People who experience trauma and end up in foster care are more likely to suffer from chronic health conditions later in life, according to a new study.

Researcher Keri Vartanian, with the Providence Center for Outcomes Research and Education, said the fact that foster kids experience trauma isn’t surprising.

“What we found surprising was the extreme prevalence of trauma in this population," she said. "Every single measure of adversity that we looked at in childhood was significantly more prevalent in the foster care population.”

Vartanian's study found half of the kids who were in foster care at some point reported physical, verbal or sexual abuse. They also reported being far from prepared to live on their own afterwards.

The study also found they were more likely to experience poor physical health, mental illness, food insecurity and housing problems.

A spokeswoman with Oregon's Child Welfare office said the report does not include date from children currently in foster care, so it wouldn’t be appropriate to comment.

The Portland area coordinated care organization Health Share commissioned the report, saying it’s trying to improve care for people who’ve been through the foster care system.

Opponents of a recent Oregon bill to fund healthcare through a new tax submitted signatures Thursday to get a referendum against the tax on the ballot.

The group of Republican lawmakers opposing the tax submitted many more than the need 58,789 signatures to put Referendum 301 on the ballot.

It’ll be a while before the state has verified the signatures, but even supporters of the tax believe the referendum will make it to the ballot.

“We’re expecting that signatures will be filed [Thursday],” said Meg Niemi, president of SEIU Local 49, which wants to see the funding continue. “We would see it as a victory if they weren’t. But we are expecting that signatures will be filed to qualify Referendum 301.”

A referendum would give Oregon voters the chance to vote on the healthcare funding bill passed by lawmakers early this year. House Bill 2391 was designed to maintain insurance for more than 350,000 low-income people.

The bill generates the money to pay for expanded Medicaid coverage in Oregon by imposing a $670 million tax on health insurers and providers, many of whom supported the idea in the Legislature.

The tax would also fill a large portion of the state’s 2017-19 budget hole. Opponents of the bill say it will increase health care costs in the state.

Karen Escobar is a Medicaid recipient from The Dalles. She has bipolar disorder and schizophrenia. At a rally in Portland Thursday, she said without medication she’s suicidal and can’t even boil water, because she forgets what she's doing.

“The doctors prescribe medication, Medicaid pays for it. And I’m able to live on my own," she said. "Without that, I don’t know where I’d be."

Escobar is hopeful that people will vote in favor of keeping the funding package.

West Linn Republican Rep. Julie Parrish launched the statewide effort to derail the tax soon after H.B. 2391 passed.

She said voters deserve the right to decide whether to shift costs for “a failing program.” Parrish also said she doesn’t like the idea of hard-wiring health care taxes into the law.

At this point the referendum wouldn’t mean all the taxes raised by H.B. 2391 would end, but about $330 million is on the line. If the referendum does get to voters, it’s not easy to understand. For example here’s the title as it stands:

“Provides funds currently budgeted to pay for healthcare for low income individuals and families and for stabilizing health insurance premiums, using temporary assessments on insurance companies, some hospitals and other providers of health insurance or health care coverage.”

A "yes" vote would approve the tax. A "no" vote would save money, but put the health insurance of 350,000 Oregonians in jeopardy, according to the tax supporters.

“They absolutely could be kicked off completely,” said Patty Wentz with the health care coalition.

“We’ve done it in the past. There’s no reason to think we wouldn’t do it again. Oregon used to have a health care lottery where we would draw names to determine who would have health care," Wentz said. "There’s no reason to think we wouldn’t go back to that if we didn’t have the funding.”

If Parrish’s signature gathering is successful, H.B. 2391 would automatically go on hold until a vote in January 2018.

The Legislature pulled the vote to January, instead of November 2018, because the earlier ballot gives lawmakers a chance to react in the February session if necessary.

Editor's Note: This story has been updated to reflect the number of valid signatures needed to qualify Referendum 301 for the ballot.

A researcher at Oregon Health and Science University has reportedly become the first in the United States to genetically modify a human embryo, according to a report from the MIT Technology Review. 

The report, published Wedesday, says OHSU researcher Shoukhrat Mitalipov successfully used the gene editing technology CRISPR to alter human DNA in single-cell embryos.

OPB was not immediately able to independently confirm the breakthrough. But Mitalipov's research, if it passes peer review, would be a significant step for American scientists.

"To date, three previous reports of editing human embryos were all published by scientists in China," freelance journalist Steve Connor wrote, outlining the stakes of the research. "Mitalipov is believed to have broken new ground both in the number of embryos experimented upon and by demonstrating that it is possible to safely and efficiently correct defective genes that cause inherited diseases."

Successfully altering genes in embryos could theoretically allow scientists to cures diseases, including cancer.

But critics of the CRISPR technology say it could open the door to the world of designer babies — where parents can select for specific traits in their child.

According to the Technology Review, past efforts by U.S. scientists to use CRISPR have been inconsistent and resulted in "editing errors" that gave weight to arguments the technique "would be an unsafe way to create a person."

For now, federal regulations have banned allowing a genetically-modified human embryo to develop into a baby.