2003-09-13 -- SB2,  Health Insurance Expansion Passes Legislature


HEALTH ACCESS UPDATE Friday, September 12th, 2003

SB 2 (BURTON) PASSES THE CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE *
Landmark Bill Goes to the Governor

Tonight, the California legislature passed SB 2 (Burton), to extend
coverage to one million uninsured workers. The unofficial vote count
in the Assembly was 46-31, on a strict party-line vote, with
Assembly members Reyes (D) and Maddox (R) abstaining. The Senate vote
was strict party line vote, 25-14. The bill now goes to Governor Davis
for his signature.

The legislature also passed companion legislation, AB 1528
(Cohn/Frommer), "the Health Care Quality Improvement and Cost
Containment Commission," with bi-partisan support.

Over 18 million Californians get health coverage through their
employer; SB 2 would use modest means, using the existing
employer-based system and existing agencies and expertise, to expand
coverage to up to 1 million more. Employers of 50 or more would be
required to pay a user fee into a state health purchasing fund.
Employers would get a full credit against the fee if they provide
coverage to their workers, as the vast majority do now.

SENATE DEBATE

The California State Senate passed SB 2 (Burton) on a party line vote,
25-14, early in the day. The hour-long debate focused mostly on the
potential impact on business, both positive and negative.

AUTHORS: Senate President John Burton began the debate with historical
perspective, indicating that "this has been talked about since Earl
Warren was Governor." Senator Jackie Speier, co-author of the bill,
described how she had been in the emergency room twice that week, once
for her father, the other time for her daughter, and had wondered
"what if I didn't have health insurance?" She stated that "everybody
in this room would be clamoring for this bill if *we* didn't get
health insurance through our employer." She was clear that 95% of
businesses were exempt from the bill, and there would be significant
benefits to businesses.

OPPONENTS: Republican Senators that spoke against included Senator Sam
Aanestad, who again stated that this was a "misuse of the power of the
state," and asked "what about a food mandate, a housing mandate,... a
clothing mandate." Senator Rico Oller called the bill "socialized
medicine, while Senator Jeff Denham said that "the timing of this bill
is very inappropriate." Senator Tom McClintock, running for the
Governor, stated that "every person ought to have access to health
care" but proposed his own plan of "pre-paid tax credits." Senator
Charles Poochigian claimed that the savings from the worker's comp was
"illusory" and that this would further disadvantage business, and
Senator Jim Battin agreed.

SUPPORTERS: Democratic Senators that spoke in favor included Senator
Deborah Ortiz, who called this a "historic opportunity" and compared
it to family leave and the minimum wage. Senator Sheila Kuehl stated
that "this is a very good first step," and there was a strong
"interest of the state in health care" as a "public issue." She raised
her universal health care bill, SB 921, but that was for "another day,
another year, another discussion." Senator Dede Alpert stated that
while she "struggled with this issue," this is a step to fix the
health care problem, and that we have two-three years "to implement
this in the fairest possible way."

ASSEMBLY DEBATE

Assemblyman Dario Frommer introduced the bill, stating that "it is not
often that we can make history." It "builds on our existing system of
employer-based coverage, which now reaches 18 million workers."

SUPPORTERS: Speaking for the measure was Democratic Assembly members
Goldberg, Cohn, Wiggins, Yee, Lowenthal, Hancock, and Parra.
Assemblymember Goldberg talked about the "health care system is in
deep trouble... It is literally falling apart." She stated that to get
to universal coverage, she supported single-payer plan, other
supported other paths, but either way, "I don't think we get there
unless we make this start."

Assemblymember Cohn stated that "if health care was a patient, it
would be on the critical list," and "it is always the right time to do
the right thing." Assemblymember Wiggins also stressed that this is a
"step that is long overdue." Assemblyman Yee focused on the "relief
for local government" that SB 2 would provide.

Assemblyman Lowenthal asked "if legislators opposed to SB 2 would go
without" health insurance themselves. "Do they know where the county
hospital is? Do they want to go there? Do they over-utilize the
system, as has been implied of the insured?" Assemblywoman Parra made
a similar case, that SB 2 would tell "one million Californians they
have the same right as everyone of us on this floor" to get care.

OPPONENTS: Speaking against the measure was Republican Assemblymembers
Cox, Bogh, Richman, La Suer, Mountjoy, Maze, Campbell, Haynes,
Pacheco, Nakanishi, Benoit, Harman, Leslie, Wyland, Samuelian, and
Keene. Republican Leader Cox and other opponents cited that the cost
of this bill would be $7 billion, a Chamber of Commerce number that
has been shown to be widely overblown, double-counting many costs and
not taking into account tax breaks and write-offs. (The California
Medical Association has the cost estimate at $1.9 billion.)

Assemblyman Richman stated that "SB 2 is the wrong way to go" and
warned of "unintended consequences." At least three Assemblymembers
called the plan "socialistic," with Assemblyman La Suer saying that
"this makes Hillary Care look like a right-wing conspiracy."
Assemblyman Mountjoy stated, wrongly, that "lots of folks don't have
insurance, but very few don't get care." Assemblyman Maze was also
mistaken when he agreed, "we already heard that people do have
access." Assemblyman Maze decried policies that made us similar to
"Western Europe. We don't need to go there. We declared our
independence."

Assemblyman La Malfa stated this in discussing SB 2 extending health
coverage, his wife's stated reaction was "why go to college if you are
just going to just give this to anybody with a job?" He himself asked
"when did these things like health care become rights?... One small
step on business, one giant leap toward Hillarycare." Assemblyman
Haynes said that he "was tired of being in the minority," and hoped
that a similar political change would occur similar to the one in
Washington, DC, after the last attempt at health care reform. Assembly
Samuelian said that the California legislature would be "infamous" for
passing such a measure.

Assemblyman Pacheco and Harman focused on the fact that its impact
would be narrowly targeted, exempting 95% of businesses. Assemblyman
Wyland agreed, and gave a more thoughtful opposition than most,
suggesting that "if this was done slowly over time, some businesses
would adjust" to the requirements.

Assemblyman Frommer closed by countering some of the mistaken numbers
used, and by assuring "this is not a reach. This is a common sense
approach." In response to the comparison to the Clinton plan, he
stated that this was far more similar to the plans of two California
Republicans: Governor Earl Warren in 1953, and President Richard Nixon
in 1972.

Anthony E. Wright Health Access
1127 11th St., #234
Sacramento, CA 95814
Ph: 916-442-2308
Fx: 916-497-0921
 awright@health-access.org