|
Capitol Weekly
December 8, 2005
By Malcolm Maclachlan
Groups that want California to support universal
healthcare for the state's children are looking to the governor's
office with growing optimism, despite the veto of such a bill
earlier this year.
"This is high on their radar screen,"
said Wendy Lazarus co-president of the Children's Partnership,
a group that advocates for low-income children. "They've
certainly suggested that they want to do something in 2006."
The Partnership is part of a coalition of
groups that are working to qualify an initiative for next
November's election. The Tobacco Tax, Disease Prevention and
Children's Health Insurance Act of 2006 would fund provide
$435 million to cover 800,000 uninsured children by adding
a $1.50 tax to the price of a pack of cigarettes. If it passed,
the measure could take in $1.5 billion a year, according to
the Legislative Analyst's Office. The remainder of the money
would be used to fund a variety of other health programs,
including disease prevention and anti-smoking campaigns.
The governor's spokesman, Rob Stutzman, said
the governor is evaluating a number of ideas around children's
healthcare coverage and had not endorsed any bill or initiative.
However, the initiative would address the
concerns articulated by Schwarzenegger in his veto message
of AB 772, the bill by Assemblymembers Wilma Chan, D-Oakland,
and Dario Frommer, D-Glendale, which would have provided health
insurance for all California children. At the time, Schwarzenegger
said he supported the idea in concept but said he could not
sign it without a funding source.
The optimism among advocates that the governor
may take steps to cover uninsured children reflects changing
political realities, both in California and nationwide. Illinois
enacted a law to this year to guarantee coverage to children.
Several other states, including Texas, have lesser plans but
have expanded the number of low-income children they will
cover.
Meanwhile, the governor's loss in the special
election and staff changes that have brought Democrats into
the Horseshoe has raised speculation that Schwarzenegger shift
his policy goals in an effort to reclaim the political center
before next year's election.
If the governor is looking to recast himself
as a centrist, health care policy would be a natural for
him to tackle. Already the administration has backed away
from some of the unpopular health care stands that got him
into trouble this year. In the days after the special election,
the governor dropped his effort to oppose the five-to-one
patient-to-nurse ratio the California Nurses Association
had won. Meanwhile, the CNA put out an aggressively-worded
press release calling for "genuine reforms," including
"universal healthcare based on a single standard of
quality care for all."
The nurses are backing SB 840, the single
payer healthcare bill proposed by Sen. Sheila Kuehl, D-Los
Angeles. It would provide health insurance for every citizen
in California out of a single fund, paid for with a combination
of existing federal funds and insurance premiums charged individuals.
Proponents of the bill have argued that it
would merely shift the cost the state is already paying in
the form of emergency room visits for indigent patients. Kuehl
also sponsored the legislation establishing the five-to-one
patient to nurse ratio.
"It's still very early in the process,
but we're working very closely with her," said Charles
Idelson, a spokesman for the CNA. "That's the key bill
in California at this point. That's the one that's live."
However, given California's budget crunch,
many expect SB 840 to join a long list of other dead bills
that would have provided universal healthcare in the state.
The one that came closest was SB 2, the so-called Employer
Mandate bill that was signed into law by Gray Davis in 2003
but defeated by referendum the next year, in the form of
Proposition 72. Another bill, AB 1670, the so-called Individual
Mandate bill, died in the Assembly Revenue & Taxation
Committee in April, despite gaining support from the business
community.
Still, many say a health plan for children
could prove political viable, even while more ambitious plans
fail.
"We would eventually like to see that
everyone have insurance," said Peter Warren, a spokesman
for the California Medical Association. "But that's
not going to happen immediately. It's politically a lot harder
to attack a program for young people."
|
