The fate
of California's controversial new health care insurance law likely
will rest with voters in November.
In a victory for business
groups, a state appeals court ruled Thursday that the more than
600,000 voters who signed referendum petitions to put the law on the
ballot were not misled about what it would do.
State
lawmakers who sponsored Senate Bill 2, known as SB2, are mulling
whether they will appeal the decision.
At issue was the
summary on the petition which said that all businesses with 20 or
more employees would have to help pay for health insurance for their
workers. Senate leader John Burton, D-San Francisco, and Sen. Jackie
Speier, D-San Mateo, filed a lawsuit to block the measure from the
ballot, arguing that business groups misrepresented the law, which
only would affect businesses with 20 to 49 employees if the state
Legislature approved a tax credit to offset the costs. State
lawmakers have not approved such a credit.
A Sacramento Superior
Court judge ruled last month that the petitions did not give voters
enough information. The 1st District Court of Appeal reversed that
decision, saying the petitions were not "fatally defective" and
covered the "chief purpose and points."
A political maelstrom
erupted when Gov. Gray Davis signed SB2 into law before he was
recalled. The California Chamber of Commerce and other business
groups lambasted the new law as a job killer that would place a $7
billion burden on business. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who pledged
to improve California's business climate during his campaign, has
strong misgivings about SB2.
Business groups gathered
signatures last fall to repeal SB2. Election officials don't have
enough time to put the referendum on the March ballot. "This gives
us that much more time to help Californians understand the severe
impact that this law will have on the California economy," said
chamber spokeswoman Sara Lee.
Business groups are gearing up
for a $10 million campaign against the law that will include
television ads and direct mail pieces, said John Dunlap, chief
executive officer of the California Restaurant
Association.
"This is a laudable objective to see to it that
people who don't have health care receive it in some way," Dunlap
said. "The problem is how to do it and what the costs are and
whether or not these small businesses barely making it can afford
it.
"This is not about disliking a bad law," he said.
"Opposing SB2 is about being able to survive."
The law,
championed by labor leaders, doctors and community activists, would
extend health care coverage to more than 1 million of 7 million
uninsured Californians. Businesses with at least 200 employees would
have until 2006 to offer benefits to workers and their dependents.
Smaller businesses would have until 2007 to offer benefits to just
their employees. Under the law, employers would pay at least 80
percent of the cost and would either furnish the insurance
themselves or pay into a state fund that would provide coverage. The
law exempts businesses with fewer than 20 employees.
Art
Pulaski, executive secretary-treasurer of the California Labor
Federation, said labor union polls show that as many as 71 percent
of California voters support the law. More California workers are
losing coverage than getting it, he said. Getting employers to pony
up for the benefits would save the state $600 million, Pulaski
estimates.
"California is in a health-care crisis. The
health-care system is about to implode from the weight of the
uninsured," he said. "The money to oppose this law comes from those
large corporations who want to avoid providing health insurance to
their employees and their families. Most large employers do pay for
insurance now. Those that don't create a burden for
taxpayers."
The article originally appeared in the
Contra Costa Times (California) on January 23, 2003 written
by Jessica Guynn.
|