ortega, underscores the life-or-death stakes involved.
- Hospital Closures and Service Reductions: Financial instability can force hospitals, particularly those serving low-income communities, to close their doors or significantly scale back their operations. This would disproportionately affect marginalized populations who rely heavily on these facilities for their healthcare needs. The closure of St. Rose Hospital’s maternity ward is a concrete example of such service reductions.
- Strain on Healthcare Workforce: The existing healthcare workforce is already facing immense pressure. Funding cuts exacerbate staffing shortages, leading to burnout and increased stress among medical professionals. This can further compromise the quality of care and lead to experienced professionals leaving the field. The testimonies of Nastasha Evans and Justin Kmetz illustrate this pervasive exhaustion and concern.
- Economic Impact: The healthcare sector is a significant employer. Hospital closures and service reductions can lead to job losses, impacting local economies. Furthermore, a decline in public health can have broader economic consequences, as a healthier population is generally more productive.
- Equity and Access Disparities: The cuts are likely to widen existing disparities in healthcare access. Low-income individuals, the uninsured, and marginalized communities are most at risk of losing access to essential medical services, creating a two-tiered healthcare system where quality of care is dependent on socioeconomic status.
The push for Proposition 40 represents an effort to find a state-level solution to a problem originating from federal policy. The debate surrounding this ballot measure is likely to intensify as November approaches, with significant implications for the future of healthcare access and delivery in California. The success of Proposition 40 could set a precedent for other states grappling with similar funding challenges, while its failure could signal a continued struggle for essential public services in the face of federal budget austerity.
The "die-in" at St. Rose Hospital serves as a powerful reminder that healthcare is not merely a line item in a budget but a fundamental human need with profound societal implications. The voices of healthcare workers and patient advocates are clear: the health and well-being of communities depend on adequate and sustained funding, and the current trajectory risks dire consequences for millions.
©2026 MediaNews Group Inc. Visit at mercurynews.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency LLC.
