BILL ANALYSIS Ó AB 176 Page 1 GOVERNOR'S VETO AB 176 (Bonta) As Enrolled September 10, 2015 2/3 vote -------------------------------------------------------------------- |ASSEMBLY: |77-1 |(June 2, 2015) |SENATE: |40-0 |(September 2, | | | | | | |2015) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | -------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------- |ASSEMBLY: |77-1 |(September 8, | | | | | | |2015) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | -------------------------------------------------------------------- Original Committee Reference: HIGHER ED. SUMMARY: Requires the California Community Colleges (CCC), the California State University (CSU), the University of California (UC), and the California Department of Managed Health Care AB 176 Page 2 (CDMHC) to disaggregate demographic information for Native Hawaiian, Asian, and Pacific Islander (API) groups. The Senate amendments: 1)Delete the requirement for the California Department of Health Care Services. 2)Make technical and clarifying changes. EXISTING LAW: Requires state agencies, boards, and commissions that directly or by contract collect demographic data as to the ancestry or ethnic origin of Californians to use separate collection categories and tabulations for each major API group, including, but not limited to, Chinese, Japanese, Filipino, Korean, Vietnamese, Asian Indian, Laotian, Cambodian, Hawaiian, Guamanian, and Samoan (Government Code Section 8310.5). FISCAL EFFECT: According to the Senate Appropriations Committee: 1)One-time costs of about $10,000 and ongoing cost of about $10,000 per year for the California State University System to upgrade computer systems and ensure proper reporting of student data (General Fund). 2)No significant costs are anticipated by the Department of Managed Health Care, as another provision of existing law already requires the Department to collect data in a manner that complies with the requirements of this bill (Managed Care Fund). AB 176 Page 3 3)No significant costs are anticipated by the California Community College System, as the Chancellor's Office anticipates that the delayed implementation in the bill will allow community college districts to incorporate the required data system changes as part of their ongoing system maintenance (General Fund). 4)No significant costs are anticipated by the University of California (General Fund). COMMENTS: Background. According to the California Commission on Asian and Pacific Islander American Affairs' Issue Paper on September 5, 2014, data disaggregation is imperative for uncovering economic, educational, and social disparities inherent not only in API American communities, but in all ethnic populations. The commission finds that the need to disaggregate data is often exemplified by the needs of Southeast Asian American students; often categorized as "Asian," their "lower academic achievement rates are overshadowed by the stereotype that all Asian students excel in academics." Purpose of this bill. According to the author's office, "By relying heavily on aggregate data of the API community, the State of California fails to recognize that different API ethnic subpopulations have diverse social and economic conditions." The author contends that if the needs of each of the API "subgroups" are not addressed properly, California will run the risk of lower educational outcomes and greater healthcare costs for our future generations. Data disaggregation is imperative for uncovering social, economic and educational disparities within the greater Asian population. GOVERNOR'S VETO MESSAGE: AB 176 Page 4 Assembly Bill 176 would require the Regents of the University of California, the Trustees of the California State University, the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges and the Department of Managed Health Care to collect and report demographic information for Asians, Native Hawaiians and Pacific Islanders by specified ethnic categories after the next census. To be sure, there is value in understanding data on race, ethnicity, gender and other aspects of identity. On a broad level, these demographic data can signal important changes in society. On a practical level, they can help elucidate how our laws and programs can be shaped to reflect a changing population. Despite this utility, I am wary of the ever growing desire to stratify. Dividing people into ethnic or other subcategories may yield more information, but not necessarily greater wisdom about what actions should follow. To focus just on ethnic identity may not be enough. CSU, community colleges, and UC already provide many ways in which to self-identify, including choosing among several ethnic identities. In the case of CSU, there are 50 choices for API applicants alone. Codifying the collection and reporting of at least 12 API groups several years into the future appears unnecessary, or at least premature. Analysis Prepared by: Jeanice Warden / HIGHER ED. / (916) 319-3960 FN: 0002474 AB 176 Page 5