Proposition 3 on the California ballot seeks $1 billion to upgrade children’s hospitals in the state.

Certainly it would be hard to argue against the need to provide the best possible medical treatment for children in California. But in our view, the notion of simply throwing a billion dollars at the children’s’ hospitals and ignoring the greater need for medical care reforms is ignoring the elephant in the hospital ward.

We urge a no vote on Proposition 3.

Five University of California children’s hospitals would be the primary beneficiaries of the measure, including those in Davis, San Francisco, Los Angeles, Irvine and San Diego. The bulk of the money would pay for construction, expansion and remodeling of hospitals that focus on treating children with cancer, heart defects, diabetes, leukemia, sickle cell anemia and cystic fibrosis.

Twenty percent of the money would go to general UC hospitals.

The proposal comes four years after voters approved Proposition 61, which set aside $750 million in bonds for the same purpose. The Proposition 61 money is not completely spent. In fact, nearly half of it has yet to be awarded.

More significantly, Proposition 3 also comes a few years after voters approved $15 billion worth of bonds to bail the state out of what lawmakers call our structural deficit, meaning that the state perennially spends more than it takes in from taxpayers.

With state finances so precarious, voters have to be ever more vigilant about adding to the load of debt. Like other bond measures, with Proposition 3 it will cost $2 to pay off every $1 that goes to address the need.

Furthermore, it seems foolhardy to carve out certain kinds of care for children from the pressing task of sorting out our healthcare priorities and addressing them in a comprehensive fashion.

Vote no on Proposition 3.