The cell phone seems to have become a necessity for almost everystudent, and a look around campus proves it.

In the hallways, classrooms, cars and even inbathrooms &- it is hard not to find someone with a cell phonepressed to their ear.

This November, emergency healthcare providersare hoping to cash in on California’s obsession with talkingwith an initiative that would tax phone bills to pay for emergencycare. The move has prompted anger from some who claim telephoneservice is completely unrelated to healthcare.

The measure, called “From 911 Call to911 Care,” would add a 3 percent tax on all cellular,business and residential phone bills in California. The revenuefrom the tax goes towards improving emergency services in thestate.

The measure caps the surcharge to $.50 forresidential phone bills, and exempts seniors and others who qualifyfor discount telephone services and basic life-linerates.

However, surcharges on cell phones andbusiness lines would not be capped, and the tax would amount to 3percent of the total monthly phone bill. For example, a $60 cellphone bill would be taxed an additional $1.80 a month to help payfor emergency healthcare.

Supporters of the initiative claim the measureis necessary right now because the emergency care system is overlystressed and under funded, resulting in long waits in emergencyrooms and the closing of emergency rooms and clinics.

Peter Warren, the spokesman for the CaliforniaMedical Association, a group which represents physicians, said morethan half a billion a year in emergency medical services goesunpaid by those who need emergency care but are uninsured.

Under both state and federal law, any personin need of emergency medical care cannot be denied service,regardless of their ability to pay. As a result, hospitals andclinics have had to close as many as 60 emergency rooms in the pastdecade.

Warren said he is confident Californians willpass the measure once they realize emergency care is at stake, andcan be preserved for what amounts to “pennies a day.”Warren said the tax is “not a tremendous amount” whencompared to the benefits of improved emergency care.

The measure has telephone companies on thedefense, and many have joined an aggressive campaign to help defeatthe measure.

“This amounts to a $540 million tax ontalking,” said Todd Harris, the spokesman for Californians toStop the Phone Tax, a coalition composed of business andtelecommunications interests that is leading the effort to quashthe measure.

Harris said the biggest problem with theinitiative is that it is misleading to voters.

“The money from the initiativedoesn’t go where people believe it will go,” Harrissaid. “They call it the 911 initiative, but less than 1percent of the money actually supports the 911 call system. Themajority of the money goes to big hospitals and there is nomandatory audit to see how it is spent.”

Margaret Felts, a spokeswoman for theCalifornia Telephone Association, a trade association for localcarriers, said the measure is unfair because it is chargingtelephone users for medical services.

“The two are completely unrelated andthere is no reason why medical care should be supported with taxesfrom phone bills,” Felts said. “The initiative hasnothing to do with telephone services.”

Warren, the representative for physicians,said the only reason the phone companies are fighting the measurewith such force is because they want to be the only ones able toraise ratesC.

“It’s all about phone companiesbanding together to victimize Californians,” Warren said.”SBC is based in Texas, yet they want to tell California howto run our economy and our services.”

The claim by the telecommunications industrythat medical services and telephone services are unrelated issimply not true, Warren said.

“When people dial 911 they expect thephone to be answered quickly and they expect the call to lead toemergency care and eventually to a hospital and to a doctor,”Warren said. “It is allconnected.”