Wyatt Buchanan, Chronicle
Sacramento Bureau
Friday, January 22, 2010
(01-22) 04:00 PST Sacramento - --
As national health care reform
grew more uncertain, the California Legislature on
Thursday pushed forward a controversial proposal to
create a single-payer health system in the state.
The Senate Appropriations
Committee voted 6-3 along party lines, with
Democrats in favor of the proposal, which will be
considered by the full Senate next week.
The vote came two days after
Massachusetts voters elected a Republican U.S.
senator to fill the seat long held by Democratic
Sen. Ted Kennedy - putting President Obama's
national health bill in jeopardy. Backers of the
California plan said the timing was coincidental and
due to legislative timelines.
But political observers said the
vote could come back to hurt state Democrats in
November and viewed the move as motivated by the
turmoil in Washington, D.C. Similar incarnations of
the California plan have twice been passed by the
Legislature and both were vetoed by Gov. Arnold
Schwarzenegger. A spokeswoman for the Republican
governor said Thursday he would veto this bill if it
comes to his desk.
Sen. Mark Leno, D-San Francisco,
is sponsoring the bill, and said states will have to
act to create single-payer systems. The public
option, a form of single-payer insurance, appears
unlikely to be part of the final national bill, if
there is a final bill.
"We always wished there would be
single-payer reform in Washington, but given the
political reality that that's not going to happen,
it's not going to deter us from the pursuit of
single-payer in this state," Leno said.
The proposal, which is estimated
to cost $200 billion, would eliminate private health
insurance in California and replace it with a
state-run system, which would be provided to every
California resident. That system would be overseen
by a new state agency that also would ultimately
decide what services the coverage would entail.
The price tag would be paid by
pooling all state and federal money currently spent
on health services, which would require federal
approval, along with a payroll tax that would be
paid by both employees and workers. In a previous
incarnation of the bill, that tax was set at 16
percent. The financing is not part of the latest
version. Backers also think the single-payer system
will greatly reduce administrative costs, which also
would help pay for the system.
Republicans in the Legislature
said they were dumbfounded that the bill would move
forward given the climate toward health reform
nationwide.
"I believe the Democrats in
Sacramento just don't get it," said Sen. Tony
Strickland, R-Thousand Oaks (Ventura County). "This
was literally 48 hours after the most liberal state
in the country voted down Obamacare. They are not
listening to people in the state or the country."
Steven Maviglio, a Democratic
consultant, supports a single-payer plan but said
flatly, "this is not the time to do it."
"Anyone who has read a newspaper
in the last 24 hours knows this will not help the
Democrats in November and it could hurt them,"
Maviglio said. He said the timing would be right
"when the state isn't billions in debt."
Advocacy groups that support the
bill disagreed, however. Deborah Burger, president
of the California Nurses Association, called the
timing of California's action "perfect."
"The national bill really is not
addressing the needs of Americans and they really
want us to go forward with something that meets our
needs instead of imposing taxes on people who
already have health care benefits," Burger said.
Opponents, though, said the
proposal would not address the underlying
cost-drivers in health care.
"It is just reorganizing care and
having the government take over health care
decisions," said Charles Bacchi, executive vice
president of the California Association of Health
Plans.
Sen. Christine Kehoe, D-San
Diego, is chairwoman of the committee that approved
the proposal and voted in favor of it. She said the
cost, if passed, would be about $1 million in the
first year to do initial administrative planning.
She said it would not hurt the state's budget, which
is facing a $20 billion deficit through June 2011,
and said she thinks Californians approve of the
effort.
"If it's not going to happen at
the federal level, it's important for us to keep the
discussion alive and see if this is a viable
option," Kehoe said.
But Dan Schnur, director of the
Jesse M. Unruh Institute of Politics at the
University of Southern California, said he thought
the vote was more of a symbolic move by lawmakers to
get the attention of big-money organizations pushing
for single-payer insurance.
"An organization involved in health care
nationally is probably feeling pretty bruised this
week. This is the perfect opportunity for state
legislators to remind that organization that they
still have friends in Sacramento," Schnur said.