The supporters of Proposition 78 are really worried about Prop 79 passing. And with good reason. Should Prop 79 pass Big Pharma won't have the luxury of voluntary participation in reducing drug prices or profit from the cash-cow also known as Medi-cal. And this is the heart of the competing ballot propositions, whether pharmaceutical companies can continue to put profits before patients or the voters decide to put themselves before the corporations.
The battle on the airwaves consist of "vote no on Prop 79" commercials paid for by Big Pharma. In these commercials they talk about how their paid expert by the name of William G Hamm did a study on the costs of Proposition 79, which contains many qualifying statements involving the use of the word "could" as in the following example; "Prop 79 could cost the state more" as compared to Prop 78. It could, then again, it is more than likely Prop 79 could cost less and that is what Big Pharma is really worried about.
And as I have been posting from the beginning, don't take my word in opposition to Propositions 74, 75, 76, 78. Read the language contained in the various propositions if you have any doubts as to who will profit from the passage of these propositions that the Governor of California and his campaign contributors support. Do you actually believe that these corporations are really interested in putting the needs of patients before their profits? Before you answer that just remember that Big Pharma spends more on lobbyists than they do on research.