topnav

Home Issues & Campaigns Agency Members Community News Contact Us

Community News

Open dialogue among community members is an important part of successful advocacy. Take Action California believes that the more information and discussion we have about what's important to us, the more empowered we all are to make change.

Monday, June 30, 2014

Bill again boosting California minimum wage fails

With multiple Democrats not voting, a California Assembly panel on Wednesday rejected a bill that would raise the state's minimum wage beyond the boost agreed to in 2013.
Sen. Mark Leno, D-San Francisco, repeated the arguments that last year drove lawmakers and Gov. Jerry Brown to approve a bill boosting California's minimum wage to $10 a hour by 2016.

Leno's Senate Bill 935 would build on that, pushing the baseline to $13 an hour in 2017 and then allowing the wage to rise along with the cost of living thereafter.

"If we don't support this bill the outstanding question remains: What are we as the state of California going to do about paying poverty wages?" said Leno, who has called last year's legislation inadequate. "The phenomenon of income inequality and wealth inequality only continues to grow."

Business groups warned that Leno's bill could unhinge a faltering economic recovery and asked lawmakers to wait for last year's legislation to take effect. The hike included in 2013's Assembly Bill 10 kicks in on July 1, raising the minimum wage from $8 to $9.

"It is too much, too soon given that AB 10 is just going into effect next week, and we should allow that bill to implement," said Jennifer Barrera, a lobbyist for the California Chamber of Commerce.

That argument resonated with some Democrats on the Assembly Labor and Employment Committee. Assemblyman Luis Alejo, D-Watsonville, the author of last year's minimum wage hike, said Leno's bill would mean reneging on agreements Alejo had made with business interests to not include a cost-of-living adjustment.

"The ink hasn't even dried on AB 10," Alejo said. "You've got to keep your word."
One vote separated the bill from passage. The final tally was 3-2 ( it needed four votes to move on), with Alejo and Assemblyman Chris Holden, D-Pasadena, not voting.

Editor's note: This post was updated at 4:19 p.m. to include the vote total and the fact that the bill was in the Assembly.

PHOTO: Senator Mark Leno, D-San Francisco during session in the Senate chambers in Sacramento, Calif. on Monday, March 11, 2013. The Sacramento Bee/Hector Amezcua.
Read more here: http://blogs.sacbee.com/capitolalertlatest/2014/06/bill-again-boosting-california-minimum-wage-fails.html#storylink=cpy

Saturday, June 28, 2014

How the ACA Can Revolutionize Inmate Healthcare

On May 1, Juan Martinez went to his fourth follow-up appointment since being diagnosed with hepatitis C (HCV) a little over a year ago. Martinez, whose name has been changed to protect his identity, doesn’t know how long he had the virus before his diagnosis. HCV often remains asymptomatic until its late stages, and it had been many years since he had last seen a doctor. The virus was discovered during intake at Hampden County Correctional Center, a jail in western Massachusetts, where he has been an inmate since April 2013.
Martinez looked much older than his 57 years. Wearing a green jumpsuit and government-issued sneakers, he sat as one of the jail’s doctors, Thomas Lincoln, asked him if anything had changed since the last time they saw each other. “I put on weight,” Martinez said in a raspy voice. “You told me to!” They both laugh.
Lincoln looked over Martinez’s file and glanced at a flat screen monitor displaying an electronic version. “You’ll be out in August?” he asked. Martinez nodded. “That’s about time we’ll need to check your blood again.”
Martinez is one of ten million people who enter the local jail system each year in the United States. In contrast to prisons, jails are used to detain people for short-term sentences and low-level offenses, or while awaiting trial for a more serious charge. The average stay in jail is three months and 96 percent of inmates return directly back to their community. Of the more than 1,400 inmates at Hampden, where Martinez was detained, somewhere between 20 and 30 percent carry the HCV virus. Many, like Martinez, are first diagnosed in jail.
As the US incarceration rate has skyrocketed over the last forty years, many healthcare professionals have come to recognize that jails offer an opportunity to identify and treat people who might not otherwise seek or have access to healthcare. “With more than 2.2 million men and women and children behind bars, the health of prisoners and jail detainees and the health of the public is becoming blurred,” says Gabriel Eber, staff counsel at the ACLU’s National Prison Project.
Jail inmates are disproportionately male, people of color and poor. This population suffers from higher rates of many health problems, including chronic and infectious disease, injuries, mental illness and substance abuse. And people are often at their sickest when detained. Eighty percent of detained individuals with a chronic medical condition have not received treatment in the community prior to arrest. “It’s like an emergency room,” says Ben Butler of Community Oriented Correctional Health Services (COCHS), a nonprofit promoting healthcare connectivity between jails and communities, of jail intake. In effect, jails have become the frontline for health problems that plague underserved communities in America.
Exacerbating the problem, once in jail, what treatment happens there stays there. Health records are hard to transfer in and out, leaving patients who have received care prior to arriving in jail with siloed histories, creating inefficient, costly and potentially inconsistent treatment. There is little protocol mandating follow-up care once someone is released—in fact, according to a recent study by The Journal of Urban Health, nationwide only 10 percent of people who qualify for assistance with arranging mental or physical health treatment when they re-enter their community actually receive it.
For twenty-two years, Hampden County’s innovative, collaborative healthcare model has allowed them to combat these problems. The jail, which serves Springfield, Massachusetts, the fourth largest metropolitan area in New England, has made patient care literally continuous: doctors from local public clinics also work several shifts a week in the jail, following patients and meeting new ones. For example, Thomas Lincoln, the director of the program, is an employee of the nearby Brightwood Health Center. He splits his time between there and Hampden. Three other local clinics, covering zip codes in which 75 percent of inmates are from, send doctors into the jail on regular shifts in a similar arrangement—most work one or two half-days a week.
The Hampden County model was conceived of during the AIDS epidemic. When the antiretroviral drug AZT was put on the market in the late 1980s, Lincoln and his colleagues struggled to ensure continuous treatment for HIV-positive people in Springfield. A disproportionately high number of HIV-positive people were frequently in jail, and so, frustrated by being left in the dark about their incarcerated patients’ treatment and progress, the doctors came up with a straightforward solution in a system typically defined by red tape and bureaucracy: they would move part of their practice to the jail.
A key to the program’s success was—and continues to be—the support of Hampden County’s Sheriff Michael Ashe, who began his career as a social worker and is known in the field to be a leader of progressive reform. The healthcare collaboration fit well with the larger model of corrections he was building, which focused on rehabilitation in jail and partnering with community organizations to facilitate inmate’s transition back into the community. “How can you really be dealing with remedial education or job training when you’re dealing with health issues, or substance abuse issues, or mental illness?” Ashe asks. Soon Hampden’s collaborative health program was expanded to include three other community health clinics and to cover all patients, not just those with HIV.
Today, upwards of 90 percent of the HIV patients from Hampden County Jail have follow-up appointments within thirty days of being released. Fifty-five percent of those with less severe medical problems see a provider within thirty days of release, as do 61 percent of those with mental health issues. These numbers should be understood in the context of the chaotic and unpredictable nature of jail release. Half of the inmates at Hampden County Jail are released pretrial—after bail is posted, when charges are dropped, straight from a court hearing and so on—which means that release happens without warning. Many other jails have even higher rates of pretrial release.
Numbers from Hampden County suggest that the program may also be helping to lower incarceration rates. Healthy people are less likely to end up back in jail. The county’s recidivism rates are among the nation’s lowest, and the rate of recidivism within three years of release—a common benchmark of success—has dropped by over 10 percent since the jail’s health system was reformed.
Other localities are taking notice. Programs based on this model have been successfully implemented in Washington DC and Marion County, Florida.
In most communities around the country, however, a chasm between jail health centers and healthcare on the outside persists. While not all jurisdictions have a sheriff with a Masters in social work, or a clinic with doctors who are willing or able to split their time between their hospitals and jails, the Affordable Care Act provides a unique opportunity to address this problem. Prior to the ACA, some 90 percent of those released from prison or jail each year were uninsured. Their primary medical treatment facility outside of prison or jail tended to be the ER. However, with the ACA’s Medicaid expansion in full swing in twenty-six states and Washington DC, 5.3 million people who are or have been incarcerated are newly eligible for Medicaid. The opportunity for continuity in treatment is palpable, and across the country, a movement is brewing among forward-looking jail administrators and healthcare providers to bridge this gap.
The first step in expanding continuous care models like Hampden’s is to get people enrolled in health insurance. Because it is in Massachusetts, which has had a healthcare mandate since 2006, Hampden County is ahead of the curve on this front: 65 percent of inmates are covered by MassHealth, up from 35 percent in 2011. Elsewhere in the country, in states that have less progressive healthcare laws and less experience with the influx of expansion enrollment—that is, every other state—the influx of poor single adults who can be covered by the Medicaid expansion has proven to be an enrollment challenge. According to research by The Urban Institute, as of February many uninsured adults were not aware of the Affordable Care Act’s coverage provisions. Outreach and education is needed to ensure that the newly eligible know what they’re qualified for and how to apply. At Cook County jail in Chicago, jail intake now includes starting the application process for health insurance. “Who is eligible for the Affordable Care Act very much mirrors the population you have in the county jail: low income, single adults. There was a lot of synergy there,” says Dr. John Jay Shannon, interim CEO of Cook County Illinois’s Health and Hospitals System (CCHHS)Similar programs are running in San Francisco, Louisville, and Portland, among other jail systems.
Part of providing continuous care is, of course, providing quality care in the first place, and many jails do not. “Whether it’s resources, whether it’s facilities, whether it’s staff, whether it’s training, we find all too frequently that detainees suffer because systems can’t meet their needs,” says Eber of the ACLU. “The inability to meet the health needs of prisoners and detainees is a direct result of the over-reliance on incarceration in this country. If we didn’t have as many people in prisons we wouldn’t have the crisis that we have in healthcare in prisons and jails.” In recent years the ACLU has charged several facilities with failing to do provide adequate care, including a 2012 class-action lawsuit in Arizona. Enrolling inmates in Medicaid would offset some of the costs of providing better care.
The next crucial step in achieving continuous care is connecting people to a provider once they have been released. As with Hampden, the discharge process itself can be chaotic and hard to predict. Nationwide, local jails process 13 million admissions per year, which includes many people with multiple admissions. “We hear stories of people who literally are discharged at two in the morning. It’s very difficult to maintain contact with someone who is cycling in and out of the county jail,” says Steven Glass, executive director of managed care for CCHHS. On average 100,000 inmates cycle through Cook County jail every year; the daily population is 9,000. “It doesn’t mean we can’t solve it, and it doesn’t mean we’re not trying very hard,” he adds.
In an effort to address this problem, some systems are looking to health information technology to track itinerant patients. Like the medical centers in their communities, a growing number of jails have upgraded to electronic medical records. With electronic health records a patient’s comprehensive medical history can be made accessible to doctors both inside jail and out, with the click of a mouse. Upgrading to electronic records is not an easy process in any setting, but it is even more difficult to find record systems that work for the type—and volume—of data that is recorded in jails. “It’s inpatient, it’s outpatient, it’s emergency room, it’s rehab,” explains Ben Butler from COCHS, the nonprofit that works at the nexus of public health and public safety.
Electronic records are only as useful as the number of people who can receive and input data into them. To this end, health information exchanges (HIEs) are of vital importance. HIEs are electronic databases for patient records, which can be accessed by healthcare providers and patients. Under the 2009 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, every state was awarded money to develop the ability to exchange health information across the healthcare system, both within and across state lines. Some states run their own databases, others partner with private companies to do so—some have been successful, others less so. Today every state has at least one functioning HIE, while several states—New York, Michigan, Texas and Florida—have more than ten, according to the Healthcare Information and Management Systems Society (HIMSS), a non-profit focused on health IT. More does not necessarily mean better. Delaware, for example, has only one database, but is considered among the best in the country because it encompasses so many providers, including not just hospitals but also specialists such as radiologists.
Some jail systems are now working to get onboard their local HIE. A perhaps unexpected leader in this field is Kentucky. The state’s exchange, Kentucky Health Information Exchange (KHIE), is among the most comprehensive in the country. Launched in 2010, KHIE connects many of the state’s largest providers and makes strategic partnerships with national organizations such as HIMSS. One of the state’s largest jails, Fayette County, is in the late stages of fully integrating its record system into the exchange.
Rodney Ballard, Fayette County Jail’s director, says administrators at KHIE were open to working with the jail when he approached them. “I said, well, 24,000 people come through my door every year, 865 people are on medication every day.” Mental health doctors at Fayette see around ninety inmates a day; nurses see 194. “They said, ‘hell we’ve got to get you onboard.’”
There were many technical difficulties along the way—including figuring out how to protect sensitive information collected in jail, such as drug abuse history. “In the past, we’ve not done a very good job in jails and prisons talking to healthcare providers about inmate healthcare,” says Ballard. “For one, they call them patients; we call them inmates. Something as simple as that.” Despite these barriers, they had the jail connected in a matter of months. The jail can now push its data onto the exchange, allowing all of the treatments that inmates receive and medications they start to be accessed by doctors in the community should he or she seek treatment upon release. The jail is now working on also receiving data.
Other city and county jails are in late stages of connecting their health record systems with local HIEs, notably New York City; Camden, New Jersey; Orange County, Florida and Multnomah County, Oregon, according to a recent COCHS paper.
As healthcare providers and correctional institutions increasingly recognize that public health and jail health should be treated as one, it is critical for government funding and regulation to follow. In August 2012, the Department of Health and Human Services published new regulations that made correctional institutions eligible to receive incentive payments for using electronic health records under the “meaningful use” program. These incentives were previously reserved for providers who cared for underserved communities outside of correctional walls. The implementation of meaningful use funds comes in three incremental stages as the provider upgrades their health information technology, with an end goal of the provider being capable of joining a HIE.
Funding aside, according to Ben Butler the most important element for success is having all of the key players engaged and supportive: the jail administrators, HIE administrators, the local government and so on. It is, Butler says, a matter of “opening eyes to the potential.”

Friday, June 27, 2014

Agreement on California business property tax bill blows up

It wasn't exactly a chorus of Kumbaya, but a few weeks ago, two lobbyists who have battled each other for decades over property tax policy sat together at a legislative hearing to praise a compromise bill.

Lenny Goldberg, who represents the California Tax Reform Association, praised the bill, which would alter the circumstances under which commercial property could be reassessed for tax purposes, as a "step forward."

"I get a little nervous sitting here with Rex Hime," Goldberg told the Assembly committee considering Assembly Bill 2372, referring to the president of the California Business Properties Association. "He and I have been at it for many, many years." Hime nodded in agreement.

However, when the bill, having passed the Assembly, reached the Senate Governance and Finance Committee on Wednesday, Goldberg pulled his support, saying in a letter to the measure's author, Assemblyman Tom Ammiano, D-San Francisco, that it "does not provide real reform" and would allow business owners to escape reassessment with "slightly more sophisticated steps."

Under current law, adopted after Proposition 13 passed in 1978, business property is reassessed only when it changes ownership in one transaction. Goldberg and other critics have argued that it allows business deals to be structured in ways that avoid reassessment, mostly by never having more than 50 percent to be changed in any one transaction.

AB 2372, hammered out in weeks of private negotiations, says that property can be revalued for taxation when 90 percent changes ownership in a three-year period. It's backed by many business organizations as a way of staving off a long-threatened ballot measure that would create a complete "split roll" that treats business and residential property differently for tax purposes.

"We supported it as a means of opening up the discussion which we have always sought," Goldberg said in an email after Wednesday's hearing and committee approval, "but not as meaningful reform.

"Our concern is that, like many bills in the legislature, it projects the image of reform, allowing business to say, 'we closed the loopholes,' rather than the substance, since it in effect grandfathers in the thousands of properties which have changed ownership without reassessment."

Goldberg complained in his letter to Ammiano that his bill's change should apply retroactively to previous transactions that met its qualifications for reassessment. He also complained about amendments on the Assembly floor made after the hearing at which he appeared with Hime.

Goldberg's pullback drives a wedge between him and Ammiano, who has also been a long-standing champion of changing tax assessments on business property. Whether the split is fatal will depend on what happens when the bill hits the Senate Appropriations Committee and, perhaps, the Senate floor.

Were it to fail in those two venues, back in the Assembly or at Gov. Jerry Brown's hands, the long-pending issue might, indeed, find its way onto the ballot in a split roll initiative.

In a related action, the Assembly Revenue and Tax Committee rejected another business property tax bill, one aimed at making it easier to impose higher parcel taxes on commercial property.

The measure, Senate Bill 1021, would allow local school districts to impose higher parcel taxes on business than it did on residential property. Under current law, parcel taxes must be equal amounts on each parcel regardless of size or value.

SB 1021, carried by Sen. Lois Wolk, D-Davis, won Senate approval but faced stiff opposition from theCalifornia Chamber of Commerce, which labeled it a "job killer," and other business groups, leading to rejection in the Assembly committee.

Wolk introduced the bill after a court ruled a differential parcel tax imposed by one school district to be illegal.

PHOTO: Lenny Goldberg is the executive director of the California Tax Reform Association. Photo courtesy of Lenny Goldberg

Read more here: http://blogs.sacbee.com/capitolalertlatest/2014/06/agreement-on-business-property-tax-bill-blows-up.html#storylink=cpy

Wednesday, June 25, 2014

IMMIGRATION: Legality of effort to repeal Prop. 187 is questioned

Some California legislators are poised to repeal Proposition 187, a controversial 20-year-old initiative that was ruled unconstitutional by a federal court and never enforced. But law scholars question whether the elected officials have the legal authority to act on their own.
“The California Constitution says you can’t amend or repeal an approved measure without submitting it to the voters unless there’s a waiver clause,” said Jessica A. Levinson, a Loyola Law School professor who specializes on election law.
Prop. 187, which sought to cut off public education, health care and welfare benefits to undocumented immigrants in California, had no such waiver, said John C. Eastman, a Chapman University Law School professor and founding director of the Claremont Institute’s Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence.
“These guys are acting lawlessly,” Eastman said. “They’ll do it if they think they can get away with it and no one will challenge them.”
California voters approved Prop. 187 – also known as the “Save our State” campaign – in November 1994 with almost 60 percent approval. A federal court ruled most of the provisions unconstitutional, and the measure was not enforced. But some of the language remains embedded in various codes, including education codes.
Sen. Kevin de Leon, D-Los Angeles, said he learned of its existence in California codes accidentally. He was recently talking to his staff about his personal history and recounting how he “cut my teeth politically against the 187 campaign.” Chief of Staff Dan Reeves decided to look into the proposition and found it had not been removed.
“These code sections are unenforceable. The Legislature has the right and power and authority to maintain the codes with our statutes and that’s we’re doing,” Reeves said.
“Essentially, it’s code cleaning,” he said.
De Leon’s staff consulted with the state’s legislative counsel, Diane Boyer-Vine, whose opinion was that “it’s not necessary to go back to the voters,” Reeves said.
State Sen. Richard Roth, D-Riverside, said unconstitutional laws should not remain on the books.
“The Constitution is the highest law of our nation, and I support any effort to remove any statute or language found unconstitutional,” he said.
Sen. Mike Morrell, a Rancho Cucamonga Republican who represents parts of Riverside and San Bernardino counties, said in a statement that he has not yet decided whether to vote for de Leon’s bill.
“I have not yet had a chance to review the specific language of the bill or the legal questions surrounding it,” he said.
Robin Hvidston, executive director of the anti-illegal-immigration We the People Rising and an Upland resident, urged legislators to keep the law in California codes.
“To me, it’s important because this was the direct voice of the people,” she said. “The people’s voice, the people’s will was overruled by the courts.”
She worried that stripping Prop. 187 language from state codes would set a dangerous precedent and lead to other voter initiatives being gutted.
But Maria Rodriguez, an activist with the Inland Empire Immigrant Youth Coalition, said passage of de Leon’s bill would be another signal by the Legislature that California is “an immigrant-friendly state.”

Monday, June 23, 2014

Jerry Brown to sign budget Friday in San Diego

Gov. Jerry Brown will sign the state budget Friday in San Diego, his office announced Thursday, less than a week after both houses of the Legislature approved the spending plan.
Governors have the right to reduce or strike appropriations in budget bills before signing them, but it is unclear what line-item vetoes Brown will make to the $156.4 billion budget for the fiscal year beginning July 1. Last year, the Democratic governor made only a small number of line-item vetoes, totaling about $40 million.

This year's budget plan is a compromise between Brown and Democratic lawmakers. It includes an expansion of child care and preschool for poor children and more money for high-speed rail, Medi-Cal and welfare-to-work. It also puts about $1.6 billion into a special rainy-day account.

Brown will be joined for the budget signing by Assembly Speaker Toni Atkins, D-San Diego, and Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg, D-Sacramento. Brown is scheduled to travel to Los Angeles after signing the budget to attend a celebration with Latino lawmakers.

PHOTO: Gov. Jerry Brown signs bills in Sacramento on March 24, 2011 as Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg, D-Sacramento, and Sen. Mark Leno, D-San Francisco look on. The Sacramento Bee/Hector Amezcua




Read more here: http://blogs.sacbee.com/capitolalertlatest/2014/06/jerry-brown-to-sign-budget-friday-in-san-diego.html#storylink=cpy

Friday, June 20, 2014

Optimistic on economy, California lawmakers OK $156.4-billion budget

Flush with optimism from California's resurgent economy, lawmakers approved a $156.4-billion state budget that expands preschool for children from poor families, increases welfare payments and provides critical funding for building the nation's first bullet train.

The state's financial turnaround has allowed the Democratic-led Legislature, with the blessing of Gov. Jerry Brown, to spend more freely just a few years after the recession prompted deep cuts to government services. And if tax receipts outpace expectations, the budget could send even more money to schools, public universities and local governments.

Lawmakers also are addressing more of California's lingering financial problems, stockpiling cash in a rainy-day fund and chipping away at pension costs.

"This is a much brighter day than what we've seen in years past," Senate Budget Chairman Mark Leno (D-San Francisco) said.

The spending plan — which includes a $108-billion general fund, $7.3 billion larger than last year's — now goes to Brown, who has until the end of the month to sign it. He can still veto items he dislikes.

The budget marks lawmakers' first major effort to combat global warming with revenue from the state cap-and-trade program, which charges fees on polluters when their carbon emissions exceed set limits.

Over the next several years, billions of dollars from those funds could flow to affordable housing, mass transit and environmental programs in a broad effort to get Californians to drive less and consume less energy.

A quarter of the money will be used for building the $68-billion bullet train, a decision that may draw legal challenges from groups that oppose the project and view it as an improper use of cap-and-trade revenue.

Republicans criticized the money for high-speed rail, and Senate Republican leader Bob Huff (R-Diamond Bar) called the budget a "missed opportunity."

"You're enacting policies to make California unnecessarily expensive, drive people into poverty and then propose new government programs to subsidize their life in poverty," Huff said.

Long-term costs for public employee retirements and overdue maintenance continue to weigh on state finances, and the budget starts tackling the $74-billion shortfall in the teacher pension fund. Under the plan, schools, teachers and the state will contribute more money to the fund in an attempt to close the gap over the next three decades.

The budget also deposits $1.6 billion into a reserve fund, a down payment on the state's effort to create a cushion for future economic downturns. Voters will have an opportunity in November to approve a constitutional amendment that would set aside money in the fund every year and help pay off the state's debt and long-term costs.

Despite the budget's increasing size, some cuts remain in place. Most notably, doctors who participate in Medi-Cal will continue receiving reduced payments even as hundreds of thousands of new patients enroll in the state's public healthcare program. Brown's resistance to increasing the payments disappointed lawmakers from both sides of the aisle, who fear fewer doctors will agree to care for Medi-Cal patients.

"The Senate wants to do this, the Assembly wants to do this and the governor understands we need to," Assembly Speaker Toni Atkins (D-San Diego) said. "So we are working as of tomorrow to figure out how soon we can do this. But we have to make sure we can pay for it."

Other programs for California's poor are being boosted. Beginning next April, welfare payments for a family of three in such high-cost counties as Los Angeles would increase to $704 per month, up from $670.

Over the next few years, preschool enrollment is expected to increase by 43,000 4-year-olds from low-income families. There's also more money for subsidized child care.

The budget already had been negotiated among Brown and top Democratic lawmakers before Sunday's vote, tamping down the drama in the Capitol. Still, controversy bubbled over a series of new policy proposals that were included in budget-related bills, sometimes after little public vetting.

For example, Brown has pushed new limits on how much money school districts can keep in their reserve accounts. Administration officials say the schools won't need to stockpile as much cash because the state will have its own rainy-day fund, but angry district officials called the proposal a ploy by the powerful teachers union to make more money available while negotiating contracts.

The California Teachers Assn. spent $4.7 million to help elect Brown in 2010 and donated nearly $290,000 to lawmakers, mostly Democrats, for this year's campaigns.

Lawmakers from both parties criticized the governor for inserting the proposal late in the budget process, but Democrats ensured the bill passed.

Another measure approved by the Legislature would modify California's new rules for granting driver's licenses to immigrants here without documentation, eliminating the requirement for applicants to submit affidavits saying they cannot prove legal residency.

Ronald Coleman, a lobbyist for the California Immigrant Policy Center, said the change would provide "peace of mind" that applying for a license won't increase the risk of deportation for immigrants who are here without those papers.

A separate budget-related bill, also approved Sunday, would remove the ban on drug felons receiving food stamps and welfare payments. Democrats say the measure would help former inmates reintegrate into society, but Republicans were critical.

"In what universe does it make sense to give cash benefit cards to drug users?" Huff said.

More budget bills have yet to be considered by the Legislature. Democrats are angling to pass two new taxes, on fireworks and insurance. The levy on fireworks — 10 cents per pound, to be paid by distributors — is intended to finance the safe destruction of illegal pyrotechnics. The other tax — 15 cents per insurance policy for residential and commercial renters — would fund earthquake research.

via: http://www.latimes.com/local/la-me-pol-state-budget-20140616-story.html

Thursday, June 19, 2014

California soda warning label bill stalls in committee

California lawmakers on Tuesday turned back legislation that would require warning labels on sugary beverages, voicing skepticism about the public health benefits. 

"It's an honorable effort but I feel it's ineffective," said Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzalez, D-San Diego, who acknowledged that soda manufacturers are prominent job generators in her district. "I think this bill creates as much confusion as it does information. A label which will appear on soda and sports drinks with no labels appearing on chocolate milk, juices or alcoholic beverages sends the wrong message."

Senate Bill 1000 slipped out of the Senate last month with the bare minimum 21 votes needed to advance. Legislators on the Assembly Health Committee halted its progress, with two Democrats voting against the measure and four others abstaining. The measure fell three votes short of the 10 needed to pass.

After trying unsuccessfully in the past to impose a tax on sugar-suffused drinks, Sen. Bill Monning, D-Carmel, this year sought to drain soda consumption by having the drinks bear warning labels. Monning and public health officials backing the legislation called sugary drinks a key culprit in the nation's swollen obesity rate.

"The label is based on the science that says liquid sugar is a unique driver in today's obesity and diabetes epidemics," Monning testified.

Opponents representing the beverage industry argued that Monning's bill unfairly singled out soft drinks. They argued that other factors, including a lack of exercise, genetics and unhealthy diets, contribute in concert to ballooning obesity and diabetes rates.

"This bill would not give consumers meaningful, helpful information," testified John Latimer, a lobbyist representing the California Retailers Association and PepsiCo. "Instead it will disparage many hundreds of beverages that can be safely consumed and responsibly added as part of a healthy diet."

Holding aloft a picture of a thick slice of chocolate cake, Latimer dismissed a soda-labeling policy as inconsistent.

"This beautiful piece of chocolate cake, which can be secured at a restaurant nearby, has 2,700 calories, 150 grams of fat, 55 grams of saturated fat," Latimer said. "And yet it doesn't need a warning label, but a 75 calories beverage does?"

Members who declined to support the bill said they were not convinced that labeling would do enough to influence consumer behavior.

"I've looked for any kind of information that shows that labeling changes peoples' habits," said Assemblyman Jimmy Gomez, D-Los Angeles. "I haven't found one."

Comparisons to the tobacco industry, both overt and implicit, surfaced throughout the debate. Dr. Harold Goldstein of the California Center for Public Health Advocacy wondered, "how bad will it have to get before we begin to tell the truth about these sugary drinks?" Assemblyman Tom Ammiano, D-San Francisco, was more direct.

"I do remember some of these same arguments and some of the same struggles around labeling of cigarettes," Ammiano said, "and it took a long time to permeate peoples' consciousness."

Critics of the bill rejected those comparisons, saying it is disingenuous to equate soda and smoking.

"Smoking is inherently dangerous," said Bob Achermann, a lobbyist representing a trade group called the California Nevada Soft Drink Association. "Consumption of a sugar-sweetened beverage, or anything else for that matter, is not inherently dangerous."

PHOTO: In this Monday, Feb. 9, 2009 file photo, Pepsi drinks sit on display at JJ&F Market in Palo Alto, Calif. Paul Sakuma/AP Photo.

via: http://blogs.sacbee.com/capitolalertlatest/2014/06/california-soda-warning-label-bill-stalls-in-committee.html



Read more here: http://blogs.sacbee.com/capitolalertlatest/2014/06/california-soda-warning-label-bill-stalls-in-committee.html#storylink=cpy

Read more here: http://blogs.sacbee.com/capitolalertlatest/2014/06/california-soda-warning-label-bill-stalls-in-committee.html#storylink=cpy




Read more here: http://blogs.sacbee.com/capitolalertlatest/2014/06/california-soda-warning-label-bill-stalls-in-committee.html#storylink=cpy